|
|
wow! that's a lot of changes.... I wonder how the Ultralisk will perform with these kind of alterations
|
Happy that they're buffing non cancerous units.
|
Will be interesting to see how this plays out in the pro level. Terran late game is obviously much worse, but their mid game is a lot better and we may be able to not force a map split every game on large maps now.
|
On May 16 2018 23:38 pieroog wrote: wow! that's a lot of changes.... I wonder how the Ultralisk will perform with these kind of alterations You dont play Ultras
|
On May 16 2018 23:54 Caelum93 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2018 23:38 pieroog wrote: wow! that's a lot of changes.... I wonder how the Ultralisk will perform with these kind of alterations You dont play Ultras
Yeah, Terrans usualy go tanks nowadays, broods are better.
|
I'm a little confused about how this is a buff for the Maurader.
It's getting 1 attack instead of 2, but doubling the damage? Isn't that the same?
|
On May 17 2018 00:40 EvanC wrote: I'm a little confused about how this is a buff for the Maurader.
It's getting 1 attack instead of 2, but doubling the damage? Isn't that the same?
the higher the number of attacks, the more times the armor of your enemy's units is applied
|
On May 17 2018 00:40 EvanC wrote: I'm a little confused about how this is a buff for the Maurader.
It's getting 1 attack instead of 2, but doubling the damage? Isn't that the same?
No it's not the same, 1 armor would reduce 20 damage to 19 with one attack, with two attack animation it would be 18.
Now it looks like a minor change, but you can count how much time a marauder would take killing ultra having two attacks and one in comparison
|
pretty sure this change (when every one is 3/3 researched) makes the marauder go from needing:
32~ shots to kill an ultralisk
to 24~ shots to kill an ultralisk. anyone who understands upgrades feel free to chime in, i used
500/(26-10) 500/(26-5)
not sure this is exactly right but it feels about right.
w plating
500/(26-14) = 42~ hits 500/(26-7)= 27~ hits
can any one confirm? this seems like a massive change
|
In my qualifying match yesterday the Vikings felt a little bit more study against a Protoss that went for quick-carriers. They didn't feel OP, but definitely had a little bit more lasting-power.
|
Today i felt the Buff of the Marauders against protoss, 3 rax, one with reactor, two with techlab, bio upgrades and push in each game .
|
On May 17 2018 01:11 renaissanceMAN wrote: In my qualifying match yesterday the Vikings felt a little bit more study against a Protoss that went for quick-carriers. They didn't feel OP, but definitely had a little bit more lasting-power.
Yes they now trade even with a small number of Carriers provided that the Carrier are not supported by any splash units.
|
YES
I recently switched to Terran after playing Toss for years. I thought I was imagining things when I said "wow, is Toss really this OP?"
Thanks for the buffs! Guess I am not as bad as I thought I was!
CHOW
|
Do you think only 10 life points more for Viking is enough ?
|
On May 17 2018 03:14 bObA wrote: Do you think only 10 life points more for Viking is enough ? 10 life points is all you need to send someone to the Shadow Realm.
|
Hurray!
Back to the days of MMM dominance...
Let's see how it goes.
|
On May 17 2018 03:36 Elentos wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2018 03:14 bObA wrote: Do you think only 10 life points more for Viking is enough ? 10 life points is all you need to send someone to the Shadow Realm.
:v
so anime
|
Do they affect co-op commanders? Raynor probably very op with it.
|
On May 17 2018 04:36 Dingodile wrote: Do they affect co-op commanders? Raynor probably very op with it.
I think they said it was only in Versus Multiplayer, not in Co-Op.
|
I like these changes. Glad that they fixed Marauders. Two shots was bs.
|
I'm not sure if there are too many changes at once, but each change seems reasonable. I think Blizzard should organise a weekly tournament every time they make balance changes. Only for pro gamers so they can show imbalances. Pro gamers earn money, while Blizzard get their balance patches tested properly.
|
On May 17 2018 05:53 sc-darkness wrote: I'm not sure if there are too many changes at once, but each change seems reasonable. I think Blizzard should organise a weekly tournament every time they make balance changes. Only for pro gamers so they can show imbalances. Pro gamers earn money, while Blizzard get their balance patches tested properly. The problem with this is it often takes time to figure out the state of balance after changes are made. Maybe things will look balanced for a few weeks then someone finds a truly abusive timing and then everything goes to hell. Maybe things will look like nothing has changed until someone finds a build or a strategy to blow things wide open. People like to shit on the idea of the need to let the meta settle, but it is sometimes really needs to before we can say whether things are broken or fixed.
|
On May 17 2018 05:04 Trozz wrote: I like these changes. Glad that they fixed Marauders. Two shots was bs. It still is two shots?
e: nvm
|
Love the patch and the maps so far. Surprisingly even Dreamcatcher which was criticized seems really fun to play.
|
On May 17 2018 01:05 c0sm0naut wrote: pretty sure this change (when every one is 3/3 researched) makes the marauder go from needing:
32~ shots to kill an ultralisk
to 24~ shots to kill an ultralisk. anyone who understands upgrades feel free to chime in, i used
500/(26-10) 500/(26-5)
not sure this is exactly right but it feels about right.
w plating
500/(26-14) = 42~ hits 500/(26-7)= 27~ hits
can any one confirm? this seems like a massive change
I confirm.
|
Patch 3.8.0 [4]
The "Research Charge" upgrade will now increase the Zealot's movement speed from 3.15 to 4.13.
[hide] Patch 3.14.0 [5]
Charge upgrade cost lowered from 200/200 to 100/100.
Source: Zealot
There. I dare someone to try arguing with me.
|
On May 17 2018 08:10 KR_4EVR wrote:Show nested quote +Patch 3.8.0 [4]
The "Research Charge" upgrade will now increase the Zealot's movement speed from 3.15 to 4.13.
[hide] Patch 3.14.0 [5]
Charge upgrade cost lowered from 200/200 to 100/100.
Source: ZealotThere. I dare someone to try arguing with me.
Why this was important:
The movement speed increase let Protoss players keep their zealots in front of their army without much micro, preventing any flank the enemy might try to set up.
The upgrade cost decrease makes charge all-ins come much quicker and provides an inexpensive harass option.
IMO these changes weren't the ones the game was looking for.
|
Patch 3.11.0 Balance Update [3]
Splash damage +shield bonus reduced from +40 to +25
[hide] Patch 4.0.0 [4]
Widow Mines are now revealed while Sentinel Missile is on cooldown.
[hide] Patch 4.1.1 Balance Update[5]
Build time reduced from 28.6 to 21.4 seconds.
Discharged widow mines that unburrow and re-burrow should be invisible again without anymore cooldown. This minor change is 100% sensible and would enable Terran to use widow mines fairly.
|
On May 16 2018 23:54 Caelum93 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2018 23:38 pieroog wrote: wow! that's a lot of changes.... I wonder how the Ultralisk will perform with these kind of alterations You dont play Ultras Yeah, Ultras feel like hot garbage again against bio. I suspect they may need to up the max armor again to 8. Perhaps an increase to their base armor from 2 to 3 would be the best way to go about this. As long as the Marauder can mostly still counter Ultras, rather than just slightly counter Ultras, like in early LotV, then I don't find it too problematic that Marines return to hitting them with peashooters.
I wouldn't go so far as to state that I'm not in favor of the Marauder being reverted to single-shot (for one, it just looks way better and easier to follow), but I think that this will necessitate some other things shifting to compensate.
|
Praise the Conc Shell. Let he who hath the conc speak. Lord of the Flies aside hopefully the Raven can find a nice spot. Really like Interference Matrix in small scale fights, especially in TvT and TvP, although I'm not sure a +1 range buff to the turret will be enough to bring the opening back to prominence in TvZ.
|
On May 16 2018 23:44 xTJx wrote: Happy that they're buffing non cancerous units.
I find this hilarious since the big meme from like 2010-2015 was that Marauders were shitty un-microable and in-interesting 1a2a3a units.
|
On May 17 2018 10:49 Thaniri wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2018 23:44 xTJx wrote: Happy that they're buffing non cancerous units. I find this hilarious since the big meme from like 2010-2015 was that Marauders were shitty un-microable and in-interesting 1a2a3a units.
Not only has that never been a meme, but aslo nobody does 1a2a3a in SC2.
|
I'm really hating these new maps. 5th bases are very far, late game is a pain in the ass for zerg. There's one that's so bright it hurts my eyes, and other so dark i couldn't tell marines from marauders.
|
MARAUDER IS BACK BOYS! time to play terran again
|
Marauder buff means Maru buff.
|
The marauder attack was needed for bio to stop grossly underperform against gate armies with guardian shield (or double chrono'ed upgrades).
Raven missile nerf is also a good thing design-wise.
The viking health buff is very underwhelming but going in the right direction.
Now the issue is that mech is now generally meh to decent in TvZ, plain bad in TvT, and completely terrible in TvP. Wish they'd acknowledge that the raven redesign was a failure, and that the cyclone is still badly designed.
|
On May 17 2018 08:36 Pontius Pirate wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2018 23:54 Caelum93 wrote:On May 16 2018 23:38 pieroog wrote: wow! that's a lot of changes.... I wonder how the Ultralisk will perform with these kind of alterations You dont play Ultras Yeah, Ultras feel like hot garbage again against bio. I suspect they may need to up the max armor again to 8. Perhaps an increase to their base armor from 2 to 3 would be the best way to go about this. As long as the Marauder can mostly still counter Ultras, rather than just slightly counter Ultras, like in early LotV, then I don't find it too problematic that Marines return to hitting them with peashooters. I wouldn't go so far as to state that I'm not in favor of the Marauder being reverted to single-shot (for one, it just looks way better and easier to follow), but I think that this will necessitate some other things shifting to compensate. You haven't understood, you need ultras with 14 armor to go back to the previous state of marauders vs ultras interaction.
That tells you how dead ultras are right now.
|
On May 17 2018 11:17 Lexender wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2018 10:49 Thaniri wrote:On May 16 2018 23:44 xTJx wrote: Happy that they're buffing non cancerous units. I find this hilarious since the big meme from like 2010-2015 was that Marauders were shitty un-microable and in-interesting 1a2a3a units. Not only has that never been a meme, but aslo nobody does 1a2a3a in SC2. It's the truth. Marauder is a cyclone that comes out of barracks.
|
On May 17 2018 08:36 Pontius Pirate wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2018 23:54 Caelum93 wrote:On May 16 2018 23:38 pieroog wrote: wow! that's a lot of changes.... I wonder how the Ultralisk will perform with these kind of alterations You dont play Ultras Yeah, Ultras feel like hot garbage again against bio. I suspect they may need to up the max armor again to 8. Perhaps an increase to their base armor from 2 to 3 would be the best way to go about this. As long as the Marauder can mostly still counter Ultras, rather than just slightly counter Ultras, like in early LotV, then I don't find it too problematic that Marines return to hitting them with peashooters. I wouldn't go so far as to state that I'm not in favor of the Marauder being reverted to single-shot (for one, it just looks way better and easier to follow), but I think that this will necessitate some other things shifting to compensate. I'm glad that the meta isn't anymore Zerg sitting in their base doing nothing but turtling to ultras with terran being forced to allin every game. If the game turns out to be imbalanced they better should buff midgame units like Mutas or Banelings.
|
I'm sorry guys but the balance team does not get it.
A good RTS should be a game where you can outplay a opponent with a good micro and positioning, like a FPS player who can win a fight with a a bad weapon cause he has just a better aim than is opponent. But you can't here, cause if a player make 2 cyclone in TvT you cannot outplay him, if a Zerg make 7 queen you cannot outplay him, if a Protoss make 2 Imo, you cannot outplay him etc.
So now this game is all about "having the good meta build", and if you dont have it, even if you micro well you will die, this is not what a good RTS should be.
At the beginning of this game, on WOL, we had some great things, like when Bomber was holding 10 baneling with 15 marines well spreading behind a wall. With no stim, no baneling speed, only skill. That was a good RTS.
Now it's just a run, you can have some no skill unit like Cyclone at 2.30 min. Some T3 Unit like Ultralisk at 8.30 min... This is not the base of the RTS style Blizzard. Players should have times to build his basement, to choose his strategy, to feel the game.
You have produced a big mechanics game, but there is nothing to tell now when you cast a game, same opening ( was a time were CC first and 11 rax was a bit more exciting than now, or Forge Nexus/ Nexus first and not always the fast expo than now).
So now you can change the map, to have some game with more late game, but that will never affect the casual player. Cause when you are outside of this game, when you don't play since 2, 3, 4 or 5 years, this game look not fun. Nothing is easy and despit of what the majority of the players think, this is no more an intellectual game, its 90% mechanics 10% strategy. Yes you need to think to find some new build, but let's be honest, you all watch the GSL and copy paste. This is not what a strategic player should do, he should improve and think, not copy paste.
You can be a very good strategist, even if you have a Plat/Dia mechanic, you will never outplay a Master/GM player cause he will produce better than you. We all know mechanics must be a part of the game, but not some much guys.
So since you increase the worker from 6 to 12, you increase the mechanics requirement from 50% since the first minute of the game.. You increase the gas income, cause you have more worker to invest on it, so you decrease the timing where the T1 unit can be played and so now, in TvT, you cant produce marine cause you can have a Cyclone so easily with all this gas. You can't play gazless B2 full marines cause gas is so free now.
But you will never understand that. You will continue to make little change, and players who invest so much time on this game will, step by step, play others games, with time cause you missed the shot. A good game is easy to learn, hard to master. All the balance team should play Fortnite, you will understand what does it mean. All people can try this game for fun, and you will be addicted by the build, by the aim, by all the item. And if you want the ninja skill's you will need a ton's of hours. That's a game easy to learn hard to master, despite of how the Starcraft 2 community are judging Fortnite, it's not the point.
If you want Starcraft 2 a good game, consider Broodwar, at 8 min you don't have any T3 unit, at Broodwar you can fight with your zealot not upgraded and win a game with T1 unit fighting on 10 minutes. Same with marines, same with zergling, this is not a rush on T2 unit and mass 200. This is about strategy.
I dont know what i still continu to write some commentary, i know it's a lost of time but this game is such a mess... that's make me really sad and mad to have this great work did on unit, on background, on graphics, but not a good balance team.. sad.
|
On May 17 2018 16:48 Anoss wrote: I dont know what i still continu to write some commentary
Me neither. Think before you write.
Most of ur „arguments“ are pretty pointless and i don‘t even know why i continued reading your wall of text after the first couple of sentences.
|
As a Terran, I think these changes are really good, though we'll have to see exactly how they play out and if they make Terran mid game vs Protoss too strong. I think current greedier Stalker into Collosus builds will probably be a lot harder to hold with, we might see a move back towards Stalker / Zealot builds or something similar (unless the mine buff completely killed these).
Versus Zerg the marauder buff will make basically no difference since ling / bane / hydra are all light units and the meta is very tank heavy compositions atm so transitions into Broods are far more common than transitions into Ultra. It will actually make marauders on 3/3 slightly worse vs 2/2 zerg. Viking buff wont make up for losing Raven but Raven was stupid and boring to play anyway.
The changes will also help bio vs mech quite a bit, which isn't super important but I think a nice little change a lot of Terran will like, it will be a lot easier to punish the 3/4 base turtle into mass air that is super frustrating to play vs.
|
On May 17 2018 16:58 EXRNaRa wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2018 16:48 Anoss wrote: I dont know what i still continu to write some commentary Me neither. Think before you write. Most of ur „arguments“ are pretty pointless and i don‘t even know why i continued reading your wall of text after the first couple of sentences.
Sometimes you are in the wrong side of the wall, but you are still thinking that you think right. Despite of how you analyse my argue, this game is not growing up, and on this planet, if you are not growing up you are dying.
That's mean i'm right on one thing : All the people who are thinking like you, will leave the game soon, and start less playing, it's mathematics. So if you think this game is great you are the minority. I know a lot of guys with SC2 on the DD but no way they launch it. 4 years ago they was all Dia, all SC2 maniacs. They have some argues to explain why they dont play anymore, but it seems nobody cares.
So yeah sorry to disturb, that was i promise my last commentary on TL/ Blizzard thread. Gl gl for next game
|
I also wish a master player could beat a GM with build order
|
France12463 Posts
On May 17 2018 17:16 Anoss wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2018 16:58 EXRNaRa wrote:On May 17 2018 16:48 Anoss wrote: I dont know what i still continu to write some commentary Me neither. Think before you write. Most of ur „arguments“ are pretty pointless and i don‘t even know why i continued reading your wall of text after the first couple of sentences. Sometimes you are in the wrong side of the wall, but you are still thinking that you think right. Despite of how you analyse my argue, this game is not growing up, and on this planet, if you are not growing up you are dying. That's mean i'm right on one thing : All the people who are thinking like you, will leave the game soon, and start less playing, it's mathematics. So if you think this game is great you are the minority. I know a lot of guys with SC2 on the DD but no way they launch it. 4 years ago they was all Dia, all SC2 maniacs. They have some argues to explain why they dont play anymore, but it seems nobody cares. So yeah sorry to disturb, that was i promise my last commentary on TL/ Blizzard thread. Gl gl for next game Player base won't grow much no matter how good Blizzard balance team is because the majority of players want semi-casual games à la Overwatch, LoL, Fortnite, or whatever latest trendy game.
|
Czech Republic12115 Posts
On May 17 2018 18:40 Ej_ wrote:I also wish a master player could beat a GM with build order I saw Parting in Masters defeating GM players. It may happen to you too!
|
On May 17 2018 18:40 Ej_ wrote:I also wish a master player could beat a GM with build order
That's pretty possible in best-of-1, I did it dozen of times when played zotac/go4sc2 back in days... well up to top100 of GM it's much easier to do and harder with top GM's, at some points it's not that complicated to execute a single all-in (or variations) build perfectly to win. But since you won with bshit strat or execution once, they might remember you for the next time and it would be harder to win again considering some difference in game level.
Although you have to be at least top Master/low GM in terms of ladder points to make it work.
|
On May 17 2018 16:58 EXRNaRa wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2018 16:48 Anoss wrote: I dont know what i still continu to write some commentary Me neither. Think before you write. Most of ur „arguments“ are pretty pointless and i don‘t even know why i continued reading your wall of text after the first couple of sentences. You can only look at his broken english or try to actually look at the content of his post without biased. There is a fair point being made to some extend. Starcraft has moved more and more towards just executing some meta build order and then trying to macro/micro better in the lategame. I just watched some old cast from 2011 and that was so different from what sc2 is like now. It seemed like there were more viable builds and that you could actually be more aggressive, and I think that ultimately made the game more strategic. I think that's the point of Anoss, and it's at least a fair preference to have.
|
On May 17 2018 16:48 Anoss wrote: I'm sorry guys but the balance team does not get it.
A good RTS should be a game where you can outplay a opponent with a good micro and positioning, like a FPS player who can win a fight with a a bad weapon cause he has just a better aim than is opponent. But you can't here, cause if a player make 2 cyclone in TvT you cannot outplay him, if a Zerg make 7 queen you cannot outplay him, if a Protoss make 2 Imo, you cannot outplay him etc.
So now this game is all about "having the good meta build", and if you dont have it, even if you micro well you will die, this is not what a good RTS should be.
At the beginning of this game, on WOL, we had some great things, like when Bomber was holding 10 baneling with 15 marines well spreading behind a wall. With no stim, no baneling speed, only skill. That was a good RTS.
Now it's just a run, you can have some no skill unit like Cyclone at 2.30 min. Some T3 Unit like Ultralisk at 8.30 min... This is not the base of the RTS style Blizzard. Players should have times to build his basement, to choose his strategy, to feel the game.
You have produced a big mechanics game, but there is nothing to tell now when you cast a game, same opening ( was a time were CC first and 11 rax was a bit more exciting than now, or Forge Nexus/ Nexus first and not always the fast expo than now).
So now you can change the map, to have some game with more late game, but that will never affect the casual player. Cause when you are outside of this game, when you don't play since 2, 3, 4 or 5 years, this game look not fun. Nothing is easy and despit of what the majority of the players think, this is no more an intellectual game, its 90% mechanics 10% strategy. Yes you need to think to find some new build, but let's be honest, you all watch the GSL and copy paste. This is not what a strategic player should do, he should improve and think, not copy paste.
You can be a very good strategist, even if you have a Plat/Dia mechanic, you will never outplay a Master/GM player cause he will produce better than you. We all know mechanics must be a part of the game, but not some much guys.
So since you increase the worker from 6 to 12, you increase the mechanics requirement from 50% since the first minute of the game.. You increase the gas income, cause you have more worker to invest on it, so you decrease the timing where the T1 unit can be played and so now, in TvT, you cant produce marine cause you can have a Cyclone so easily with all this gas. You can't play gazless B2 full marines cause gas is so free now.
But you will never understand that. You will continue to make little change, and players who invest so much time on this game will, step by step, play others games, with time cause you missed the shot. A good game is easy to learn, hard to master. All the balance team should play Fortnite, you will understand what does it mean. All people can try this game for fun, and you will be addicted by the build, by the aim, by all the item. And if you want the ninja skill's you will need a ton's of hours. That's a game easy to learn hard to master, despite of how the Starcraft 2 community are judging Fortnite, it's not the point.
If you want Starcraft 2 a good game, consider Broodwar, at 8 min you don't have any T3 unit, at Broodwar you can fight with your zealot not upgraded and win a game with T1 unit fighting on 10 minutes. Same with marines, same with zergling, this is not a rush on T2 unit and mass 200. This is about strategy.
I dont know what i still continu to write some commentary, i know it's a lost of time but this game is such a mess... that's make me really sad and mad to have this great work did on unit, on background, on graphics, but not a good balance team.. sad. your rant makes no sense. there will always be "meta builds" as people figure out the upper limits of micro and how units can be used. making the game "more about strategy" literally just means allowing people to hide builds and deny scouting.
people say this stuff and it always just sounds like "im not mechanically good at this game therefore the game is bad, change the game so my favorite units are the best" or "make sc2 the same thing as brood war" (you even reference brood war in your post). sc2 is a great game man. i'm 4.2-4.4k MMR which most people consider "trash" and i still have fun and play any builds i want. it seems like you just want the game to change so you're better at it lol
On May 17 2018 19:04 Jerom wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2018 16:58 EXRNaRa wrote:On May 17 2018 16:48 Anoss wrote: I dont know what i still continu to write some commentary Me neither. Think before you write. Most of ur „arguments“ are pretty pointless and i don‘t even know why i continued reading your wall of text after the first couple of sentences. You can only look at his broken english or try to actually look at the content of his post without biased. There is a fair point being made to some extend. Starcraft has moved more and more towards just executing some meta build order and then trying to macro/micro better in the lategame. I just watched some old cast from 2011 and that was so different from what sc2 is like now. It seemed like there were more viable builds and that you could actually be more aggressive, and I think that ultimately made the game more strategic. I think that's the point of Anoss, and it's at least a fair preference to have. the reason you think 2011 was more strategic is because they didn't have seven years of metagaming and pioneering micro tricks to base their gameplay on. you can't unravel history - once people know how the units function it will be practiced, pros will perfect it, and the rest of us will imitate them. changing that just means a merry go round of patches that upend how the game works, which will kill a playerbase who values their practiced ability at the game
the arguments here just aren't coherent. the first poster i quoted was saying the game is "all about build order" and you can't win by microing, which first of all is insanely untrue and secondly what is the difference between a "build" and a "strategy"? when you talk about strategy you're either talking about build order or you're talking about surprise tactics, which are universally hated in this game. no one liked being cannon rushed after forgetting to scout the natural - that's a strategy. no one liked being hit by a brutal 7gate after a denied overlord scout. these are strategies - brilliant ones, because they worked. and they were horrible for the game
|
At least it's true that PvZ is less strategic than ever. Stargate vs proxy stargate opening and that's it.
|
On May 17 2018 15:50 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2018 08:36 Pontius Pirate wrote:On May 16 2018 23:54 Caelum93 wrote:On May 16 2018 23:38 pieroog wrote: wow! that's a lot of changes.... I wonder how the Ultralisk will perform with these kind of alterations You dont play Ultras Yeah, Ultras feel like hot garbage again against bio. I suspect they may need to up the max armor again to 8. Perhaps an increase to their base armor from 2 to 3 would be the best way to go about this. As long as the Marauder can mostly still counter Ultras, rather than just slightly counter Ultras, like in early LotV, then I don't find it too problematic that Marines return to hitting them with peashooters. I wouldn't go so far as to state that I'm not in favor of the Marauder being reverted to single-shot (for one, it just looks way better and easier to follow), but I think that this will necessitate some other things shifting to compensate. I'm glad that the meta isn't anymore Zerg sitting in their base doing nothing but turtling to ultras with terran being forced to allin every game. If the game turns out to be imbalanced they better should buff midgame units like Mutas or Banelings.
Mutas viable, the dream.....
|
On May 17 2018 20:54 yangluphil wrote: At least it's true that PvZ is less strategic than ever. Stargate vs proxy stargate opening and that's it. ??? not true. archon drop is a standard and semi aggressive opener that can play out into macro or allin. what openers do you want? straight robo? it's either robo, twilight or stargate. not every opener is good in every matchup. and more importantly, you will always have to have harassment potential against zerg as P or T, it's just how the matchup works. like, you can still try to immortal sentry allin on a small map, and it might work sometimes, but in lotv you can't afford heavy 2 base tech vs zerg unless it's going to force units or kill drones. glaives allin is still viable too but it's an allin, if they scout and defend then they deserve to win
|
On May 17 2018 21:00 brickrd wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2018 20:54 yangluphil wrote: At least it's true that PvZ is less strategic than ever. Stargate vs proxy stargate opening and that's it. ??? not true. archon drop is a standard and semi aggressive opener that can play out into macro or allin. which part of it is not true? The rest of your reply basically explains that it is true. You could open with robo/twilight vs zerg and transition into lategame without going allin back in the days.
|
Arguing that Blizzard did not trade strategical depth for mechanical prowess, "wow" moments and abilities interactions is delusional. The entire "editorial line" of DK for HOTS and LOTV was "more intensity, more APM, more abilities micro, more multitask, less strategy, macro and planning".
|
I do think only 10 life points more for vikings is not enough to compensate Ravens nerf.
Happy to see T could handle mass gates imos better and have a decent mid game
|
On May 17 2018 22:06 bObA wrote: I do think only 10 life points more for vikings is not enough to compensate Ravens nerf.
Yeah they still can not handle Carriers except if the Carrier count is really low and have no splash damage units supporting them.
But maybe it is better to nerf the Carriers directly since they are too strong in all matchups.
|
This game, with all the rock-paper-scissor hard counters and exagggerated splash damage - will in my opinion never be fixed by any number of "balance" patches. I just don't enjoy playing it anymore.
|
On May 17 2018 21:25 JackONeill wrote: Arguing that Blizzard did not trade strategical depth for mechanical prowess, "wow" moments and abilities interactions is delusional. The entire "editorial line" of DK for HOTS and LOTV was "more intensity, more APM, more abilities micro, more multitask, less strategy, macro and planning". Pls add the quote where DK said he wants less strategy, macro and planning.
|
On May 17 2018 16:48 Anoss wrote: I'm sorry guys but the balance team does not get it.
...
I agree with the sentiment of your post. after playing sc2 for years, I took a little break to rediscover wc3. watching grubby's live stream inspired me to play again. during his commentaries he talks non-stop about strategy. there are so many variables and an insane about of depth to that game. just look at the titles of his youtube videos:
The Gambling Orc Hide And Seek Epic High Level Hero Game Towers Beget Towers To The Town Hall!
every game is its own story, with its own unique characters and plot twists. can you really say that pro sc2 games have their own story? their own personality?
compare that to a typical gsl match. artosis and tastosis bang out the same expositions every game. artosis sounds desperate to find something unusual to talk about. sc2 is pure tactics and mechanics, hardly any strategy.
|
On May 17 2018 22:26 MockHamill wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2018 22:06 bObA wrote: I do think only 10 life points more for vikings is not enough to compensate Ravens nerf.
Yeah they still can not handle Carriers except if the Carrier count is really low and have no splash damage units supporting them. But maybe it is better to nerf the Carriers directly since they are too strong in all matchups. The only problem with that is that if you nerf Protoss air too much, then Protoss won't be able to win late game PvZ ever, which would give Zerg the incentive to turtle to some combination of infestor/broodlord/corruptor/queen/viper (and maybe even swarm hosts?) with mass static defence since they'd be guaranteed to win if they reach that stage. For the health of the game, we don't want PvZ to return to that kind of game.
I do agree Carriers feel too strong, but nerfing them would require buffing something else to make up for it, and that could cause a lot of issues. What could even be buffed to make up for it? Most buffs I can think of would break PvT.
|
On May 17 2018 23:19 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2018 21:25 JackONeill wrote: Arguing that Blizzard did not trade strategical depth for mechanical prowess, "wow" moments and abilities interactions is delusional. The entire "editorial line" of DK for HOTS and LOTV was "more intensity, more APM, more abilities micro, more multitask, less strategy, macro and planning". Pls add the quote where DK said he wants less strategy, macro and planning.
- Pls add the quote where a logging company says that despite the environnemental issues, cutting down the rainforest makes more of a profit - Pls add the quote where blizzard states that overwatch is over priced compared to other multiplayer games with similar content because they know they can get people to pay for the blizz brand - Pls add the quote where your local drug dealer stated he sells new customers high quality drugs to get them hooked, then sells them one third laundry powder, one third flour and one third cocaine to make more money
Sure the PR guy is going to state "we're dumbing down the game and making it more impressive to watch to attract more people while necessarily reducing the strategical depth of the game" in a quote. Thanks for the laugh.
Go find yourself every SC2 patch notes where the speed of a unit has been increased, that the pace of the game got faster and that more fast reaction, harass or multitask friendly units were implemented.
|
On May 18 2018 02:12 JackONeill wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2018 23:19 Charoisaur wrote:On May 17 2018 21:25 JackONeill wrote: Arguing that Blizzard did not trade strategical depth for mechanical prowess, "wow" moments and abilities interactions is delusional. The entire "editorial line" of DK for HOTS and LOTV was "more intensity, more APM, more abilities micro, more multitask, less strategy, macro and planning". Pls add the quote where DK said he wants less strategy, macro and planning. - Pls add the quote where a logging company says that despite the environnemental issues, cutting down the rainforest makes more of a profit - Pls add the quote where blizzard states that overwatch is over priced compared to other multiplayer games with similar content because they know they can get people to pay for the blizz brand - Pls add the quote where your local drug dealer stated he sells new customers high quality drugs to get them hooked, then sells them one third laundry powder, one third flour and one third cocaine to make more money Sure the PR guy is going to state "we're dumbing down the game and making it more impressive to watch to attract more people while necessarily reducing the strategical depth of the game" in a quote. Thanks for the laugh. Go find yourself every SC2 patch notes where the speed of a unit has been increased, that the pace of the game got faster and that more fast reaction, harass or multitask friendly units were implemented. Point is I don't see what making the game more micro/multitasking intensive has to do with reducing strategical depth. It has nothing to do with it and I don't think strategical depth got reduced at all.
|
Blizzard logic: 'Terran has no lategame vs toss, and is forced to all-in every game. Meanwhile, they have good lategame vs Zerg with Ravens, how do we solve this?' 'Let's delete the Raven from the lategame, compensate with a miniscule buff to a useless unit and buff terran's midgame all-ins.' David Kim would be proud.
|
Maru wins GSL, Blizzard calls it fake news and now Terran took as many qualifying spots for WCS Austin as Zerg and Protoss combined. I'd say Blizzard logic trumps.
|
On May 18 2018 04:05 JWD[9] wrote: Maru wins GSL, Blizzard calls it fake news and now Terran took as many qualifying spots for WCS Austin as Zerg and Protoss combined. I'd say Blizzard logic trumps. You're seriously gonna use race distribution in wcs circuit as an kind of balance indicator? Lets see if you keep on that when only one terran makes top 8 there.
|
On May 18 2018 04:05 JWD[9] wrote: Maru wins GSL, Blizzard calls it fake news and now Terran took as many qualifying spots for WCS Austin as Zerg and Protoss combined. I'd say Blizzard logic trumps. Wait since when do we take foreign tournaments in consideration when talking about balance? I mean I don't mind it but the Zerg nerfs that would follow would be quite massive
|
On May 18 2018 05:15 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2018 04:05 JWD[9] wrote: Maru wins GSL, Blizzard calls it fake news and now Terran took as many qualifying spots for WCS Austin as Zerg and Protoss combined. I'd say Blizzard logic trumps. Wait since when do we take foreign tournaments in consideration when talking about balance? I mean I don't mind it but the Zerg nerfs that would follow would be quite massive
That would nuke the entire European SC2 pro scene!
|
On May 18 2018 05:15 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2018 04:05 JWD[9] wrote: Maru wins GSL, Blizzard calls it fake news and now Terran took as many qualifying spots for WCS Austin as Zerg and Protoss combined. I'd say Blizzard logic trumps. Wait since when do we take foreign tournaments in consideration when talking about balance? I mean I don't mind it but the Zerg nerfs that would follow would be quite massive It's a good thing we have korea and sc2 isn't balanced around the EU scene.
|
On May 18 2018 07:51 Creager wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2018 05:15 Charoisaur wrote:On May 18 2018 04:05 JWD[9] wrote: Maru wins GSL, Blizzard calls it fake news and now Terran took as many qualifying spots for WCS Austin as Zerg and Protoss combined. I'd say Blizzard logic trumps. Wait since when do we take foreign tournaments in consideration when talking about balance? I mean I don't mind it but the Zerg nerfs that would follow would be quite massive That would nuke the entire European SC2 pro scene! And that's a bad thing? The race distribution of the non-Korean scene was argument #2 for why the split WCS Circuit was a dumb decision. Why on earth would you save a broken scene?
|
Korea (South)227 Posts
Again, we're in the circle-jerk of balance is either stupid, needs to be fixed, and blizzard has no idea how to make the game truly balanced and forever fair. I've only played around 10 games post patch, and to be totally honest? Apart from the odd few games where I went late game and realized MMM can't beat colossi+storm or Ultra-Viper, I felt no immediate difference to the overall state of the game apart from that marauders seem to smash buildings quicker than before (as well has armored units). I will have to say that I don't think any of these changes have really broken or destroyed the game. I will always say this, but this idea of micro-macro being either more or less important isn't really the biggest issue when playing. Knowing your win condition and how you position yourself to get there is the most important factor to win. I get exasperated when people post that this unit is broken, this strat is broken etc. Only in professional matches does it seem even close to broken; in normal ladder I've never been beaten by a strategy or a unit I thought was "broken". If it looked like that, it was more me letting them reach the late game undeterred than the units themselves being broken. Like, we complain about ultras hitting around 8:30 to 9 but immediately forget we must have done something wrong letting them hit a healthy amount of ultras ad 8:30 at all. If the other player rushed to ultras, he either has one or two, which you can deal with with just about anything or you let him macro scot free, which you can never let a zerg player do, let alone any player in sc2. Please lets drop the pitchforks and lets play, and if we hit a wall lets try to say that its because we must have done something wrong and something needs to be improved APART from balance.
|
On May 18 2018 08:44 Boggyb wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2018 07:51 Creager wrote:On May 18 2018 05:15 Charoisaur wrote:On May 18 2018 04:05 JWD[9] wrote: Maru wins GSL, Blizzard calls it fake news and now Terran took as many qualifying spots for WCS Austin as Zerg and Protoss combined. I'd say Blizzard logic trumps. Wait since when do we take foreign tournaments in consideration when talking about balance? I mean I don't mind it but the Zerg nerfs that would follow would be quite massive That would nuke the entire European SC2 pro scene! And that's a bad thing? The race distribution of the non-Korean scene was argument #2 for why the split WCS Circuit was a dumb decision. Why on earth would you save a broken scene? Well, first, this was a tongue in cheek comment and second, if taken seriously this would only deteriorate the playerbase further with little to no benefit. It‘s not like EU Terrans would suddenly appear out of nowhere to deliver amazing quality games.
Gotta work with what you got, I guess.
|
Czech Republic12115 Posts
On May 18 2018 09:21 Orlok wrote: Again, we're in the circle-jerk of balance is either stupid, needs to be fixed, and blizzard has no idea how to make the game truly balanced and forever fair. I've only played around 10 games post patch, and to be totally honest? Apart from the odd few games where I went late game and realized MMM can't beat colossi+storm or Ultra-Viper, I felt no immediate difference to the overall state of the game apart from that marauders seem to smash buildings quicker than before (as well has armored units). I will have to say that I don't think any of these changes have really broken or destroyed the game. I will always say this, but this idea of micro-macro being either more or less important isn't really the biggest issue when playing. Knowing your win condition and how you position yourself to get there is the most important factor to win. I get exasperated when people post that this unit is broken, this strat is broken etc. Only in professional matches does it seem even close to broken; in normal ladder I've never been beaten by a strategy or a unit I thought was "broken". If it looked like that, it was more me letting them reach the late game undeterred than the units themselves being broken. Like, we complain about ultras hitting around 8:30 to 9 but immediately forget we must have done something wrong letting them hit a healthy amount of ultras ad 8:30 at all. If the other player rushed to ultras, he either has one or two, which you can deal with with just about anything or you let him macro scot free, which you can never let a zerg player do, let alone any player in sc2. Please lets drop the pitchforks and lets play, and if we hit a wall lets try to say that its because we must have done something wrong and something needs to be improved APART from balance. It's actually quite funny, on my level of Zerg any Terran who's going bio is semi-passive(they will do a drop or two and if I defend these they move to the passive state) or passive. So I just go fast bane speed, massive creep spread and ultra rush. And then they blame the balance. While active bio Terrans can kill me. Sure, this isn't the true aspect of top games, but let's face it, balance whine comes from lower leagues too
|
Why were corresponding energy/lategame units from the other races not nerfed along side ravens? They straight up nerfed Terran late game essentially by 50% effectiveness considering Terran's lategame entirely was equal to making ravens.
I don't have any issue with raven nerfs - i have issue with Blizzard being mega anti-Terran biased and flat out nerfing Terran while not touching the other two races.
This patch is most likely the nail in the coffin for SC2 competitive. There'll eventually be quite a bit less Terrans playing the game, and then most games will be PvP/ZvZ/PvZ which will end up upsetting even P/Z players in the end.
But sure, if people want to listen to casters that are clueless about the game and in their bubble in korea thinking that Terran is fine because of a closed off GSL Tourney with it's own eco system...then i don't know what to say.
Game balance for 99% of players is not the GSL tournament, where players are in their own little bubble metagaming each other and Terran manages to pull out games because maru/innovation are mindgaming/metagaming people they know intimately in BOX series with 2 base allins vs P.
The raven needs a revert asap, or the other races energy units need equally harsh nerfs, otherwise i don't see this ending up well. People might look at the patch the first two weeks and think "wow marauder/viking are stronger!" But once that wears off, you're going to see every game trending towards P/Z getting to lategame and Terran being worse off.
|
On May 17 2018 18:41 Poopi wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2018 17:16 Anoss wrote:On May 17 2018 16:58 EXRNaRa wrote:On May 17 2018 16:48 Anoss wrote: I dont know what i still continu to write some commentary Me neither. Think before you write. Most of ur „arguments“ are pretty pointless and i don‘t even know why i continued reading your wall of text after the first couple of sentences. Sometimes you are in the wrong side of the wall, but you are still thinking that you think right. Despite of how you analyse my argue, this game is not growing up, and on this planet, if you are not growing up you are dying. That's mean i'm right on one thing : All the people who are thinking like you, will leave the game soon, and start less playing, it's mathematics. So if you think this game is great you are the minority. I know a lot of guys with SC2 on the DD but no way they launch it. 4 years ago they was all Dia, all SC2 maniacs. They have some argues to explain why they dont play anymore, but it seems nobody cares. So yeah sorry to disturb, that was i promise my last commentary on TL/ Blizzard thread. Gl gl for next game Player base won't grow much no matter how good Blizzard balance team is because the majority of players want semi-casual games à la Overwatch, LoL, Fortnite, or whatever latest trendy game.
Wrong. You know the difference between those games and what's happened with SC2? I've said this for years...i still say it today.
Those games get balance patches C O N S T A N T L Y. They get updates C O N S T A N T L Y.
SC2 gets this patch that really messes up Terran late game, and it will receive no revert, and no patches now for months because it's the way blizzard patches their games. They release a patch and won't admit it was a mistake or wrong ever. What they do is, next patch, when they and people realize Terran lategame is screwed...they will complicate the problem further by randomly buffing/nerfing something else instead of reverting the original thing they screwed up.
Look at LoL - they did a complete basically 100% Leblanc revert. They admitted they screwed up the champion, and did a full revert to her, sure it took a bit, but they did. But they constantly are making changes, patch changes that actually are impactful and change the meta and balance.
Same for Fortnite. Constant game updates, whether to cosmetics or even adding new weapons into the game, and even removing weapons flat out from the game that are bad for the game. Case in point - the guided missile that was in the game for a few weeks, and then flat out removed because it was bad for the game.
SC2 will take this balance patch, it will be horrendous for T lategame for the coming months, and then we'll get a balance post from blizzard months from now about how they think Terran might not be doing well lategame, and that they're keeping an eye on it.
3 months after that, they'll release another post saying - "we're going to make a change for Terran lategame since we may have taken too much power away from the raven. We're going to give BCS +10 HP as compensation."
aka they'll make an irrelevant change that doesn't address the problem, and then that patch will STICK for the next months with the problem persisting in the game.
That's why SC2 has come to this point that it is at nowadays. DEVELOPER EGO. They do not want to admit any fault when it comes to SC2, or a lack of knowledge of the game. I invite Blizzard to discuss mech / lategame balance with myself, and someone like me that has mega insight into long 20+ minute games can help them put meaningful changes into the game. I'd even challenge the guys running "the pylon" to have me on their show if they are brave enough to discuss these recent patch changes and what's currently wrong with SC2 - doubtful they will be brave enough to do that though, because no one wants to discuss actual reality when it comes to SC2.
Players / streamers from LoL for example the streamer anniebot was contacted before by Riot when they wanted to re-balance/adjust annie. Blizzard should be doing the same thing in SC2 - get into contact with a player like myself that's used mass raven/mech for years, so that i can give them insight and offer them changes that won't break the game but will get mass raven out of the game while offering Terran lategame to not be an autoloss.
I've reached out to them before, with ZERO ANSWER. If anyone wonders why i've been vocal and upset and it might seem like i shit talk the devs sometimes or am not tactful - it's because i've reached out already plenty of times with zero response, so they either do not care or do not value the opinion of someone who has expertise on units in the game like ravens or lategame scenarios.
The truth of the matter is this most recent patch is just flat out terrible. There is no way to really sugar coat it, it's just a bad patch in many ways, including the map pool, but mostly because it nerfs 1/3 races lategame without touching the other two. How is it remotely fair to remove Terran's lategame while not touching the other two races? This makes no sense.
The depressing thing is that regardless of balance, we'll all be stuck with this patch for the next however many months until we get a blizzard post saying they're looking into maybe possibly changing things, with no reverts on bad changes.
|
On May 18 2018 21:52 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2018 18:41 Poopi wrote:On May 17 2018 17:16 Anoss wrote:On May 17 2018 16:58 EXRNaRa wrote:On May 17 2018 16:48 Anoss wrote: I dont know what i still continu to write some commentary Me neither. Think before you write. Most of ur „arguments“ are pretty pointless and i don‘t even know why i continued reading your wall of text after the first couple of sentences. Sometimes you are in the wrong side of the wall, but you are still thinking that you think right. Despite of how you analyse my argue, this game is not growing up, and on this planet, if you are not growing up you are dying. That's mean i'm right on one thing : All the people who are thinking like you, will leave the game soon, and start less playing, it's mathematics. So if you think this game is great you are the minority. I know a lot of guys with SC2 on the DD but no way they launch it. 4 years ago they was all Dia, all SC2 maniacs. They have some argues to explain why they dont play anymore, but it seems nobody cares. So yeah sorry to disturb, that was i promise my last commentary on TL/ Blizzard thread. Gl gl for next game Player base won't grow much no matter how good Blizzard balance team is because the majority of players want semi-casual games à la Overwatch, LoL, Fortnite, or whatever latest trendy game. Wrong. You know the difference between those games and what's happened with SC2? I've said this for years...i still say it today. Those games get balance patches C O N S T A N T L Y. They get updates C O N S T A N T L Y. SC2 gets this patch that really messes up Terran late game, and it will receive no revert, and no patches now for months because it's the way blizzard patches their games. They release a patch and won't admit it was a mistake or wrong ever. What they do is, next patch, when they and people realize Terran lategame is screwed...they will complicate the problem further by randomly buffing/nerfing something else instead of reverting the original thing they screwed up. Look at LoL - they did a complete basically 100% Leblanc revert. They admitted they screwed up the champion, and did a full revert to her, sure it took a bit, but they did. But they constantly are making changes, patch changes that actually are impactful and change the meta and balance. Same for Fortnite. Constant game updates, whether to cosmetics or even adding new weapons into the game, and even removing weapons flat out from the game that are bad for the game. Case in point - the guided missile that was in the game for a few weeks, and then flat out removed because it was bad for the game. SC2 will take this balance patch, it will be horrendous for T lategame for the coming months, and then we'll get a balance post from blizzard months from now about how they think Terran might not be doing well lategame, and that they're keeping an eye on it. 3 months after that, they'll release another post saying - "we're going to make a change for Terran lategame since we may have taken too much power away from the raven. We're going to give BCS +10 HP as compensation." aka they'll make an irrelevant change that doesn't address the problem, and then that patch will STICK for the next months with the problem persisting in the game. That's why SC2 has come to this point that it is at nowadays. DEVELOPER EGO. They do not want to admit any fault when it comes to SC2, or a lack of knowledge of the game. I invite Blizzard to discuss mech / lategame balance with myself, and someone like me that has mega insight into long 20+ minute games can help them put meaningful changes into the game. I'd even challenge the guys running "the pylon" to have me on their show if they are brave enough to discuss these recent patch changes and what's currently wrong with SC2 - doubtful they will be brave enough to do that though, because no one wants to discuss actual reality when it comes to SC2. Players / streamers from LoL for example the streamer anniebot was contacted before by Riot when they wanted to re-balance/adjust annie. Blizzard should be doing the same thing in SC2 - get into contact with a player like myself that's used mass raven/mech for years, so that i can give them insight and offer them changes that won't break the game but will get mass raven out of the game while offering Terran lategame to not be an autoloss. I've reached out to them before, with ZERO ANSWER. If anyone wonders why i've been vocal and upset and it might seem like i shit talk the devs sometimes or am not tactful - it's because i've reached out already plenty of times with zero response, so they either do not care or do not value the opinion of someone who has expertise on units in the game like ravens or lategame scenarios. The truth of the matter is this most recent patch is just flat out terrible. There is no way to really sugar coat it, it's just a bad patch in many ways, including the map pool, but mostly because it nerfs 1/3 races lategame without touching the other two. How is it remotely fair to remove Terran's lategame while not touching the other two races? This makes no sense. The depressing thing is that regardless of balance, we'll all be stuck with this patch for the next however many months until we get a blizzard post saying they're looking into maybe possibly changing things, with no reverts on bad changes.
Starcraft devs are ignoring you? (Gee, I wonder why)
Four years later, this image still manages to remain relevant:
|
Ultras are so horribly bad now vs terran its almost comical! they need to up their armor ASAP!
|
Looks like it's endless war, man. War on balance, man. And now you know you should like forget about strategic aspects and just be faster, build more, abusing it. A big mess in here. Macro games. Tons of AOE and abusing some units like infrestor, raven of carriers/storms. More like a message to you, hey, man stop think about your strategy and keep pressing buttons. I miss the intial start with 5 workers, man.
|
lol@avilo. shit on bio terrans more.
terrans got a late-game buff (versus zergs) in the form of marauder-buff. marauders are also buffed mid-game versus protoss against upgraded (armor) zealots.
you get no sympathy from me. learn to be what you call a "bio-whore"
|
On May 18 2018 21:52 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2018 18:41 Poopi wrote:On May 17 2018 17:16 Anoss wrote:On May 17 2018 16:58 EXRNaRa wrote:On May 17 2018 16:48 Anoss wrote: I dont know what i still continu to write some commentary Me neither. Think before you write. Most of ur „arguments“ are pretty pointless and i don‘t even know why i continued reading your wall of text after the first couple of sentences. Sometimes you are in the wrong side of the wall, but you are still thinking that you think right. Despite of how you analyse my argue, this game is not growing up, and on this planet, if you are not growing up you are dying. That's mean i'm right on one thing : All the people who are thinking like you, will leave the game soon, and start less playing, it's mathematics. So if you think this game is great you are the minority. I know a lot of guys with SC2 on the DD but no way they launch it. 4 years ago they was all Dia, all SC2 maniacs. They have some argues to explain why they dont play anymore, but it seems nobody cares. So yeah sorry to disturb, that was i promise my last commentary on TL/ Blizzard thread. Gl gl for next game Player base won't grow much no matter how good Blizzard balance team is because the majority of players want semi-casual games à la Overwatch, LoL, Fortnite, or whatever latest trendy game. Wrong. You know the difference between those games and what's happened with SC2? I've said this for years...i still say it today. Those games get balance patches C O N S T A N T L Y. They get updates C O N S T A N T L Y. SC2 gets this patch that really messes up Terran late game, and it will receive no revert, and no patches now for months because it's the way blizzard patches their games. They release a patch and won't admit it was a mistake or wrong ever. What they do is, next patch, when they and people realize Terran lategame is screwed...they will complicate the problem further by randomly buffing/nerfing something else instead of reverting the original thing they screwed up. Look at LoL - they did a complete basically 100% Leblanc revert. They admitted they screwed up the champion, and did a full revert to her, sure it took a bit, but they did. But they constantly are making changes, patch changes that actually are impactful and change the meta and balance. Same for Fortnite. Constant game updates, whether to cosmetics or even adding new weapons into the game, and even removing weapons flat out from the game that are bad for the game. Case in point - the guided missile that was in the game for a few weeks, and then flat out removed because it was bad for the game. SC2 will take this balance patch, it will be horrendous for T lategame for the coming months, and then we'll get a balance post from blizzard months from now about how they think Terran might not be doing well lategame, and that they're keeping an eye on it. 3 months after that, they'll release another post saying - "we're going to make a change for Terran lategame since we may have taken too much power away from the raven. We're going to give BCS +10 HP as compensation." aka they'll make an irrelevant change that doesn't address the problem, and then that patch will STICK for the next months with the problem persisting in the game. That's why SC2 has come to this point that it is at nowadays. DEVELOPER EGO. They do not want to admit any fault when it comes to SC2, or a lack of knowledge of the game. I invite Blizzard to discuss mech / lategame balance with myself, and someone like me that has mega insight into long 20+ minute games can help them put meaningful changes into the game. I'd even challenge the guys running "the pylon" to have me on their show if they are brave enough to discuss these recent patch changes and what's currently wrong with SC2 - doubtful they will be brave enough to do that though, because no one wants to discuss actual reality when it comes to SC2. Players / streamers from LoL for example the streamer anniebot was contacted before by Riot when they wanted to re-balance/adjust annie. Blizzard should be doing the same thing in SC2 - get into contact with a player like myself that's used mass raven/mech for years, so that i can give them insight and offer them changes that won't break the game but will get mass raven out of the game while offering Terran lategame to not be an autoloss. I've reached out to them before, with ZERO ANSWER. If anyone wonders why i've been vocal and upset and it might seem like i shit talk the devs sometimes or am not tactful - it's because i've reached out already plenty of times with zero response, so they either do not care or do not value the opinion of someone who has expertise on units in the game like ravens or lategame scenarios. The truth of the matter is this most recent patch is just flat out terrible. There is no way to really sugar coat it, it's just a bad patch in many ways, including the map pool, but mostly because it nerfs 1/3 races lategame without touching the other two. How is it remotely fair to remove Terran's lategame while not touching the other two races? This makes no sense. The depressing thing is that regardless of balance, we'll all be stuck with this patch for the next however many months until we get a blizzard post saying they're looking into maybe possibly changing things, with no reverts on bad changes.
Good thing that blizzard hasn't contacted you, haven't heard too many good things about balance from your side.
|
On May 19 2018 00:10 MrWayne wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2018 21:52 avilo wrote:On May 17 2018 18:41 Poopi wrote:On May 17 2018 17:16 Anoss wrote:On May 17 2018 16:58 EXRNaRa wrote:On May 17 2018 16:48 Anoss wrote: I dont know what i still continu to write some commentary Me neither. Think before you write. Most of ur „arguments“ are pretty pointless and i don‘t even know why i continued reading your wall of text after the first couple of sentences. Sometimes you are in the wrong side of the wall, but you are still thinking that you think right. Despite of how you analyse my argue, this game is not growing up, and on this planet, if you are not growing up you are dying. That's mean i'm right on one thing : All the people who are thinking like you, will leave the game soon, and start less playing, it's mathematics. So if you think this game is great you are the minority. I know a lot of guys with SC2 on the DD but no way they launch it. 4 years ago they was all Dia, all SC2 maniacs. They have some argues to explain why they dont play anymore, but it seems nobody cares. So yeah sorry to disturb, that was i promise my last commentary on TL/ Blizzard thread. Gl gl for next game Player base won't grow much no matter how good Blizzard balance team is because the majority of players want semi-casual games à la Overwatch, LoL, Fortnite, or whatever latest trendy game. Wrong. You know the difference between those games and what's happened with SC2? I've said this for years...i still say it today. Those games get balance patches C O N S T A N T L Y. They get updates C O N S T A N T L Y. SC2 gets this patch that really messes up Terran late game, and it will receive no revert, and no patches now for months because it's the way blizzard patches their games. They release a patch and won't admit it was a mistake or wrong ever. What they do is, next patch, when they and people realize Terran lategame is screwed...they will complicate the problem further by randomly buffing/nerfing something else instead of reverting the original thing they screwed up. Look at LoL - they did a complete basically 100% Leblanc revert. They admitted they screwed up the champion, and did a full revert to her, sure it took a bit, but they did. But they constantly are making changes, patch changes that actually are impactful and change the meta and balance. Same for Fortnite. Constant game updates, whether to cosmetics or even adding new weapons into the game, and even removing weapons flat out from the game that are bad for the game. Case in point - the guided missile that was in the game for a few weeks, and then flat out removed because it was bad for the game. SC2 will take this balance patch, it will be horrendous for T lategame for the coming months, and then we'll get a balance post from blizzard months from now about how they think Terran might not be doing well lategame, and that they're keeping an eye on it. 3 months after that, they'll release another post saying - "we're going to make a change for Terran lategame since we may have taken too much power away from the raven. We're going to give BCS +10 HP as compensation." aka they'll make an irrelevant change that doesn't address the problem, and then that patch will STICK for the next months with the problem persisting in the game. That's why SC2 has come to this point that it is at nowadays. DEVELOPER EGO. They do not want to admit any fault when it comes to SC2, or a lack of knowledge of the game. I invite Blizzard to discuss mech / lategame balance with myself, and someone like me that has mega insight into long 20+ minute games can help them put meaningful changes into the game. I'd even challenge the guys running "the pylon" to have me on their show if they are brave enough to discuss these recent patch changes and what's currently wrong with SC2 - doubtful they will be brave enough to do that though, because no one wants to discuss actual reality when it comes to SC2. Players / streamers from LoL for example the streamer anniebot was contacted before by Riot when they wanted to re-balance/adjust annie. Blizzard should be doing the same thing in SC2 - get into contact with a player like myself that's used mass raven/mech for years, so that i can give them insight and offer them changes that won't break the game but will get mass raven out of the game while offering Terran lategame to not be an autoloss. I've reached out to them before, with ZERO ANSWER. If anyone wonders why i've been vocal and upset and it might seem like i shit talk the devs sometimes or am not tactful - it's because i've reached out already plenty of times with zero response, so they either do not care or do not value the opinion of someone who has expertise on units in the game like ravens or lategame scenarios. The truth of the matter is this most recent patch is just flat out terrible. There is no way to really sugar coat it, it's just a bad patch in many ways, including the map pool, but mostly because it nerfs 1/3 races lategame without touching the other two. How is it remotely fair to remove Terran's lategame while not touching the other two races? This makes no sense. The depressing thing is that regardless of balance, we'll all be stuck with this patch for the next however many months until we get a blizzard post saying they're looking into maybe possibly changing things, with no reverts on bad changes. Good thing that blizzard hasn't contacted you, haven't heard too many good things about balance from your side.
If you guys want to shitpost on everything he says you should at least attempt to counter his arguments..the "well you're avilo.." argument is not really doing it for me. Marauder buff isnt going to impact the final condition late game comp that includes broodlords vipers infestors queens and mass static unless you count killing spores very slightly faster lol. The raven was the answer to zerg getting free air control which is what is required to get to this comp..nothing in this patch compensates for that. The viking hp is a literal nothing. This buff will impact tvz on a supppper narrow timing where ultras are first coming out before proper late game. To that point i can see blizz trying to prevent the super late games as they arent good to view..but this does create a problem..we have seen what happens every time the meta develops into kill x race before y timing...eventually x race figures out how to survive until after y and the imbalance gets out of control...not saying 100% thats going to happen..it can also end up the other way where x race simply cant..but based on what ive seen so far its looking like the former..the tvp implications are similar with an earlier and more intense impact imo.. time will tell
|
On May 19 2018 00:51 DomeGetta wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 00:10 MrWayne wrote:On May 18 2018 21:52 avilo wrote:On May 17 2018 18:41 Poopi wrote:On May 17 2018 17:16 Anoss wrote:On May 17 2018 16:58 EXRNaRa wrote:On May 17 2018 16:48 Anoss wrote: I dont know what i still continu to write some commentary Me neither. Think before you write. Most of ur „arguments“ are pretty pointless and i don‘t even know why i continued reading your wall of text after the first couple of sentences. Sometimes you are in the wrong side of the wall, but you are still thinking that you think right. Despite of how you analyse my argue, this game is not growing up, and on this planet, if you are not growing up you are dying. That's mean i'm right on one thing : All the people who are thinking like you, will leave the game soon, and start less playing, it's mathematics. So if you think this game is great you are the minority. I know a lot of guys with SC2 on the DD but no way they launch it. 4 years ago they was all Dia, all SC2 maniacs. They have some argues to explain why they dont play anymore, but it seems nobody cares. So yeah sorry to disturb, that was i promise my last commentary on TL/ Blizzard thread. Gl gl for next game Player base won't grow much no matter how good Blizzard balance team is because the majority of players want semi-casual games à la Overwatch, LoL, Fortnite, or whatever latest trendy game. Wrong. You know the difference between those games and what's happened with SC2? I've said this for years...i still say it today. Those games get balance patches C O N S T A N T L Y. They get updates C O N S T A N T L Y. SC2 gets this patch that really messes up Terran late game, and it will receive no revert, and no patches now for months because it's the way blizzard patches their games. They release a patch and won't admit it was a mistake or wrong ever. What they do is, next patch, when they and people realize Terran lategame is screwed...they will complicate the problem further by randomly buffing/nerfing something else instead of reverting the original thing they screwed up. Look at LoL - they did a complete basically 100% Leblanc revert. They admitted they screwed up the champion, and did a full revert to her, sure it took a bit, but they did. But they constantly are making changes, patch changes that actually are impactful and change the meta and balance. Same for Fortnite. Constant game updates, whether to cosmetics or even adding new weapons into the game, and even removing weapons flat out from the game that are bad for the game. Case in point - the guided missile that was in the game for a few weeks, and then flat out removed because it was bad for the game. SC2 will take this balance patch, it will be horrendous for T lategame for the coming months, and then we'll get a balance post from blizzard months from now about how they think Terran might not be doing well lategame, and that they're keeping an eye on it. 3 months after that, they'll release another post saying - "we're going to make a change for Terran lategame since we may have taken too much power away from the raven. We're going to give BCS +10 HP as compensation." aka they'll make an irrelevant change that doesn't address the problem, and then that patch will STICK for the next months with the problem persisting in the game. That's why SC2 has come to this point that it is at nowadays. DEVELOPER EGO. They do not want to admit any fault when it comes to SC2, or a lack of knowledge of the game. I invite Blizzard to discuss mech / lategame balance with myself, and someone like me that has mega insight into long 20+ minute games can help them put meaningful changes into the game. I'd even challenge the guys running "the pylon" to have me on their show if they are brave enough to discuss these recent patch changes and what's currently wrong with SC2 - doubtful they will be brave enough to do that though, because no one wants to discuss actual reality when it comes to SC2. Players / streamers from LoL for example the streamer anniebot was contacted before by Riot when they wanted to re-balance/adjust annie. Blizzard should be doing the same thing in SC2 - get into contact with a player like myself that's used mass raven/mech for years, so that i can give them insight and offer them changes that won't break the game but will get mass raven out of the game while offering Terran lategame to not be an autoloss. I've reached out to them before, with ZERO ANSWER. If anyone wonders why i've been vocal and upset and it might seem like i shit talk the devs sometimes or am not tactful - it's because i've reached out already plenty of times with zero response, so they either do not care or do not value the opinion of someone who has expertise on units in the game like ravens or lategame scenarios. The truth of the matter is this most recent patch is just flat out terrible. There is no way to really sugar coat it, it's just a bad patch in many ways, including the map pool, but mostly because it nerfs 1/3 races lategame without touching the other two. How is it remotely fair to remove Terran's lategame while not touching the other two races? This makes no sense. The depressing thing is that regardless of balance, we'll all be stuck with this patch for the next however many months until we get a blizzard post saying they're looking into maybe possibly changing things, with no reverts on bad changes. Good thing that blizzard hasn't contacted you, haven't heard too many good things about balance from your side. If you guys want to shitpost on everything he says you should at least attempt to counter his arguments..the "well you're avilo.." argument is not really doing it for me. Marauder buff isnt going to impact the final condition late game comp that includes broodlords vipers infestors queens and mass static unless you count killing spores very slightly faster lol. The raven was the answer to zerg getting free air control which is what is required to get to this comp..nothing in this patch compensates for that. The viking hp is a literal nothing. This buff will impact tvz on a supppper narrow timing where ultras are first coming out before proper late game. To that point i can see blizz trying to prevent the super late games as they arent good to view..but this does create a problem..we have seen what happens every time the meta develops into kill x race before y timing...eventually x race figures out how to survive until after y and the imbalance gets out of control...not saying 100% thats going to happen..it can also end up the other way where x race simply cant..but based on what ive seen so far its looking like the former..the tvp implications are similar with an earlier and more intense impact imo.. time will tell
You realize that literally the entirety of HotS (except turtle mech, and I'm sure avilo loved that era) was based around Terran killing Protoss and Zerg before a certain time? Terran will be fine, and if not, more buffs will come.
Also worth noting that Blizzard does listen to the pros. They specifically solicit feedback from GSL, and I distinctly remember Major saying he asked Blizzard for a Marauder revert way back near 4.0. It took them a few months, but here it is. I used to distrust the balance team, but my faith in them has only grown over the past year or so. Not saying that balance is or will be perfect, but their changes have definitely been trending in a positive direction.
The fact that the balance team is clearly ignoring avilo, assuming they even noticed him at all, can only help that.
|
On May 19 2018 01:25 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 00:51 DomeGetta wrote:On May 19 2018 00:10 MrWayne wrote:On May 18 2018 21:52 avilo wrote:On May 17 2018 18:41 Poopi wrote:On May 17 2018 17:16 Anoss wrote:On May 17 2018 16:58 EXRNaRa wrote:On May 17 2018 16:48 Anoss wrote: I dont know what i still continu to write some commentary Me neither. Think before you write. Most of ur „arguments“ are pretty pointless and i don‘t even know why i continued reading your wall of text after the first couple of sentences. Sometimes you are in the wrong side of the wall, but you are still thinking that you think right. Despite of how you analyse my argue, this game is not growing up, and on this planet, if you are not growing up you are dying. That's mean i'm right on one thing : All the people who are thinking like you, will leave the game soon, and start less playing, it's mathematics. So if you think this game is great you are the minority. I know a lot of guys with SC2 on the DD but no way they launch it. 4 years ago they was all Dia, all SC2 maniacs. They have some argues to explain why they dont play anymore, but it seems nobody cares. So yeah sorry to disturb, that was i promise my last commentary on TL/ Blizzard thread. Gl gl for next game Player base won't grow much no matter how good Blizzard balance team is because the majority of players want semi-casual games à la Overwatch, LoL, Fortnite, or whatever latest trendy game. Wrong. You know the difference between those games and what's happened with SC2? I've said this for years...i still say it today. Those games get balance patches C O N S T A N T L Y. They get updates C O N S T A N T L Y. SC2 gets this patch that really messes up Terran late game, and it will receive no revert, and no patches now for months because it's the way blizzard patches their games. They release a patch and won't admit it was a mistake or wrong ever. What they do is, next patch, when they and people realize Terran lategame is screwed...they will complicate the problem further by randomly buffing/nerfing something else instead of reverting the original thing they screwed up. Look at LoL - they did a complete basically 100% Leblanc revert. They admitted they screwed up the champion, and did a full revert to her, sure it took a bit, but they did. But they constantly are making changes, patch changes that actually are impactful and change the meta and balance. Same for Fortnite. Constant game updates, whether to cosmetics or even adding new weapons into the game, and even removing weapons flat out from the game that are bad for the game. Case in point - the guided missile that was in the game for a few weeks, and then flat out removed because it was bad for the game. SC2 will take this balance patch, it will be horrendous for T lategame for the coming months, and then we'll get a balance post from blizzard months from now about how they think Terran might not be doing well lategame, and that they're keeping an eye on it. 3 months after that, they'll release another post saying - "we're going to make a change for Terran lategame since we may have taken too much power away from the raven. We're going to give BCS +10 HP as compensation." aka they'll make an irrelevant change that doesn't address the problem, and then that patch will STICK for the next months with the problem persisting in the game. That's why SC2 has come to this point that it is at nowadays. DEVELOPER EGO. They do not want to admit any fault when it comes to SC2, or a lack of knowledge of the game. I invite Blizzard to discuss mech / lategame balance with myself, and someone like me that has mega insight into long 20+ minute games can help them put meaningful changes into the game. I'd even challenge the guys running "the pylon" to have me on their show if they are brave enough to discuss these recent patch changes and what's currently wrong with SC2 - doubtful they will be brave enough to do that though, because no one wants to discuss actual reality when it comes to SC2. Players / streamers from LoL for example the streamer anniebot was contacted before by Riot when they wanted to re-balance/adjust annie. Blizzard should be doing the same thing in SC2 - get into contact with a player like myself that's used mass raven/mech for years, so that i can give them insight and offer them changes that won't break the game but will get mass raven out of the game while offering Terran lategame to not be an autoloss. I've reached out to them before, with ZERO ANSWER. If anyone wonders why i've been vocal and upset and it might seem like i shit talk the devs sometimes or am not tactful - it's because i've reached out already plenty of times with zero response, so they either do not care or do not value the opinion of someone who has expertise on units in the game like ravens or lategame scenarios. The truth of the matter is this most recent patch is just flat out terrible. There is no way to really sugar coat it, it's just a bad patch in many ways, including the map pool, but mostly because it nerfs 1/3 races lategame without touching the other two. How is it remotely fair to remove Terran's lategame while not touching the other two races? This makes no sense. The depressing thing is that regardless of balance, we'll all be stuck with this patch for the next however many months until we get a blizzard post saying they're looking into maybe possibly changing things, with no reverts on bad changes. Good thing that blizzard hasn't contacted you, haven't heard too many good things about balance from your side. If you guys want to shitpost on everything he says you should at least attempt to counter his arguments..the "well you're avilo.." argument is not really doing it for me. Marauder buff isnt going to impact the final condition late game comp that includes broodlords vipers infestors queens and mass static unless you count killing spores very slightly faster lol. The raven was the answer to zerg getting free air control which is what is required to get to this comp..nothing in this patch compensates for that. The viking hp is a literal nothing. This buff will impact tvz on a supppper narrow timing where ultras are first coming out before proper late game. To that point i can see blizz trying to prevent the super late games as they arent good to view..but this does create a problem..we have seen what happens every time the meta develops into kill x race before y timing...eventually x race figures out how to survive until after y and the imbalance gets out of control...not saying 100% thats going to happen..it can also end up the other way where x race simply cant..but based on what ive seen so far its looking like the former..the tvp implications are similar with an earlier and more intense impact imo.. time will tell You realize that literally the entirety of HotS (except turtle mech, and I'm sure avilo loved that era) was based around Terran killing Protoss and Zerg before a certain time? Terran will be fine, and if not, more buffs will come. Also worth noting that Blizzard does listen to the pros. They specifically solicit feedback from GSL, and I distinctly remember Major saying he asked Blizzard for a Marauder revert way back near 4.0. It took them a few months, but here it is. I used to distrust the balance team, but my faith in them has only grown over the past year or so. Not saying that balance is or will be perfect, but their changes have definitely been trending in a positive direction. The fact that the balance team is clearly ignoring avilo, assuming they even noticed him at all, can only help that.
Getting feedback from GSL players that basically are playing in their own little tournament eco system is absolutely HORRENDOUS for game balance.
No one cares what 10 guys in GSL want for their personally balanced games that they play against solely each other in the tournament.
GSL tournament play, or any other tournament is not equivalent to the overall balance of the game. Players are mega biased for their races in GSL and other stuff. Just because a player is a "progamer" doesn't mean they have a clue about game balance or game design. Most pros are notoriously terrible when it comes to judging game balance and design.
The balance team isn't ignoring "avilo." They're ignoring objective late game scenarios that pop up incredibly often. Brood/viper/infestor/spores and carrier/high templar/tempest will remain exactly the same as the previous patch, but now Terran in this situation is massively weaker with no compensatory nerfs to P/Z or compensatory buffs (marauder/viking buffs do NOTHIGN in these late game energy unit situations).
Is there anyone that has an argument on why Terran lategame just received a severe nerf without corresponding nerfs to the other two races? The only argument anyone can provide is "marauder/viking" will make T mid-game stronger, allowing you to "avoid lategame."
That's the only argument that can be presented and it's based off the entire premise "kill them before they get there, and if you don't you lose the game now."
How is that game balance acceptable for anyone that plays this game? People should literally be up in arms over the raven nerfs, because it's one of the worst changes to hit the game in a very long time, from an objective balance standpoint.
|
i think its great that Blizzard is promoting PIG's beginner videos. His videos have really helped 2 of my friends who were reluctant to make the jump from P. v. E. type SC2 games to true PvP.
Great work by PIG and smart decision making by Blizzard in recognizing how good his videos are for beginning PvPers.
|
@avilo, I lost the will to be up in arms after the cyclone changes. TvT is as bad as roach vs roach now.
|
On May 18 2018 23:45 Pentarp wrote: lol@avilo. shit on bio terrans more.
terrans got a late-game buff (versus zergs) in the form of marauder-buff. marauders are also buffed mid-game versus protoss against upgraded (armor) zealots.
you get no sympathy from me. learn to be what you call a "bio-whore"
Marauders are now a late-game unit Requires fusion core, armory Concussive shells research time changed to 160 seconds Supply cost increased to 7 Damage and health stats remain unchanged
|
On May 19 2018 05:04 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 01:25 pvsnp wrote:On May 19 2018 00:51 DomeGetta wrote:On May 19 2018 00:10 MrWayne wrote:On May 18 2018 21:52 avilo wrote:On May 17 2018 18:41 Poopi wrote:On May 17 2018 17:16 Anoss wrote:On May 17 2018 16:58 EXRNaRa wrote:On May 17 2018 16:48 Anoss wrote: I dont know what i still continu to write some commentary Me neither. Think before you write. Most of ur „arguments“ are pretty pointless and i don‘t even know why i continued reading your wall of text after the first couple of sentences. Sometimes you are in the wrong side of the wall, but you are still thinking that you think right. Despite of how you analyse my argue, this game is not growing up, and on this planet, if you are not growing up you are dying. That's mean i'm right on one thing : All the people who are thinking like you, will leave the game soon, and start less playing, it's mathematics. So if you think this game is great you are the minority. I know a lot of guys with SC2 on the DD but no way they launch it. 4 years ago they was all Dia, all SC2 maniacs. They have some argues to explain why they dont play anymore, but it seems nobody cares. So yeah sorry to disturb, that was i promise my last commentary on TL/ Blizzard thread. Gl gl for next game Player base won't grow much no matter how good Blizzard balance team is because the majority of players want semi-casual games à la Overwatch, LoL, Fortnite, or whatever latest trendy game. Wrong. You know the difference between those games and what's happened with SC2? I've said this for years...i still say it today. Those games get balance patches C O N S T A N T L Y. They get updates C O N S T A N T L Y. SC2 gets this patch that really messes up Terran late game, and it will receive no revert, and no patches now for months because it's the way blizzard patches their games. They release a patch and won't admit it was a mistake or wrong ever. What they do is, next patch, when they and people realize Terran lategame is screwed...they will complicate the problem further by randomly buffing/nerfing something else instead of reverting the original thing they screwed up. Look at LoL - they did a complete basically 100% Leblanc revert. They admitted they screwed up the champion, and did a full revert to her, sure it took a bit, but they did. But they constantly are making changes, patch changes that actually are impactful and change the meta and balance. Same for Fortnite. Constant game updates, whether to cosmetics or even adding new weapons into the game, and even removing weapons flat out from the game that are bad for the game. Case in point - the guided missile that was in the game for a few weeks, and then flat out removed because it was bad for the game. SC2 will take this balance patch, it will be horrendous for T lategame for the coming months, and then we'll get a balance post from blizzard months from now about how they think Terran might not be doing well lategame, and that they're keeping an eye on it. 3 months after that, they'll release another post saying - "we're going to make a change for Terran lategame since we may have taken too much power away from the raven. We're going to give BCS +10 HP as compensation." aka they'll make an irrelevant change that doesn't address the problem, and then that patch will STICK for the next months with the problem persisting in the game. That's why SC2 has come to this point that it is at nowadays. DEVELOPER EGO. They do not want to admit any fault when it comes to SC2, or a lack of knowledge of the game. I invite Blizzard to discuss mech / lategame balance with myself, and someone like me that has mega insight into long 20+ minute games can help them put meaningful changes into the game. I'd even challenge the guys running "the pylon" to have me on their show if they are brave enough to discuss these recent patch changes and what's currently wrong with SC2 - doubtful they will be brave enough to do that though, because no one wants to discuss actual reality when it comes to SC2. Players / streamers from LoL for example the streamer anniebot was contacted before by Riot when they wanted to re-balance/adjust annie. Blizzard should be doing the same thing in SC2 - get into contact with a player like myself that's used mass raven/mech for years, so that i can give them insight and offer them changes that won't break the game but will get mass raven out of the game while offering Terran lategame to not be an autoloss. I've reached out to them before, with ZERO ANSWER. If anyone wonders why i've been vocal and upset and it might seem like i shit talk the devs sometimes or am not tactful - it's because i've reached out already plenty of times with zero response, so they either do not care or do not value the opinion of someone who has expertise on units in the game like ravens or lategame scenarios. The truth of the matter is this most recent patch is just flat out terrible. There is no way to really sugar coat it, it's just a bad patch in many ways, including the map pool, but mostly because it nerfs 1/3 races lategame without touching the other two. How is it remotely fair to remove Terran's lategame while not touching the other two races? This makes no sense. The depressing thing is that regardless of balance, we'll all be stuck with this patch for the next however many months until we get a blizzard post saying they're looking into maybe possibly changing things, with no reverts on bad changes. Good thing that blizzard hasn't contacted you, haven't heard too many good things about balance from your side. If you guys want to shitpost on everything he says you should at least attempt to counter his arguments..the "well you're avilo.." argument is not really doing it for me. Marauder buff isnt going to impact the final condition late game comp that includes broodlords vipers infestors queens and mass static unless you count killing spores very slightly faster lol. The raven was the answer to zerg getting free air control which is what is required to get to this comp..nothing in this patch compensates for that. The viking hp is a literal nothing. This buff will impact tvz on a supppper narrow timing where ultras are first coming out before proper late game. To that point i can see blizz trying to prevent the super late games as they arent good to view..but this does create a problem..we have seen what happens every time the meta develops into kill x race before y timing...eventually x race figures out how to survive until after y and the imbalance gets out of control...not saying 100% thats going to happen..it can also end up the other way where x race simply cant..but based on what ive seen so far its looking like the former..the tvp implications are similar with an earlier and more intense impact imo.. time will tell You realize that literally the entirety of HotS (except turtle mech, and I'm sure avilo loved that era) was based around Terran killing Protoss and Zerg before a certain time? Terran will be fine, and if not, more buffs will come. Also worth noting that Blizzard does listen to the pros. They specifically solicit feedback from GSL, and I distinctly remember Major saying he asked Blizzard for a Marauder revert way back near 4.0. It took them a few months, but here it is. I used to distrust the balance team, but my faith in them has only grown over the past year or so. Not saying that balance is or will be perfect, but their changes have definitely been trending in a positive direction. The fact that the balance team is clearly ignoring avilo, assuming they even noticed him at all, can only help that. Getting feedback from GSL players that basically are playing in their own little tournament eco system is absolutely HORRENDOUS for game balance. No one cares what 10 guys in GSL want for their personally balanced games that they play against solely each other in the tournament. GSL tournament play, or any other tournament is not equivalent to the overall balance of the game. Players are mega biased for their races in GSL and other stuff. Just because a player is a "progamer" doesn't mean they have a clue about game balance or game design. Most pros are notoriously terrible when it comes to judging game balance and design. The balance team isn't ignoring "avilo." They're ignoring objective late game scenarios that pop up incredibly often. Brood/viper/infestor/spores and carrier/high templar/tempest will remain exactly the same as the previous patch, but now Terran in this situation is massively weaker with no compensatory nerfs to P/Z or compensatory buffs (marauder/viking buffs do NOTHIGN in these late game energy unit situations). Is there anyone that has an argument on why Terran lategame just received a severe nerf without corresponding nerfs to the other two races? The only argument anyone can provide is "marauder/viking" will make T mid-game stronger, allowing you to "avoid lategame." That's the only argument that can be presented and it's based off the entire premise "kill them before they get there, and if you don't you lose the game now." How is that game balance acceptable for anyone that plays this game? People should literally be up in arms over the raven nerfs, because it's one of the worst changes to hit the game in a very long time, from an objective balance standpoint.
I've been called a Terran Whiner™ here on TL, and more than once at that. It's good to know that, biased as I may be, I am still not in agreement with avilo. If that ever changes, then I will know I am truly lost.
Lest I be accused of dismissing avilo solely because he is avilo, I'll elaborate:
Technically speaking, within the confines of an arbitrary and artificial "lategame" boundary outlined in his post, avilo is correct. Terran lategame has been nerfed by this balance patch. Not that this is some groundbreaking revelation; Blizzard explicitly announced that much themselves:
...we feel good about continuing with our plans to reduce Anti-Armor Missile’s late-game strength and improve Terran‘s mid-game strength in the TvP matchup.
This change decreases its late-game damage potential while minimally affecting utility in the mid-game...
While we felt this change would have similar effects in the late-game, we thought this would be too much of a hit to its mid-game strength...
We realize Terrans will take a hit to their late-game strength due to the Anti-Armor Missile change...
As for TvP, we believe this change will improve Terran’s ability to apply more consistent pressure during the mid game.
And most important of all:
...as we mentioned in the last community update, we’d like to focus more on how Terran’s mid-game power scales into the late-game, which will hopefully grant Terrans with more control over that transition.
Blizzard is very literally spelling out its (perfectly sound) logic to avilo and anyone else that actually reads what they write instead of knee-jerk raging about nerfs to their own race and/or buffs to any other race.
It's true that Terran lategame is now weaker than it used to be, and weaker than that of Protoss and Zerg. If every SC2 game started at the 20 minute mark, Terran would be in for a world of hurt. Fortunately, and either unknown or neglected by avilo and his ilk, the game starts about 20 minutes earlier. The lategame strength of Protoss and Zerg deathballs means jack shit if they have no workers, no bases, and no economy to support such a deathball. Or if they already gg'd out.
Now some people will undoubtedly bitch about how this argument amounts to "kill them before they get there." And that's true to a certain extent, I'm saying more or less that Terran needs to kill Protoss and Zerg before they get there. The thing is, "kill them before they get there" is terrible advice–not to mention a disingenuous defense of imbalance–when Terran lacked the tools to actually, well, kill Protoss/Zerg before they got there. But now that Blizzard has kindly accommodated by buffing Terran midgame, "kill them before they get there" is a viable strategy (presuming that the midgame buffs work as intended, if not then Blizzard will buff Terran some more).
Moreover, of all races to carry the burden of "kill them before they get there," Terran is undoubtedly the best. The nature of Terran is such that–when properly balanced–it has the largest number of aggressive options, the most mobile ground army (bio) and also the strongest ground army (mech). Furthermore, Terran simultaneously has the greatest ability to turtle, with siege lines, planetaries, sensor towers, and mules. Most of the time, Terran should be the one attacking, taking advantage of their greater offensive capability. When this state of affairs is reversed, with Terran mostly defending, we get the cancerous sort of turtling that drags the game on endlessly. It is metas in which Terran goes for a supreme lategame that inevitably encourage such cancerous turtling, as seen in the turtle mech era and more recently with 30-damage AAM.
And the cherry on the cake is that the Raven wasn't changed for GSL. While GSL-level balance was of course a factor, it was games like Clem vs Guru that truly displayed the disgusting potential of a Raven-based meta. GSL-level players are too skilled to allow the game to degenerate to such a state, but at lower levels, well, just go and rewatch the game.
If a race has stronger defense than offense, any rational player will very obviously chose to defend instead of attack. The very identity of Terran as a race revolves around its offensive capabilities and aggressive timings, while Protoss and Zerg assume the defensive role in PvT and ZvT. Handing Terran a superior defensive tool like 30-damage AAM removes the incentive to be aggressive. Since Protoss and Zerg were already defending, Terran also defends and voila, a game with no aggression, no engagements, no interest, and no entertainment. Refer to Clem vs Guru.
TL;DR: AAM was breaking the identity of Terran. Now Terran has a weaker lategame and a stronger midgame. Perfectly balanced, as all things should be.
|
On May 19 2018 06:40 SHODAN wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2018 23:45 Pentarp wrote: lol@avilo. shit on bio terrans more.
terrans got a late-game buff (versus zergs) in the form of marauder-buff. marauders are also buffed mid-game versus protoss against upgraded (armor) zealots.
you get no sympathy from me. learn to be what you call a "bio-whore"
Marauders are now a late-game unit Requires fusion core, armory Concussive shells research time changed to 160 seconds Supply cost increased to 7 Damage and health stats remain unchanged
I really have to question your knowledge of the game when you don't see how marauders being able to kill ultralisks affects late game in TvZ.
I bet you also think that Terran is designed around "tiers" a la "AMG TIER 1 UNIT SHOULDNT KILL TIER 3 UNIT WAHHHHH". We have Zergs crying how their ultras are melting, and then we have people like you.
/edit
Anyone remember back in WoL how BL/Infestor (in TvZ) became suddenly more prevalent AFTER queen range buff?
This made it so that Zergs could skip roach tech and defend versus hellions with only queens, making the late-game transition faster and easier.
Let's check the tech requirements for queens. According to you, queens require hive tech. Am I doing this right?
|
On May 19 2018 08:13 Pentarp wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 06:40 SHODAN wrote:On May 18 2018 23:45 Pentarp wrote: lol@avilo. shit on bio terrans more.
terrans got a late-game buff (versus zergs) in the form of marauder-buff. marauders are also buffed mid-game versus protoss against upgraded (armor) zealots.
you get no sympathy from me. learn to be what you call a "bio-whore"
Marauders are now a late-game unit Requires fusion core, armory Concussive shells research time changed to 160 seconds Supply cost increased to 7 Damage and health stats remain unchanged I really have to question your knowledge of the game when you don't see how marauders being able to kill ultralisks affects late game in TvZ. I bet you also think that Terran is designed around "tiers" a la "AMG TIER 1 UNIT SHOULDNT KILL TIER 3 UNIT WAHHHHH". We have Zergs crying how their ultras are melting, and then we have people like you. Let's check the tech requirements for queens. According to you, queens require hive tech. Am I doing this right?
golly gosh, you sure inferred a lot from not very much at all. if you want my opinions on late game TvZ, why don't you just ask me? lol
|
On May 19 2018 08:46 SHODAN wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 08:13 Pentarp wrote:On May 19 2018 06:40 SHODAN wrote:On May 18 2018 23:45 Pentarp wrote: lol@avilo. shit on bio terrans more.
terrans got a late-game buff (versus zergs) in the form of marauder-buff. marauders are also buffed mid-game versus protoss against upgraded (armor) zealots.
you get no sympathy from me. learn to be what you call a "bio-whore"
Marauders are now a late-game unit Requires fusion core, armory Concussive shells research time changed to 160 seconds Supply cost increased to 7 Damage and health stats remain unchanged I really have to question your knowledge of the game when you don't see how marauders being able to kill ultralisks affects late game in TvZ. I bet you also think that Terran is designed around "tiers" a la "AMG TIER 1 UNIT SHOULDNT KILL TIER 3 UNIT WAHHHHH". We have Zergs crying how their ultras are melting, and then we have people like you. Let's check the tech requirements for queens. According to you, queens require hive tech. Am I doing this right? golly gosh, you sure inferred a lot from not very much at all. if you want my opinions on late game TvZ, why don't you just ask me? lol
No, lets do what you do and make a sarcastic shitpost about how "marauders are now a lategame unit".
|
On May 19 2018 07:06 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 05:04 avilo wrote:On May 19 2018 01:25 pvsnp wrote:On May 19 2018 00:51 DomeGetta wrote:On May 19 2018 00:10 MrWayne wrote:On May 18 2018 21:52 avilo wrote:On May 17 2018 18:41 Poopi wrote:On May 17 2018 17:16 Anoss wrote:On May 17 2018 16:58 EXRNaRa wrote:On May 17 2018 16:48 Anoss wrote: I dont know what i still continu to write some commentary Me neither. Think before you write. Most of ur „arguments“ are pretty pointless and i don‘t even know why i continued reading your wall of text after the first couple of sentences. Sometimes you are in the wrong side of the wall, but you are still thinking that you think right. Despite of how you analyse my argue, this game is not growing up, and on this planet, if you are not growing up you are dying. That's mean i'm right on one thing : All the people who are thinking like you, will leave the game soon, and start less playing, it's mathematics. So if you think this game is great you are the minority. I know a lot of guys with SC2 on the DD but no way they launch it. 4 years ago they was all Dia, all SC2 maniacs. They have some argues to explain why they dont play anymore, but it seems nobody cares. So yeah sorry to disturb, that was i promise my last commentary on TL/ Blizzard thread. Gl gl for next game Player base won't grow much no matter how good Blizzard balance team is because the majority of players want semi-casual games à la Overwatch, LoL, Fortnite, or whatever latest trendy game. Wrong. You know the difference between those games and what's happened with SC2? I've said this for years...i still say it today. Those games get balance patches C O N S T A N T L Y. They get updates C O N S T A N T L Y. SC2 gets this patch that really messes up Terran late game, and it will receive no revert, and no patches now for months because it's the way blizzard patches their games. They release a patch and won't admit it was a mistake or wrong ever. What they do is, next patch, when they and people realize Terran lategame is screwed...they will complicate the problem further by randomly buffing/nerfing something else instead of reverting the original thing they screwed up. Look at LoL - they did a complete basically 100% Leblanc revert. They admitted they screwed up the champion, and did a full revert to her, sure it took a bit, but they did. But they constantly are making changes, patch changes that actually are impactful and change the meta and balance. Same for Fortnite. Constant game updates, whether to cosmetics or even adding new weapons into the game, and even removing weapons flat out from the game that are bad for the game. Case in point - the guided missile that was in the game for a few weeks, and then flat out removed because it was bad for the game. SC2 will take this balance patch, it will be horrendous for T lategame for the coming months, and then we'll get a balance post from blizzard months from now about how they think Terran might not be doing well lategame, and that they're keeping an eye on it. 3 months after that, they'll release another post saying - "we're going to make a change for Terran lategame since we may have taken too much power away from the raven. We're going to give BCS +10 HP as compensation." aka they'll make an irrelevant change that doesn't address the problem, and then that patch will STICK for the next months with the problem persisting in the game. That's why SC2 has come to this point that it is at nowadays. DEVELOPER EGO. They do not want to admit any fault when it comes to SC2, or a lack of knowledge of the game. I invite Blizzard to discuss mech / lategame balance with myself, and someone like me that has mega insight into long 20+ minute games can help them put meaningful changes into the game. I'd even challenge the guys running "the pylon" to have me on their show if they are brave enough to discuss these recent patch changes and what's currently wrong with SC2 - doubtful they will be brave enough to do that though, because no one wants to discuss actual reality when it comes to SC2. Players / streamers from LoL for example the streamer anniebot was contacted before by Riot when they wanted to re-balance/adjust annie. Blizzard should be doing the same thing in SC2 - get into contact with a player like myself that's used mass raven/mech for years, so that i can give them insight and offer them changes that won't break the game but will get mass raven out of the game while offering Terran lategame to not be an autoloss. I've reached out to them before, with ZERO ANSWER. If anyone wonders why i've been vocal and upset and it might seem like i shit talk the devs sometimes or am not tactful - it's because i've reached out already plenty of times with zero response, so they either do not care or do not value the opinion of someone who has expertise on units in the game like ravens or lategame scenarios. The truth of the matter is this most recent patch is just flat out terrible. There is no way to really sugar coat it, it's just a bad patch in many ways, including the map pool, but mostly because it nerfs 1/3 races lategame without touching the other two. How is it remotely fair to remove Terran's lategame while not touching the other two races? This makes no sense. The depressing thing is that regardless of balance, we'll all be stuck with this patch for the next however many months until we get a blizzard post saying they're looking into maybe possibly changing things, with no reverts on bad changes. Good thing that blizzard hasn't contacted you, haven't heard too many good things about balance from your side. If you guys want to shitpost on everything he says you should at least attempt to counter his arguments..the "well you're avilo.." argument is not really doing it for me. Marauder buff isnt going to impact the final condition late game comp that includes broodlords vipers infestors queens and mass static unless you count killing spores very slightly faster lol. The raven was the answer to zerg getting free air control which is what is required to get to this comp..nothing in this patch compensates for that. The viking hp is a literal nothing. This buff will impact tvz on a supppper narrow timing where ultras are first coming out before proper late game. To that point i can see blizz trying to prevent the super late games as they arent good to view..but this does create a problem..we have seen what happens every time the meta develops into kill x race before y timing...eventually x race figures out how to survive until after y and the imbalance gets out of control...not saying 100% thats going to happen..it can also end up the other way where x race simply cant..but based on what ive seen so far its looking like the former..the tvp implications are similar with an earlier and more intense impact imo.. time will tell By You realize that literally the entirety of HotS (except turtle mech, and I'm sure avilo loved that era) was based around Terran killing Protoss and Zerg before a certain time? Terran will be fine, and if not, more buffs will come. Also worth noting that Blizzard does listen to the pros. They specifically solicit feedback from GSL, and I distinctly remember Major saying he asked Blizzard for a Marauder revert way back near 4.0. It took them a few months, but here it is. I used to distrust the balance team, but my faith in them has only grown over the past year or so. Not saying that balance is or will be perfect, but their changes have definitely been trending in a positive direction. The fact that the balance team is clearly ignoring avilo, assuming they even noticed him at all, can only help that. Getting feedback from GSL players that basically are playing in their own little tournament eco system is absolutely HORRENDOUS for game balance. No one cares what 10 guys in GSL want for their personally balanced games that they play against solely each other in the tournament. GSL tournament play, or any other tournament is not equivalent to the overall balance of the game. Players are mega biased for their races in GSL and other stuff. Just because a player is a "progamer" doesn't mean they have a clue about game balance or game design. Most pros are notoriously terrible when it comes to judging game balance and design. The balance team isn't ignoring "avilo." They're ignoring objective late game scenarios that pop up incredibly often. Brood/viper/infestor/spores and carrier/high templar/tempest will remain exactly the same as the previous patch, but now Terran in this situation is massively weaker with no compensatory nerfs to P/Z or compensatory buffs (marauder/viking buffs do NOTHIGN in these late game energy unit situations). Is there anyone that has an argument on why Terran lategame just received a severe nerf without corresponding nerfs to the other two races? The only argument anyone can provide is "marauder/viking" will make T mid-game stronger, allowing you to "avoid lategame." That's the only argument that can be presented and it's based off the entire premise "kill them before they get there, and if you don't you lose the game now." How is that game balance acceptable for anyone that plays this game? People should literally be up in arms over the raven nerfs, because it's one of the worst changes to hit the game in a very long time, from an objective balance standpoint. I've been called a Terran Whiner™ here on TL, and more than once at that. It's good to know that, biased as I may be, I am still not in agreement with avilo. If that ever changes, then I will know I am truly lost. Lest I be accused of dismissing avilo solely because he is avilo, I'll elaborate: Technically speaking, within the confines of an arbitrary and artificial "lategame" boundary outlined in his post, avilo is correct. Terran lategame has been nerfed by this balance patch. Not that this is some groundbreaking revelation; Blizzard explicitly announced that much themselves: ...we feel good about continuing with our plans to reduce Anti-Armor Missile’s late-game strength and improve Terran‘s mid-game strength in the TvP matchup.This change decreases its late-game damage potential while minimally affecting utility in the mid-game...While we felt this change would have similar effects in the late-game, we thought this would be too much of a hit to its mid-game strength...We realize Terrans will take a hit to their late-game strength due to the Anti-Armor Missile change...As for TvP, we believe this change will improve Terran’s ability to apply more consistent pressure during the mid game. And most important of all: ...as we mentioned in the last community update, we’d like to focus more on how Terran’s mid-game power scales into the late-game, which will hopefully grant Terrans with more control over that transition.Blizzard is very literally spelling out its (perfectly sound) logic to avilo and anyone else that actually reads what they write instead of knee-jerk raging about nerfs to their own race and/or buffs to any other race. It's true that Terran lategame is now weaker than it used to be, and weaker than that of Protoss and Zerg. If every SC2 game started at the 20 minute mark, Terran would be in for a world of hurt. Fortunately, and either unknown or neglected by avilo and his ilk, the game starts about 20 minutes earlier. The lategame strength of Protoss and Zerg deathballs means jack shit if they have no workers, no bases, and no economy to support such a deathball. Or if they already gg'd out. Now some people will undoubtedly bitch about how this argument amounts to "kill them before they get there." And that's true to a certain extent, I'm saying more or less that Terran needs to kill Protoss and Zerg before they get there. The thing is, "kill them before they get there" is terrible advice–not to mention a disingenuous defense of imbalance–when Terran lacked the tools to actually, well, kill Protoss/Zerg before they got there. But now that Blizzard has kindly accommodated by buffing Terran midgame, "kill them before they get there" is a viable strategy (presuming that the midgame buffs work as intended, if not then Blizzard will buff Terran some more). Moreover, of all races to carry the burden of "kill them before they get there," Terran is undoubtedly the best. The nature of Terran is such that–when properly balanced–it has the largest number of aggressive options, the most mobile ground army (bio) and also the strongest ground army (mech). Furthermore, Terran simultaneously has the greatest ability to turtle, with siege lines, planetaries, sensor towers, and mules. Most of the time, Terran should be the one attacking, taking advantage of their greater offensive capability. When this state of affairs is reversed, with Terran mostly defending, we get the cancerous sort of turtling that drags the game on endlessly. It is metas in which Terran goes for a supreme lategame that inevitably encourage such cancerous turtling, as seen in the turtle mech era and more recently with 30-damage AAM. And the cherry on the cake is that the Raven wasn't changed for GSL. While GSL-level balance was of course a factor, it was games like Clem vs Guru that truly displayed the disgusting potential of a Raven-based meta. GSL-level players are too skilled to allow the game to degenerate to such a state, but at lower levels, well, just go and rewatch the game. If a race has stronger defense than offense, any rational player will very obviously chose to defend instead of attack. The very identity of Terran as a race revolves around its offensive capabilities and aggressive timings, while Protoss and Zerg assume the defensive role in PvT and ZvT. Handing Terran a superior defensive tool like 30-damage AAM removes the incentive to be aggressive. Since Protoss and Zerg were already defending, Terran also defends and voila, a game with no aggression, no engagements, no interest, and no entertainment. Refer to Clem vs Guru. TL;DR: AAM was breaking the identity of Terran. Now Terran has a weaker lategame and a stronger midgame. Perfectly balanced, as all things should be.
Im ok with this post. You are expressing your opinion which is different from his....thats exactly what should happen in these threads imo. This is a very important debate to have and for blizzard to consider(imo). Some people are very opposed to the idea that one race has to force the action all game and end it on a timer..it doesnt seem fair..if both players have similar apm and mechanics the one playing with defenders adv all game should have a clear adv. In contrast, all people (even avilo i dare say) know that having a matchup where both players have incentive to defend is horrible to watch and play. How do you create a meta where both races have incentive to harass / attack and expand anywhere from early game thru late game without it being a mirror? If we could figure that out i think you could achieve balance along with entertaining games where one race doesnt have a decisive adv in the late game..until then tho, i personally think the hydra and bane buffs will still make it too easy for zerg to get to their ultimate comp (which is, without the old raven, not counterable by a terran army) and we are going to see this happen in the near future.
|
|
I'm really looking forward to seeing the game on a pro KR level with the patch and new maps...anything goes until we can get real evidence.
|
On May 19 2018 08:46 SHODAN wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 08:13 Pentarp wrote:On May 19 2018 06:40 SHODAN wrote:On May 18 2018 23:45 Pentarp wrote: lol@avilo. shit on bio terrans more.
terrans got a late-game buff (versus zergs) in the form of marauder-buff. marauders are also buffed mid-game versus protoss against upgraded (armor) zealots.
you get no sympathy from me. learn to be what you call a "bio-whore"
Marauders are now a late-game unit Requires fusion core, armory Concussive shells research time changed to 160 seconds Supply cost increased to 7 Damage and health stats remain unchanged I really have to question your knowledge of the game when you don't see how marauders being able to kill ultralisks affects late game in TvZ. I bet you also think that Terran is designed around "tiers" a la "AMG TIER 1 UNIT SHOULDNT KILL TIER 3 UNIT WAHHHHH". We have Zergs crying how their ultras are melting, and then we have people like you. Let's check the tech requirements for queens. According to you, queens require hive tech. Am I doing this right? golly gosh, you sure inferred a lot from not very much at all. if you want my opinions on late game TvZ, why don't you just ask me? lol Looking at your first post: What do you even mean with this post? It just looks like a sarcastic response because of a misinterpretation. Why a fusion core requirement? How will that aid versus zealots? You posted in a balance discussion. Of course someone will try to understand your intentions. You saying that marauders requires fusion core is very much like saying "there are tiers". You can have a unit available in the earlier game that are used more in the late game, e.t. zealots and liberators. Even marauders are like that in TvP. Terrans are making mostly marines in the early stages but make more and more marauders as the game goes long.
I see perfectly clear how Pentarp could draw those conclusions.
Then you commented with an "if you want my opinions on late game TvZ, why don't you just ask me?" Your initial comment should have answered this. That is how discussions work, you try to say what you mean. If your initial comment meant nothing, then it should never have been written.
SHODAN, do better! If you write, contribute.
|
Korea (South)227 Posts
Ugh. Avilo strikes again. I know we're supposed to respect every and all opinions, but its hard to try and take this guy seriously. Maphack accusing anyone? I hope he stops bitching to blizzard that mech isn't the god powerful comp it was in BW.
|
Sure SC2 balancing is moving in circles and it wont go anywhere, ever.
But this is no new information. I think it had become obvious since some months after release of HOTS, I guess it was mid to end 2013.
These threads are still full of players who try to gain little edges and advantages for their own races mostly. And a few decent posts inbetween which by themselves are not able to pull it off.
Sc2 is not in the situation where it can be helped with small changes and instead several things would have to be changed at once as everything is connected. This patch is obviously trying to perform that kind of thing but it actually it is not even enough. But its getting harder to forecast results the more you change at once, due to networking effect.
At this point it is probably best to have a larger overhaul (large random factor) again and to hope that one wins the lottery, but they actually had to be way more courageous with adressing cores of issues than before.
Hence it might do the trick to parallel the development and have several teams compete with alternative designs/balances against each other internally. If we had like 3-4 teams doing 4 designs a year (one per quarter), it would be more likely to hit the jackpot earlier, support teams learning from each other, and can image different pictures and perceptions of the game to choose from in a faster pace.
The jackpot is what Anoss stated. To have a game that is not as much focused on mechanics as it currently is, which gives a bit more freedom to creativity of players. Add to that, that advantages over time should not scale in square but a bit more towards linearish (not fully obviously). Bring back early game. Damage per map size of units revision. Splash vs single target revision. Game pace revision. Mineral block/base saturation revision. etc.
|
It's obvious by now, the balance team wants terran to all-in in an effort to create 'EXCITING!!!1111' games. That's why this game is dying/dead.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
Haha I didn't know there was a patch, and I kept doing my very specific builds that shunned marauders in certain situations, and made ravens if I couldn't kill em early enough. I checked for this solely because the builds were doing worse and I figured there had to be a patch.
I'm actually super happy about these changes for vP and vZ. Also I wonder if this makes it easier to break tank lines with full bio, and if full bio (or full bio + 1fac tank) is viable vs pure marine tank
|
Interesting to see balance whine still going on. recently there really has been no reason to ask for changes besides mass raven play.
just wanted to throw it out there that all metrics before the balance patch showed the game pretty balanced.
winrates no more than 3% off of even.
gsl top 16 is 7/5/4 race distribution.
hell even EU and US challenger for Austin was 2/2/4 at ro8 with terrans in the finals.
|
On May 20 2018 14:20 youngjiddle wrote: winrates no more than 3% off of even.
What fantasy did that number come from? Even blizzard posted a different number in their community update. Protoss was favored quite a lot in TvP... Lets see how everything fares now after the patch had time to settle in.
|
Actually this patch is much more damaging to mech than it is to terran. Marauder buff and viking health should indeed make bio midgame a little stronger, while not impacting late game that much since the raven wasn't really used en masse with bio.
Thing is, mech's now : - horrible in TvP : always has been, but ravens/cyclones don't combo as well - really bad in TvT : marauder buff, raven nerf and viking buff means the raven is not as good to prevent mass vikings/libs on superior economy - mediocre to bad in TvZ : mainly since lots of BL/corru/vipers has no credible counter. Abduct thors, parabomb vikings, and there's not much terran can do. Ghost/libs should be still working but there's no reason to go mech then. Also the missile nerf makes playing against swarm hosts and hydras much tougher in the late game.
Blizz seems to be caught in an endless "terran's too weak" => "buff bio nerf mech" => "mech's not viable" => "implement some really bad designs to make mech viable" => "blanket nerf because of bad designs" => "terran's too weak"
|
On May 20 2018 23:47 JackONeill wrote: Actually this patch is much more damaging to mech than it is to terran. Marauder buff and viking health should indeed make bio midgame a little stronger, while not impacting late game that much since the raven wasn't really used en masse with bio.
Thing is, mech's now : - horrible in TvP : always has been, but ravens/cyclones don't combo as well - really bad in TvT : marauder buff, raven nerf and viking buff means the raven is not as good to prevent mass vikings/libs on superior economy - mediocre to bad in TvZ : mainly since lots of BL/corru/vipers has no credible counter. Abduct thors, parabomb vikings, and there's not much terran can do. Ghost/libs should be still working but there's no reason to go mech then. Also the missile nerf makes playing against swarm hosts and hydras much tougher in the late game.
Blizz seems to be caught in an endless "terran's too weak" => "buff bio nerf mech" => "mech's not viable" => "implement some really bad designs to make mech viable" => "blanket nerf because of bad designs" => "terran's too weak"
Agree about it making mech worse since u can no longer fight hive mass air, but it's certainly a nerf to bio late game as well..if u have watched any of the games in gsl bio tvz that have gone late 100% end in mass ghost raven. Personally no problem from me with nerfing mech out of the game xD lol. The entire premise in its current state is based on turtling...= not fun to play or watch..but still very interested to watch ro16 and see what the horsemen come up with for the inevitable late game
|
Czech Republic12115 Posts
On May 20 2018 23:47 JackONeill wrote: Actually this patch is much more damaging to mech than it is to terran. Marauder buff and viking health should indeed make bio midgame a little stronger, while not impacting late game that much since the raven wasn't really used en masse with bio.
Thing is, mech's now : - horrible in TvP : always has been, but ravens/cyclones don't combo as well - really bad in TvT : marauder buff, raven nerf and viking buff means the raven is not as good to prevent mass vikings/libs on superior economy - mediocre to bad in TvZ : mainly since lots of BL/corru/vipers has no credible counter. Abduct thors, parabomb vikings, and there's not much terran can do. Ghost/libs should be still working but there's no reason to go mech then. Also the missile nerf makes playing against swarm hosts and hydras much tougher in the late game.
Blizz seems to be caught in an endless "terran's too weak" => "buff bio nerf mech" => "mech's not viable" => "implement some really bad designs to make mech viable" => "blanket nerf because of bad designs" => "terran's too weak" Tanks still use smartfire, aren't they?
To make mech & bio viable at the same time they would have to do some crazy balance. And that would require to redesign some core units - and they don't have the balls for this. I don't blame them, it would require some crazy knowledge to redesign properly the game so both styles are viable in both non-mirror MU(and I don't think they can change just some units, IMO they would need to redesign the Protoss race and that's the core of the problem IMO).
|
On May 21 2018 00:25 DomeGetta wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2018 23:47 JackONeill wrote: Actually this patch is much more damaging to mech than it is to terran. Marauder buff and viking health should indeed make bio midgame a little stronger, while not impacting late game that much since the raven wasn't really used en masse with bio.
Thing is, mech's now : - horrible in TvP : always has been, but ravens/cyclones don't combo as well - really bad in TvT : marauder buff, raven nerf and viking buff means the raven is not as good to prevent mass vikings/libs on superior economy - mediocre to bad in TvZ : mainly since lots of BL/corru/vipers has no credible counter. Abduct thors, parabomb vikings, and there's not much terran can do. Ghost/libs should be still working but there's no reason to go mech then. Also the missile nerf makes playing against swarm hosts and hydras much tougher in the late game.
Blizz seems to be caught in an endless "terran's too weak" => "buff bio nerf mech" => "mech's not viable" => "implement some really bad designs to make mech viable" => "blanket nerf because of bad designs" => "terran's too weak" Agree about it making mech worse since u can no longer fight hive mass air, but it's certainly a nerf to bio late game as well..if u have watched any of the games in gsl bio tvz that have gone late 100% end in mass ghost raven. Personally no problem from me with nerfing mech out of the game xD lol. The entire premise in its current state is based on turtling...= not fun to play or watch..but still very interested to watch ro16 and see what the horsemen come up with for the inevitable late game
On May 21 2018 07:54 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2018 23:47 JackONeill wrote: Actually this patch is much more damaging to mech than it is to terran. Marauder buff and viking health should indeed make bio midgame a little stronger, while not impacting late game that much since the raven wasn't really used en masse with bio.
Thing is, mech's now : - horrible in TvP : always has been, but ravens/cyclones don't combo as well - really bad in TvT : marauder buff, raven nerf and viking buff means the raven is not as good to prevent mass vikings/libs on superior economy - mediocre to bad in TvZ : mainly since lots of BL/corru/vipers has no credible counter. Abduct thors, parabomb vikings, and there's not much terran can do. Ghost/libs should be still working but there's no reason to go mech then. Also the missile nerf makes playing against swarm hosts and hydras much tougher in the late game.
Blizz seems to be caught in an endless "terran's too weak" => "buff bio nerf mech" => "mech's not viable" => "implement some really bad designs to make mech viable" => "blanket nerf because of bad designs" => "terran's too weak" Tanks still use smartfire, aren't they? To make mech & bio viable at the same time they would have to do some crazy balance. And that would require to redesign some core units - and they don't have the balls for this. I don't blame them, it would require some crazy knowledge to redesign properly the game so both styles are viable in both non-mirror MU(and I don't think they can change just some units, IMO they would need to redesign the Protoss race and that's the core of the problem IMO).
Actually the cyclone could have opened up options to make a somewhat "mobile" version of mech work.
Making mech and bio viable would have been a possibility if Blizz designed the cyclone as a reliable mech footman able to provide good "general purposed" anti air, but needing mech upgrades to do so. Instead, they managed the feat to make it a horrible unit in all matchup outside of cheeses, while being extremely oppressive in early game TvT.
And ajusting mech vs protoss without breaking it versus zerg would have been possible, especially by tuning units like the banshee, the thor and the liberator, or doing very niche nerfs to protoss units preventing mech from ever working.
My point is that if you could make mech viable vs protoss but without being the same than against zerg or terran. Relying less on tanks, for instance. But frankly i do agree that the game is such an intense clusterfuck right now, riddled with horrible designs (blink DTs are still in the game, i find myself chuckling softly while writing it) that a throughout rework would need to be done.
|
On May 20 2018 16:36 Dekker wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2018 14:20 youngjiddle wrote: winrates no more than 3% off of even.
What fantasy did that number come from? Even blizzard posted a different number in their community update. Protoss was favored quite a lot in TvP...
numbers from our only source of winrates we have to use... and why are you lying about what Blizzard said? the most they said was that winrates/midgame slightly favored protoss. I think your pushing your own idea when you say "Protoss was favored quite a lot in TvP", lol...
|
What if we replaced cyclone with goliath? Goliath is okay vs armored air units like voidray and carrier. TvT is okay, right? no more cyclone wars. TvZ is okay too for both sides. Also this is good if you doing mech, right? protecting mech ball and tanks.
|
On May 21 2018 10:10 dummy1 wrote: What if we replaced cyclone with goliath? Goliath is okay vs armored air units like voidray and carrier. TvT is okay, right? no more cyclone wars. TvZ is okay too for both sides. Also this is good if you doing mech, right? protecting mech ball and tanks.
what if we restored the cyclone to its (almost) former glory? the old cyclone was a flawed masterpiece. a few tweaks and it could have been great. it already was the coolest unit in the game in my opinion.
so what the fuck went wrong? first, we had the lock-on range bug which reduced the activation range by 2. this bug was raised sometime in Feburary 2016:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/503667-serious-problem-or-bug-on-cyclone
cyclones should have had 7 activation range. the bug caused them to have 5 activation range. this meant that cyclones took damage from marines, marauders, stalkers, immortals, queens and un-upgraded hydras when it should have been taking no damage at all.
IIRC, this bug was fixed sometime in August 2016... 6 fucking months later.
patch 3.8.0 replaced lock-on with tornado blaster cyclones on 22nd November 2016.
this means that players only had 3 months of testing with the non-buggy lock-on cyclone before it was dramatically redesigned into warhound 2.0. one can imagine that the tornado blaster redesign was already in the works many weeks/months before November 22nd 2016. Blizzard didn't even give it a chance. they gave up on lock-on cyclones prematurely. why? I don't know.
make no mistake, this bug was the #1 reason why pros didn't experiment with lock-on cyclones.
#2 reason? 4 supply cost.
#3 reason? the techlab limitation.
Blizzard gave up on lock-on prematurely. there are plenty of balance tweaks they could have tested, but didn't.
3 supply lock-on cyclones? not tested.
lock-on cyclones with no techlab requirement? not tested.
production cost / stat scaling? not tested. they could have tried reducing the production cost to 125/75 and proportionally reduce ground-to-ground lock-on damage to match the cost (e.g. -20% damage, 320 damage over 14 seconds). why stop there? you could scale the cyclone down even further... make cyclones 2 supply, reduce the cost even further, reduce their damage a bit more. this would make them a cheap, fast, swarmy unit like hellions or vultures, while retaining the micro potential of lock-on and their awesome synergy with hellions and widow mines.
let's face it, goliaths are never gonna be added to sc2. Blizz don't have the balls to remove or add units. the best case scenario is that they bring back lock-on cyclones. in fact, I would prefer lock-on cyclones over the goliath.
sc2 mech doesn't have anything like the vulture. lock-on cyclones partially fill the role of both vulture and goliath. lock-on in large battles has an infinite skill ceiling and high micro potential. plus, their high movement speed allowed them to flee any zerg ground unit except speedlings. this meant you could (theoretically) split your cyclones into 2 or 3 groups (with hellion support to protect against lings), having multiple skirmishes around the map at once. if you are Maru or TY, you could potentially save every cyclone and do massive damage. if you are Rogue or Dark, you could ninja fungal or set up lurker traps.
INoVation was just beginning to show the amazing synergy cyclones have with hellions and widow mines. hellion/cyclone resulted in constant skirmishes vs zerg because you had the ability to kite. now with the reduced movement speed and removal of ground-to-ground lock-on, there is no kiting, no micro, no skirmishes. no fun at all.
tornado blaster cyclones are incredibly powerful in very narrow situations (early-game vP/vT), and completely useless as a core unit. with the help of some repairing SCVs, you can survive almost anything in the early-game. after that, useless. it isn't worth building them as a core AA unit and it isn't worth building them vs ground because you can't kite.
there is literally no skill difference between a pro KR terran killing a zealot with a cyclone vs a plat league terran killing a zealot with a cyclone. drop-ship micro doesn't count. cylcones need their own micro mechanic. any micro mechanic is better than what we have now... remember kiting ultras across the map with super fast cyclones? damn, that was fun
cyclones should be glass cannons with low(ish) health, high damage and fast movement speed.
everything that was fun about this unit is now gone. lock-on was totally unique and had the potential to be tweaked into something great, perhaps a spiritual successor to the vulture's scoot & shoot. tornado blaster cyclones have absolutely no micro potential...
best case scenario:
1) bring back patch 3.7 cyclones - remove tornado blasters - reinstate ground-to-ground lock-on - reinstate ground-to-air lock-on - revert the movement speed nerf - revert the health buff (cyclones should be glass cannons) - supply cost: 3 (maybe even 2, depending on the damage/health scaling) - patch 3.7 model size
2) no techlab limitation
3) reduce the cost from 150/100 to ???/?? (125/75, 100/50, test, test, test) and proportionally reduce ground-to-ground lock-on damage to match the cost
-16.67% health = -16.67% mineral cost = -16.67% damage = 333 damage over 20 seconds or -33.33% health = -33.33% mineral cost = -33.33% damage = 267 damage over 20 seconds)
4) new upgrade: charon boosters. increases lock-on activation range of ground-to-air weapons by 3 (activation range, not missile range). this would make cyclones the core AA mech unit even vs capital ships. bye bye thors, nobody will miss you.
5) if AA damage is a problem in the early game (too strong against oracle / overlords / medivacs / banshees), make AA dmg an upgrade. personally, I wouldn't mind reducing the supremacy of air units in the early game.
6) if ground-to-ground activation range is a problem in the early game (7 range out-ranges and out-speeds every T1 zerg unit except speedlings), make lock-on activation range an upgrade, or merge the upgrade bonus with one of the existing 3.7 upgrades (e.g. mag field).
I want cyclones to be really bad when they are standing still (like tornado blasters do) and really powerful when they are moved intelligently while firing (luring the opponent into widow mine traps, tank lines, etc)
|
On May 21 2018 09:40 JackONeill wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2018 00:25 DomeGetta wrote:On May 20 2018 23:47 JackONeill wrote: Actually this patch is much more damaging to mech than it is to terran. Marauder buff and viking health should indeed make bio midgame a little stronger, while not impacting late game that much since the raven wasn't really used en masse with bio.
Thing is, mech's now : - horrible in TvP : always has been, but ravens/cyclones don't combo as well - really bad in TvT : marauder buff, raven nerf and viking buff means the raven is not as good to prevent mass vikings/libs on superior economy - mediocre to bad in TvZ : mainly since lots of BL/corru/vipers has no credible counter. Abduct thors, parabomb vikings, and there's not much terran can do. Ghost/libs should be still working but there's no reason to go mech then. Also the missile nerf makes playing against swarm hosts and hydras much tougher in the late game.
Blizz seems to be caught in an endless "terran's too weak" => "buff bio nerf mech" => "mech's not viable" => "implement some really bad designs to make mech viable" => "blanket nerf because of bad designs" => "terran's too weak" Agree about it making mech worse since u can no longer fight hive mass air, but it's certainly a nerf to bio late game as well..if u have watched any of the games in gsl bio tvz that have gone late 100% end in mass ghost raven. Personally no problem from me with nerfing mech out of the game xD lol. The entire premise in its current state is based on turtling...= not fun to play or watch..but still very interested to watch ro16 and see what the horsemen come up with for the inevitable late game Show nested quote +On May 21 2018 07:54 deacon.frost wrote:On May 20 2018 23:47 JackONeill wrote: Actually this patch is much more damaging to mech than it is to terran. Marauder buff and viking health should indeed make bio midgame a little stronger, while not impacting late game that much since the raven wasn't really used en masse with bio.
Thing is, mech's now : - horrible in TvP : always has been, but ravens/cyclones don't combo as well - really bad in TvT : marauder buff, raven nerf and viking buff means the raven is not as good to prevent mass vikings/libs on superior economy - mediocre to bad in TvZ : mainly since lots of BL/corru/vipers has no credible counter. Abduct thors, parabomb vikings, and there's not much terran can do. Ghost/libs should be still working but there's no reason to go mech then. Also the missile nerf makes playing against swarm hosts and hydras much tougher in the late game.
Blizz seems to be caught in an endless "terran's too weak" => "buff bio nerf mech" => "mech's not viable" => "implement some really bad designs to make mech viable" => "blanket nerf because of bad designs" => "terran's too weak" Tanks still use smartfire, aren't they? To make mech & bio viable at the same time they would have to do some crazy balance. And that would require to redesign some core units - and they don't have the balls for this. I don't blame them, it would require some crazy knowledge to redesign properly the game so both styles are viable in both non-mirror MU(and I don't think they can change just some units, IMO they would need to redesign the Protoss race and that's the core of the problem IMO). Actually the cyclone could have opened up options to make a somewhat "mobile" version of mech work. Making mech and bio viable would have been a possibility if Blizz designed the cyclone as a reliable mech footman able to provide good "general purposed" anti air, but needing mech upgrades to do so. Instead, they managed the feat to make it a horrible unit in all matchup outside of cheeses, while being extremely oppressive in early game TvT. And ajusting mech vs protoss without breaking it versus zerg would have been possible, especially by tuning units like the banshee, the thor and the liberator, or doing very niche nerfs to protoss units preventing mech from ever working. My point is that if you could make mech viable vs protoss but without being the same than against zerg or terran. Relying less on tanks, for instance. But frankly i do agree that the game is such an intense clusterfuck right now, riddled with horrible designs (blink DTs are still in the game, i find myself chuckling softly while writing it) that a throughout rework would need to be done.
Whats wrong with blink dts? they give players an option to create map specific cheeses and make creative build orders. There are alot of things I think are resonable to complain about but I dont understand whats so wrong with blink dts?
|
On May 17 2018 16:48 Anoss wrote:So now you can change the map, to have some game with more late game, but that will never affect the casual player. Cause when you are outside of this game, when you don't play since 2, 3, 4 or 5 years, this game look not fun. Nothing is easy and despit of what the majority of the players think, this is no more an intellectual game, its 90% mechanics 10% strategy. Yes you need to think to find some new build, but let's be honest, you all watch the GSL and copy paste. This is not what a strategic player should do, he should improve and think, not copy paste.
I played 2 games vs a Diamond level 3 player today in TvZ. I beat him with a reaper expand both times.
Not a big timing attack with 2-2 bio. Or even a medivac with marines.
I killed him with a single reaper that would consistently get more than 5 drone kills before the 3:30 speed timing and fluster him enough that he had no creep spread or macro.
My MMR is 4800 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQ5QnewXH5qatQBBUj8yAy6XglqSZrOsvBMaz7LlaN_Q44RnnDD26jhDD9b-1sxIq8ZaA9y6v-ut9wM/pubhtml
His MMR was somewhere in the mid 3000's. According to this graph, he would have less than 1% chance of beating me. Roughly two "orders of magnitude" below me. Strategy would not matter. We even played a game where I went fast 3 base hellion banshee and he went 2 base muta. He could not have hard countered me more, and he still lost.
Now here is the spooky thing. Serral has an MMR greater than 7000. I can wipe the floor with diamond players all day with a single reaper. I literally do not know the words to express how much better Serral would be than ME. In a simulation vs Serral, out of 1,000,000 games, I might expect to win ONCE. Where I'm 2 orders of magnitude above a diamond player. Serral is 6 orders of magnitude above a diamond player.
The level of difference that can be measured is staggering.
Now because of this, most people never get to play SC2 as a strategy game.
You can almost always out-macro and out-micro your opponent into submission. But what happens when we get two people who are masters of the game? (Not masters league, those people suck at the game). If you watch a GSL ro4 match, there are mindgames, build order swaps, feints, multi pronged attacks, traps, everything that makes RTS a compelling genre.
Just because you and I aren't good enough to play the game that way, doesn't mean that isn't the essence of the game.
---
As to the part of your post that talks about BW. The phenomenon is compounded 50x there. Savior or Flash in their respective primes were so much better than everyone else that it strategy didn't matter. I'm not a broodwar history buff but IIRC Flash would literally constantly play the same strats on the same maps and no matter what his opponents wouldn't be able to stop it.
---
Why this big rant post on some random balance update thing?
I think this is true for anything. A michelin starred chef. Michael Jordan. Aleksandr Karelin.
There are people who are such behemoths in their fields that mere men cannot compare.
However that does not belittle the strategy element in, for example, greco-roman wrestling during Karelin's prime. Strategy still existed. It just so happened to be that Karelin was stronger, faster, and smarter than all of his opponents for almost 10 years straight. I'm not gonna google it but I think there was a point at which he won 6 world championships without having a point scored on him.
Unfortunately my post has meandered since it is late in the night for me, but I hope I got my point across.
Git gud son.
|
On May 20 2018 04:12 LSN wrote: Sure SC2 balancing is moving in circles and it wont go anywhere, ever.
But this is no new information. I think it had become obvious since some months after release of HOTS, I guess it was mid to end 2013.
These threads are still full of players who try to gain little edges and advantages for their own races mostly. And a few decent posts inbetween which by themselves are not able to pull it off.
Sc2 is not in the situation where it can be helped with small changes and instead several things would have to be changed at once as everything is connected. This patch is obviously trying to perform that kind of thing but it actually it is not even enough. But its getting harder to forecast results the more you change at once, due to networking effect.
At this point it is probably best to have a larger overhaul (large random factor) again and to hope that one wins the lottery, but they actually had to be way more courageous with adressing cores of issues than before.
Hence it might do the trick to parallel the development and have several teams compete with alternative designs/balances against each other internally. If we had like 3-4 teams doing 4 designs a year (one per quarter), it would be more likely to hit the jackpot earlier, support teams learning from each other, and can image different pictures and perceptions of the game to choose from in a faster pace.
The jackpot is what Anoss stated. To have a game that is not as much focused on mechanics as it currently is, which gives a bit more freedom to creativity of players. Add to that, that advantages over time should not scale in square but a bit more towards linearish (not fully obviously). Bring back early game. Damage per map size of units revision. Splash vs single target revision. Game pace revision. Mineral block/base saturation revision. etc.
I dont get why people keep saying the game is in an awfull state, are there some problems with ballance, yes, are there some problems with the way some matchups generaly play out (tvz always being either kill them before they get there or some kind of turtle fest, PvT being in a prity bad state where terran needs to do allins before protoss gets all there tools, PVZ being very volitile with lots of very powerful allins from both sides) But despite these problems the game is fairly balanced right now. I think that its in a much better state than periods where things have realy been out of whack (1-1-1 era, BL infestor era, Blink stalker allin, 3:00 oracle) Things are alright right now, not ideal but ok, when I load into a game in any matchup as any race I think I have at least a reasonable chance of winning that game, theres no sense of an inevitable loss like there were during periods of intense imbalance in the past. Things still certainly need to be tuned (imo especially tvp) but the game is moving in an alright direction.
|
On May 21 2018 14:37 Thaniri wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2018 16:48 Anoss wrote:So now you can change the map, to have some game with more late game, but that will never affect the casual player. Cause when you are outside of this game, when you don't play since 2, 3, 4 or 5 years, this game look not fun. Nothing is easy and despit of what the majority of the players think, this is no more an intellectual game, its 90% mechanics 10% strategy. Yes you need to think to find some new build, but let's be honest, you all watch the GSL and copy paste. This is not what a strategic player should do, he should improve and think, not copy paste. I played 2 games vs a Diamond level 3 player today in TvZ. I beat him with a reaper expand both times. Not a big timing attack with 2-2 bio. Or even a medivac with marines. I killed him with a single reaper that would consistently get more than 5 drone kills before the 3:30 speed timing and fluster him enough that he had no creep spread or macro. My MMR is 4800 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQ5QnewXH5qatQBBUj8yAy6XglqSZrOsvBMaz7LlaN_Q44RnnDD26jhDD9b-1sxIq8ZaA9y6v-ut9wM/pubhtmlHis MMR was somewhere in the mid 3000's. According to this graph, he would have less than 1% chance of beating me. Roughly two "orders of magnitude" below me. Strategy would not matter. We even played a game where I went fast 3 base hellion banshee and he went 2 base muta. He could not have hard countered me more, and he still lost. Now here is the spooky thing. Serral has an MMR greater than 7000. I can wipe the floor with diamond players all day with a single reaper. I literally do not know the words to express how much better Serral would be than ME. In a simulation vs Serral, out of 1,000,000 games, I might expect to win ONCE. Where I'm 2 orders of magnitude above a diamond player. Serral is 6 orders of magnitude above a diamond player. The level of difference that can be measured is staggering. Now because of this, most people never get to play SC2 as a strategy game. You can almost always out-macro and out-micro your opponent into submission. But what happens when we get two people who are masters of the game? (Not masters league, those people suck at the game). If you watch a GSL ro4 match, there are mindgames, build order swaps, feints, multi pronged attacks, traps, everything that makes RTS a compelling genre. Just because you and I aren't good enough to play the game that way, doesn't mean that isn't the essence of the game. --- As to the part of your post that talks about BW. The phenomenon is compounded 50x there. Savior or Flash in their respective primes were so much better than everyone else that it strategy didn't matter. I'm not a broodwar history buff but IIRC Flash would literally constantly play the same strats on the same maps and no matter what his opponents wouldn't be able to stop it. --- Why this big rant post on some random balance update thing? I think this is true for anything. A michelin starred chef. Michael Jordan. Aleksandr Karelin. There are people who are such behemoths in their fields that mere men cannot compare. However that does not belittle the strategy element in, for example, greco-roman wrestling during Karelin's prime. Strategy still existed. It just so happened to be that Karelin was stronger, faster, and smarter than all of his opponents for almost 10 years straight. I'm not gonna google it but I think there was a point at which he won 6 world championships without having a point scored on him. Unfortunately my post has meandered since it is late in the night for me, but I hope I got my point across. Git gud son. SC2 is a Real Time Strategy game. The time part has a big role to play. It makes it so that mechanics are very important. The Strategy bit is there to make near equal mechanical players play interesting games. The reason Anoss's complaint about this not being an intellectual game exist, I believe, is because the game pace is so high. Had the game been running more slowly, we would have had a vastly different experience.
Thaniri's argument about skill level is very relevant. Higher skill beats lower skill, even if lower skill has strategic understanding. In my games I play at half of the APM of my opponents. I believe that is because I have higher strategic and lower mechanical skill than my opponents (though I might be wrong).
Regarding Karelin: that man was a beast. Tomas Johansson often got silver in that era and should have been "dominant" had Karelin not been there and shown what true dominance is. Johansson scored one single point vs Karelin, IIRC.
|
On May 21 2018 14:31 washikie wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2018 09:40 JackONeill wrote:On May 21 2018 00:25 DomeGetta wrote:On May 20 2018 23:47 JackONeill wrote: Actually this patch is much more damaging to mech than it is to terran. Marauder buff and viking health should indeed make bio midgame a little stronger, while not impacting late game that much since the raven wasn't really used en masse with bio.
Thing is, mech's now : - horrible in TvP : always has been, but ravens/cyclones don't combo as well - really bad in TvT : marauder buff, raven nerf and viking buff means the raven is not as good to prevent mass vikings/libs on superior economy - mediocre to bad in TvZ : mainly since lots of BL/corru/vipers has no credible counter. Abduct thors, parabomb vikings, and there's not much terran can do. Ghost/libs should be still working but there's no reason to go mech then. Also the missile nerf makes playing against swarm hosts and hydras much tougher in the late game.
Blizz seems to be caught in an endless "terran's too weak" => "buff bio nerf mech" => "mech's not viable" => "implement some really bad designs to make mech viable" => "blanket nerf because of bad designs" => "terran's too weak" Agree about it making mech worse since u can no longer fight hive mass air, but it's certainly a nerf to bio late game as well..if u have watched any of the games in gsl bio tvz that have gone late 100% end in mass ghost raven. Personally no problem from me with nerfing mech out of the game xD lol. The entire premise in its current state is based on turtling...= not fun to play or watch..but still very interested to watch ro16 and see what the horsemen come up with for the inevitable late game On May 21 2018 07:54 deacon.frost wrote:On May 20 2018 23:47 JackONeill wrote: Actually this patch is much more damaging to mech than it is to terran. Marauder buff and viking health should indeed make bio midgame a little stronger, while not impacting late game that much since the raven wasn't really used en masse with bio.
Thing is, mech's now : - horrible in TvP : always has been, but ravens/cyclones don't combo as well - really bad in TvT : marauder buff, raven nerf and viking buff means the raven is not as good to prevent mass vikings/libs on superior economy - mediocre to bad in TvZ : mainly since lots of BL/corru/vipers has no credible counter. Abduct thors, parabomb vikings, and there's not much terran can do. Ghost/libs should be still working but there's no reason to go mech then. Also the missile nerf makes playing against swarm hosts and hydras much tougher in the late game.
Blizz seems to be caught in an endless "terran's too weak" => "buff bio nerf mech" => "mech's not viable" => "implement some really bad designs to make mech viable" => "blanket nerf because of bad designs" => "terran's too weak" Tanks still use smartfire, aren't they? To make mech & bio viable at the same time they would have to do some crazy balance. And that would require to redesign some core units - and they don't have the balls for this. I don't blame them, it would require some crazy knowledge to redesign properly the game so both styles are viable in both non-mirror MU(and I don't think they can change just some units, IMO they would need to redesign the Protoss race and that's the core of the problem IMO). Actually the cyclone could have opened up options to make a somewhat "mobile" version of mech work. Making mech and bio viable would have been a possibility if Blizz designed the cyclone as a reliable mech footman able to provide good "general purposed" anti air, but needing mech upgrades to do so. Instead, they managed the feat to make it a horrible unit in all matchup outside of cheeses, while being extremely oppressive in early game TvT. And ajusting mech vs protoss without breaking it versus zerg would have been possible, especially by tuning units like the banshee, the thor and the liberator, or doing very niche nerfs to protoss units preventing mech from ever working. My point is that if you could make mech viable vs protoss but without being the same than against zerg or terran. Relying less on tanks, for instance. But frankly i do agree that the game is such an intense clusterfuck right now, riddled with horrible designs (blink DTs are still in the game, i find myself chuckling softly while writing it) that a throughout rework would need to be done. Whats wrong with blink dts? they give players an option to create map specific cheeses and make creative build orders. There are alot of things I think are resonable to complain about but I dont understand whats so wrong with blink dts?
Dude if you don't see how giving a permanently cloacked unit the same teleportation ability than another unit of the same race while making it so long cooldown wise/tech requirement wise that it won't really be used is bad design, i don't know what to say to you. Giving a harass unit that already has an escape mechanism (high movespeed, permacloack) another one that's already identified with the stalker is so lazy and terrible. It'd be like giving ghosts the ability to jump up cliffs like reapers, but making it an fusion core-required upgrade.
|
On May 21 2018 23:38 JackONeill wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2018 14:31 washikie wrote:On May 21 2018 09:40 JackONeill wrote:On May 21 2018 00:25 DomeGetta wrote:On May 20 2018 23:47 JackONeill wrote: Actually this patch is much more damaging to mech than it is to terran. Marauder buff and viking health should indeed make bio midgame a little stronger, while not impacting late game that much since the raven wasn't really used en masse with bio.
Thing is, mech's now : - horrible in TvP : always has been, but ravens/cyclones don't combo as well - really bad in TvT : marauder buff, raven nerf and viking buff means the raven is not as good to prevent mass vikings/libs on superior economy - mediocre to bad in TvZ : mainly since lots of BL/corru/vipers has no credible counter. Abduct thors, parabomb vikings, and there's not much terran can do. Ghost/libs should be still working but there's no reason to go mech then. Also the missile nerf makes playing against swarm hosts and hydras much tougher in the late game.
Blizz seems to be caught in an endless "terran's too weak" => "buff bio nerf mech" => "mech's not viable" => "implement some really bad designs to make mech viable" => "blanket nerf because of bad designs" => "terran's too weak" Agree about it making mech worse since u can no longer fight hive mass air, but it's certainly a nerf to bio late game as well..if u have watched any of the games in gsl bio tvz that have gone late 100% end in mass ghost raven. Personally no problem from me with nerfing mech out of the game xD lol. The entire premise in its current state is based on turtling...= not fun to play or watch..but still very interested to watch ro16 and see what the horsemen come up with for the inevitable late game On May 21 2018 07:54 deacon.frost wrote:On May 20 2018 23:47 JackONeill wrote: Actually this patch is much more damaging to mech than it is to terran. Marauder buff and viking health should indeed make bio midgame a little stronger, while not impacting late game that much since the raven wasn't really used en masse with bio.
Thing is, mech's now : - horrible in TvP : always has been, but ravens/cyclones don't combo as well - really bad in TvT : marauder buff, raven nerf and viking buff means the raven is not as good to prevent mass vikings/libs on superior economy - mediocre to bad in TvZ : mainly since lots of BL/corru/vipers has no credible counter. Abduct thors, parabomb vikings, and there's not much terran can do. Ghost/libs should be still working but there's no reason to go mech then. Also the missile nerf makes playing against swarm hosts and hydras much tougher in the late game.
Blizz seems to be caught in an endless "terran's too weak" => "buff bio nerf mech" => "mech's not viable" => "implement some really bad designs to make mech viable" => "blanket nerf because of bad designs" => "terran's too weak" Tanks still use smartfire, aren't they? To make mech & bio viable at the same time they would have to do some crazy balance. And that would require to redesign some core units - and they don't have the balls for this. I don't blame them, it would require some crazy knowledge to redesign properly the game so both styles are viable in both non-mirror MU(and I don't think they can change just some units, IMO they would need to redesign the Protoss race and that's the core of the problem IMO). Actually the cyclone could have opened up options to make a somewhat "mobile" version of mech work. Making mech and bio viable would have been a possibility if Blizz designed the cyclone as a reliable mech footman able to provide good "general purposed" anti air, but needing mech upgrades to do so. Instead, they managed the feat to make it a horrible unit in all matchup outside of cheeses, while being extremely oppressive in early game TvT. And ajusting mech vs protoss without breaking it versus zerg would have been possible, especially by tuning units like the banshee, the thor and the liberator, or doing very niche nerfs to protoss units preventing mech from ever working. My point is that if you could make mech viable vs protoss but without being the same than against zerg or terran. Relying less on tanks, for instance. But frankly i do agree that the game is such an intense clusterfuck right now, riddled with horrible designs (blink DTs are still in the game, i find myself chuckling softly while writing it) that a throughout rework would need to be done. Whats wrong with blink dts? they give players an option to create map specific cheeses and make creative build orders. There are alot of things I think are resonable to complain about but I dont understand whats so wrong with blink dts? Dude if you don't see how giving a permanently cloacked unit the same teleportation ability than another unit of the same race while making it so long cooldown wise/tech requirement wise that it won't really be used is bad design, i don't know what to say to you. Giving a harass unit that already has an escape mechanism (high movespeed, permacloack) another one that's already identified with the stalker is so lazy and terrible. It'd be like giving ghosts the ability to jump up cliffs like reapers, but making it an fusion core-required upgrade. Ghosts have the exact same movespeed than DT, +3 sight, and are ranged and are one of the strongest caster of the game.
Dt stop being viable when the other has enough detection, blink dt is an attempt to make them a bit viable as harass in lategame (with poor sucess let's admit it).
Of course you're not bringing a better solution to fix the issue but ask again for another riduculous buff for terran with for only argument a biased analogy.
|
On May 22 2018 00:34 Tyrhanius wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2018 23:38 JackONeill wrote:On May 21 2018 14:31 washikie wrote:On May 21 2018 09:40 JackONeill wrote:On May 21 2018 00:25 DomeGetta wrote:On May 20 2018 23:47 JackONeill wrote: Actually this patch is much more damaging to mech than it is to terran. Marauder buff and viking health should indeed make bio midgame a little stronger, while not impacting late game that much since the raven wasn't really used en masse with bio.
Thing is, mech's now : - horrible in TvP : always has been, but ravens/cyclones don't combo as well - really bad in TvT : marauder buff, raven nerf and viking buff means the raven is not as good to prevent mass vikings/libs on superior economy - mediocre to bad in TvZ : mainly since lots of BL/corru/vipers has no credible counter. Abduct thors, parabomb vikings, and there's not much terran can do. Ghost/libs should be still working but there's no reason to go mech then. Also the missile nerf makes playing against swarm hosts and hydras much tougher in the late game.
Blizz seems to be caught in an endless "terran's too weak" => "buff bio nerf mech" => "mech's not viable" => "implement some really bad designs to make mech viable" => "blanket nerf because of bad designs" => "terran's too weak" Agree about it making mech worse since u can no longer fight hive mass air, but it's certainly a nerf to bio late game as well..if u have watched any of the games in gsl bio tvz that have gone late 100% end in mass ghost raven. Personally no problem from me with nerfing mech out of the game xD lol. The entire premise in its current state is based on turtling...= not fun to play or watch..but still very interested to watch ro16 and see what the horsemen come up with for the inevitable late game On May 21 2018 07:54 deacon.frost wrote:On May 20 2018 23:47 JackONeill wrote: Actually this patch is much more damaging to mech than it is to terran. Marauder buff and viking health should indeed make bio midgame a little stronger, while not impacting late game that much since the raven wasn't really used en masse with bio.
Thing is, mech's now : - horrible in TvP : always has been, but ravens/cyclones don't combo as well - really bad in TvT : marauder buff, raven nerf and viking buff means the raven is not as good to prevent mass vikings/libs on superior economy - mediocre to bad in TvZ : mainly since lots of BL/corru/vipers has no credible counter. Abduct thors, parabomb vikings, and there's not much terran can do. Ghost/libs should be still working but there's no reason to go mech then. Also the missile nerf makes playing against swarm hosts and hydras much tougher in the late game.
Blizz seems to be caught in an endless "terran's too weak" => "buff bio nerf mech" => "mech's not viable" => "implement some really bad designs to make mech viable" => "blanket nerf because of bad designs" => "terran's too weak" Tanks still use smartfire, aren't they? To make mech & bio viable at the same time they would have to do some crazy balance. And that would require to redesign some core units - and they don't have the balls for this. I don't blame them, it would require some crazy knowledge to redesign properly the game so both styles are viable in both non-mirror MU(and I don't think they can change just some units, IMO they would need to redesign the Protoss race and that's the core of the problem IMO). Actually the cyclone could have opened up options to make a somewhat "mobile" version of mech work. Making mech and bio viable would have been a possibility if Blizz designed the cyclone as a reliable mech footman able to provide good "general purposed" anti air, but needing mech upgrades to do so. Instead, they managed the feat to make it a horrible unit in all matchup outside of cheeses, while being extremely oppressive in early game TvT. And ajusting mech vs protoss without breaking it versus zerg would have been possible, especially by tuning units like the banshee, the thor and the liberator, or doing very niche nerfs to protoss units preventing mech from ever working. My point is that if you could make mech viable vs protoss but without being the same than against zerg or terran. Relying less on tanks, for instance. But frankly i do agree that the game is such an intense clusterfuck right now, riddled with horrible designs (blink DTs are still in the game, i find myself chuckling softly while writing it) that a throughout rework would need to be done. Whats wrong with blink dts? they give players an option to create map specific cheeses and make creative build orders. There are alot of things I think are resonable to complain about but I dont understand whats so wrong with blink dts? Dude if you don't see how giving a permanently cloacked unit the same teleportation ability than another unit of the same race while making it so long cooldown wise/tech requirement wise that it won't really be used is bad design, i don't know what to say to you. Giving a harass unit that already has an escape mechanism (high movespeed, permacloack) another one that's already identified with the stalker is so lazy and terrible. It'd be like giving ghosts the ability to jump up cliffs like reapers, but making it an fusion core-required upgrade. Ghosts have the exact same movespeed than DT, +3 sight, and are ranged and are one of the strongest caster of the game. Dt stop being viable when the other has enough detection, blink dt is an attempt to make them a bit viable as harass in lategame (with poor sucess let's admit it). Of course you're not bringing a better solution to fix the issue but ask again for another riduculous buff for terran with for only argument a biased analogy.
Watch Keen vs Sos Game 2 and come back
|
On May 22 2018 00:40 Caelum93 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2018 00:34 Tyrhanius wrote:On May 21 2018 23:38 JackONeill wrote:On May 21 2018 14:31 washikie wrote:On May 21 2018 09:40 JackONeill wrote:On May 21 2018 00:25 DomeGetta wrote:On May 20 2018 23:47 JackONeill wrote: Actually this patch is much more damaging to mech than it is to terran. Marauder buff and viking health should indeed make bio midgame a little stronger, while not impacting late game that much since the raven wasn't really used en masse with bio.
Thing is, mech's now : - horrible in TvP : always has been, but ravens/cyclones don't combo as well - really bad in TvT : marauder buff, raven nerf and viking buff means the raven is not as good to prevent mass vikings/libs on superior economy - mediocre to bad in TvZ : mainly since lots of BL/corru/vipers has no credible counter. Abduct thors, parabomb vikings, and there's not much terran can do. Ghost/libs should be still working but there's no reason to go mech then. Also the missile nerf makes playing against swarm hosts and hydras much tougher in the late game.
Blizz seems to be caught in an endless "terran's too weak" => "buff bio nerf mech" => "mech's not viable" => "implement some really bad designs to make mech viable" => "blanket nerf because of bad designs" => "terran's too weak" Agree about it making mech worse since u can no longer fight hive mass air, but it's certainly a nerf to bio late game as well..if u have watched any of the games in gsl bio tvz that have gone late 100% end in mass ghost raven. Personally no problem from me with nerfing mech out of the game xD lol. The entire premise in its current state is based on turtling...= not fun to play or watch..but still very interested to watch ro16 and see what the horsemen come up with for the inevitable late game On May 21 2018 07:54 deacon.frost wrote:On May 20 2018 23:47 JackONeill wrote: Actually this patch is much more damaging to mech than it is to terran. Marauder buff and viking health should indeed make bio midgame a little stronger, while not impacting late game that much since the raven wasn't really used en masse with bio.
Thing is, mech's now : - horrible in TvP : always has been, but ravens/cyclones don't combo as well - really bad in TvT : marauder buff, raven nerf and viking buff means the raven is not as good to prevent mass vikings/libs on superior economy - mediocre to bad in TvZ : mainly since lots of BL/corru/vipers has no credible counter. Abduct thors, parabomb vikings, and there's not much terran can do. Ghost/libs should be still working but there's no reason to go mech then. Also the missile nerf makes playing against swarm hosts and hydras much tougher in the late game.
Blizz seems to be caught in an endless "terran's too weak" => "buff bio nerf mech" => "mech's not viable" => "implement some really bad designs to make mech viable" => "blanket nerf because of bad designs" => "terran's too weak" Tanks still use smartfire, aren't they? To make mech & bio viable at the same time they would have to do some crazy balance. And that would require to redesign some core units - and they don't have the balls for this. I don't blame them, it would require some crazy knowledge to redesign properly the game so both styles are viable in both non-mirror MU(and I don't think they can change just some units, IMO they would need to redesign the Protoss race and that's the core of the problem IMO). Actually the cyclone could have opened up options to make a somewhat "mobile" version of mech work. Making mech and bio viable would have been a possibility if Blizz designed the cyclone as a reliable mech footman able to provide good "general purposed" anti air, but needing mech upgrades to do so. Instead, they managed the feat to make it a horrible unit in all matchup outside of cheeses, while being extremely oppressive in early game TvT. And ajusting mech vs protoss without breaking it versus zerg would have been possible, especially by tuning units like the banshee, the thor and the liberator, or doing very niche nerfs to protoss units preventing mech from ever working. My point is that if you could make mech viable vs protoss but without being the same than against zerg or terran. Relying less on tanks, for instance. But frankly i do agree that the game is such an intense clusterfuck right now, riddled with horrible designs (blink DTs are still in the game, i find myself chuckling softly while writing it) that a throughout rework would need to be done. Whats wrong with blink dts? they give players an option to create map specific cheeses and make creative build orders. There are alot of things I think are resonable to complain about but I dont understand whats so wrong with blink dts? Dude if you don't see how giving a permanently cloacked unit the same teleportation ability than another unit of the same race while making it so long cooldown wise/tech requirement wise that it won't really be used is bad design, i don't know what to say to you. Giving a harass unit that already has an escape mechanism (high movespeed, permacloack) another one that's already identified with the stalker is so lazy and terrible. It'd be like giving ghosts the ability to jump up cliffs like reapers, but making it an fusion core-required upgrade. Ghosts have the exact same movespeed than DT, +3 sight, and are ranged and are one of the strongest caster of the game. Dt stop being viable when the other has enough detection, blink dt is an attempt to make them a bit viable as harass in lategame (with poor sucess let's admit it). Of course you're not bringing a better solution to fix the issue but ask again for another riduculous buff for terran with for only argument a biased analogy. Watch Keen vs Sos Game 2 and come back Game 3 of GSL no ?
If it's that game, i don't understand your point, yeah sos used dt blink, but as a cheese at 7-8min and manage to kill 26 SCV because Keen wanted to push at this moment and his army was half across the map, later the blink DT harass wasn't cost effective at all, and the game never goes in lategame.
|
On May 21 2018 14:29 SHODAN wrote:
Great points I agree with you, I loved old cyclone but they have their problems, I think that there a few things I'd like to add:
- 3.7 Cyclones should cost 3 supply like current cyclones. - They did 800 damage with upgrade, IMO the upgrade is not needed, instead as you said. - Mag field should change range, starting cyclone: 5 range on ground, 7 on air, upgrade gives cyclone 7 range on ground and 8 on air to lock on. - Speed and health reverts agreed - Also agree on making them reactored - I think leaving them at their start of 400 damage would be ok, maybe reduce to 300. Considering 3.7 cyclones had very low health this is offset with the shorter range, maybe extend lock on duration so that it takes more time to deal full damage to allow for more micro options. - If anything there should be an upgrade that gives cyclone more health, maybe make trasnformation servos give cyclones +20 health? Or add an extra upgrade, I don't know, lategame they become way too fragile for their cost.
I actually like new cyclones, you can do interesting stuff with them, but I agree that they are uninteresting and lack a lot of dept. Old cyclones fixed a bunch of things for mech in between being a fast AA, map control, by a mobile footman, being a flexible early game unit. It was actually good, it just lacked some tweaks, not an entire redesign.
|
On May 22 2018 00:34 Tyrhanius wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2018 23:38 JackONeill wrote:On May 21 2018 14:31 washikie wrote:On May 21 2018 09:40 JackONeill wrote:On May 21 2018 00:25 DomeGetta wrote:On May 20 2018 23:47 JackONeill wrote: Actually this patch is much more damaging to mech than it is to terran. Marauder buff and viking health should indeed make bio midgame a little stronger, while not impacting late game that much since the raven wasn't really used en masse with bio.
Thing is, mech's now : - horrible in TvP : always has been, but ravens/cyclones don't combo as well - really bad in TvT : marauder buff, raven nerf and viking buff means the raven is not as good to prevent mass vikings/libs on superior economy - mediocre to bad in TvZ : mainly since lots of BL/corru/vipers has no credible counter. Abduct thors, parabomb vikings, and there's not much terran can do. Ghost/libs should be still working but there's no reason to go mech then. Also the missile nerf makes playing against swarm hosts and hydras much tougher in the late game.
Blizz seems to be caught in an endless "terran's too weak" => "buff bio nerf mech" => "mech's not viable" => "implement some really bad designs to make mech viable" => "blanket nerf because of bad designs" => "terran's too weak" Agree about it making mech worse since u can no longer fight hive mass air, but it's certainly a nerf to bio late game as well..if u have watched any of the games in gsl bio tvz that have gone late 100% end in mass ghost raven. Personally no problem from me with nerfing mech out of the game xD lol. The entire premise in its current state is based on turtling...= not fun to play or watch..but still very interested to watch ro16 and see what the horsemen come up with for the inevitable late game On May 21 2018 07:54 deacon.frost wrote:On May 20 2018 23:47 JackONeill wrote: Actually this patch is much more damaging to mech than it is to terran. Marauder buff and viking health should indeed make bio midgame a little stronger, while not impacting late game that much since the raven wasn't really used en masse with bio.
Thing is, mech's now : - horrible in TvP : always has been, but ravens/cyclones don't combo as well - really bad in TvT : marauder buff, raven nerf and viking buff means the raven is not as good to prevent mass vikings/libs on superior economy - mediocre to bad in TvZ : mainly since lots of BL/corru/vipers has no credible counter. Abduct thors, parabomb vikings, and there's not much terran can do. Ghost/libs should be still working but there's no reason to go mech then. Also the missile nerf makes playing against swarm hosts and hydras much tougher in the late game.
Blizz seems to be caught in an endless "terran's too weak" => "buff bio nerf mech" => "mech's not viable" => "implement some really bad designs to make mech viable" => "blanket nerf because of bad designs" => "terran's too weak" Tanks still use smartfire, aren't they? To make mech & bio viable at the same time they would have to do some crazy balance. And that would require to redesign some core units - and they don't have the balls for this. I don't blame them, it would require some crazy knowledge to redesign properly the game so both styles are viable in both non-mirror MU(and I don't think they can change just some units, IMO they would need to redesign the Protoss race and that's the core of the problem IMO). Actually the cyclone could have opened up options to make a somewhat "mobile" version of mech work. Making mech and bio viable would have been a possibility if Blizz designed the cyclone as a reliable mech footman able to provide good "general purposed" anti air, but needing mech upgrades to do so. Instead, they managed the feat to make it a horrible unit in all matchup outside of cheeses, while being extremely oppressive in early game TvT. And ajusting mech vs protoss without breaking it versus zerg would have been possible, especially by tuning units like the banshee, the thor and the liberator, or doing very niche nerfs to protoss units preventing mech from ever working. My point is that if you could make mech viable vs protoss but without being the same than against zerg or terran. Relying less on tanks, for instance. But frankly i do agree that the game is such an intense clusterfuck right now, riddled with horrible designs (blink DTs are still in the game, i find myself chuckling softly while writing it) that a throughout rework would need to be done. Whats wrong with blink dts? they give players an option to create map specific cheeses and make creative build orders. There are alot of things I think are resonable to complain about but I dont understand whats so wrong with blink dts? Dude if you don't see how giving a permanently cloacked unit the same teleportation ability than another unit of the same race while making it so long cooldown wise/tech requirement wise that it won't really be used is bad design, i don't know what to say to you. Giving a harass unit that already has an escape mechanism (high movespeed, permacloack) another one that's already identified with the stalker is so lazy and terrible. It'd be like giving ghosts the ability to jump up cliffs like reapers, but making it an fusion core-required upgrade. Ghosts have the exact same movespeed than DT, +3 sight, and are ranged and are one of the strongest caster of the game. Dt stop being viable when the other has enough detection, blink dt is an attempt to make them a bit viable as harass in lategame (with poor sucess let's admit it). Of course you're not bringing a better solution to fix the issue but ask again for another riduculous buff for terran with for only argument a biased analogy.
This post is amazing. I'm trying to show how blink DTs are bad design despite the fact that the ability is barely used, by comparing it to something as ridiculous as a fusion-core required cliff-jumping ghosts, and you manage somehow to interpret it as some kind a balance revendication.
How ridiculously vindicative and obsessed are you about balance that you'd come to the conclusion that i'm advocating for cliff-jumping ghosts when i'm saying that giving blink to DTs when the ability is already associated with stalkers and incoherent with the design of the unit is bad design?
|
On May 22 2018 01:00 Lexender wrote:Great points I agree with you, I loved old cyclone but they have their problems, I think that there a few things I'd like to add: - 3.7 Cyclones should cost 3 supply like current cyclones. - They did 800 damage with upgrade, IMO the upgrade is not needed, instead as you said. - Mag field should change range, starting cyclone: 5 range on ground, 7 on air, upgrade gives cyclone 7 range on ground and 8 on air to lock on. - Speed and health reverts agreed - Also agree on making them reactored - I think leaving them at their start of 400 damage would be ok, maybe reduce to 300. Considering 3.7 cyclones had very low health this is offset with the shorter range, maybe extend lock on duration so that it takes more time to deal full damage to allow for more micro options. - If anything there should be an upgrade that gives cyclone more health, maybe make trasnformation servos give cyclones +20 health? Or add an extra upgrade, I don't know, lategame they become way too fragile for their cost. I actually like new cyclones, you can do interesting stuff with them, but I agree that they are uninteresting and lack a lot of dept. Old cyclones fixed a bunch of things for mech in between being a fast AA, map control, by a mobile footman, being a flexible early game unit. It was actually good, it just lacked some tweaks, not an entire redesign.
I think there's a lot of ways that the cyclone could be designed, but what's important is the roles it can fill. The old cyclone had a triple purpose : 1) give terran early, reliable defense 2) give mech quick response units to split-pushes/drops 3) give mech some kind of "chasing ability" to prevent kiting forcing sieges from enemy armies
The current cyclone fills no roles but "early game cheese unit". The cyclone should be a mech footman providing decent, reliable anti air throughout the game, and some amount of "chasing abilities" to help mech be less clunky.
IMO a good way of combining the two iterations of the cyclone would be to have : - a lock-on auto attack against ground which is not an ability, and deals moderate amounts of damage but allows for the cyclone to move and give chase while firing (not a spell, therefore is influenced by armor and upgrades) - a tornado blaster-like anti air that's most efficient when standing still
This would make the cyclone great as a reliable anti air that can also get out on the map and harass enemy ground units and respond to split pushes and drops. It would also be decent against interceptors, making mech less atrocious against carriers. Also, it would make it dependent on mech upgrades, therefore not synergizing well with bio.
From there, once the design choices are made as to which roles it's supposed to fill, numbers can be tweaked, timings can be delay through upgrades, etc.
(sorry for double post)
|
On May 22 2018 01:22 JackONeill wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2018 00:34 Tyrhanius wrote:On May 21 2018 23:38 JackONeill wrote:On May 21 2018 14:31 washikie wrote:On May 21 2018 09:40 JackONeill wrote:On May 21 2018 00:25 DomeGetta wrote:On May 20 2018 23:47 JackONeill wrote: Actually this patch is much more damaging to mech than it is to terran. Marauder buff and viking health should indeed make bio midgame a little stronger, while not impacting late game that much since the raven wasn't really used en masse with bio.
Thing is, mech's now : - horrible in TvP : always has been, but ravens/cyclones don't combo as well - really bad in TvT : marauder buff, raven nerf and viking buff means the raven is not as good to prevent mass vikings/libs on superior economy - mediocre to bad in TvZ : mainly since lots of BL/corru/vipers has no credible counter. Abduct thors, parabomb vikings, and there's not much terran can do. Ghost/libs should be still working but there's no reason to go mech then. Also the missile nerf makes playing against swarm hosts and hydras much tougher in the late game.
Blizz seems to be caught in an endless "terran's too weak" => "buff bio nerf mech" => "mech's not viable" => "implement some really bad designs to make mech viable" => "blanket nerf because of bad designs" => "terran's too weak" Agree about it making mech worse since u can no longer fight hive mass air, but it's certainly a nerf to bio late game as well..if u have watched any of the games in gsl bio tvz that have gone late 100% end in mass ghost raven. Personally no problem from me with nerfing mech out of the game xD lol. The entire premise in its current state is based on turtling...= not fun to play or watch..but still very interested to watch ro16 and see what the horsemen come up with for the inevitable late game On May 21 2018 07:54 deacon.frost wrote:On May 20 2018 23:47 JackONeill wrote: Actually this patch is much more damaging to mech than it is to terran. Marauder buff and viking health should indeed make bio midgame a little stronger, while not impacting late game that much since the raven wasn't really used en masse with bio.
Thing is, mech's now : - horrible in TvP : always has been, but ravens/cyclones don't combo as well - really bad in TvT : marauder buff, raven nerf and viking buff means the raven is not as good to prevent mass vikings/libs on superior economy - mediocre to bad in TvZ : mainly since lots of BL/corru/vipers has no credible counter. Abduct thors, parabomb vikings, and there's not much terran can do. Ghost/libs should be still working but there's no reason to go mech then. Also the missile nerf makes playing against swarm hosts and hydras much tougher in the late game.
Blizz seems to be caught in an endless "terran's too weak" => "buff bio nerf mech" => "mech's not viable" => "implement some really bad designs to make mech viable" => "blanket nerf because of bad designs" => "terran's too weak" Tanks still use smartfire, aren't they? To make mech & bio viable at the same time they would have to do some crazy balance. And that would require to redesign some core units - and they don't have the balls for this. I don't blame them, it would require some crazy knowledge to redesign properly the game so both styles are viable in both non-mirror MU(and I don't think they can change just some units, IMO they would need to redesign the Protoss race and that's the core of the problem IMO). Actually the cyclone could have opened up options to make a somewhat "mobile" version of mech work. Making mech and bio viable would have been a possibility if Blizz designed the cyclone as a reliable mech footman able to provide good "general purposed" anti air, but needing mech upgrades to do so. Instead, they managed the feat to make it a horrible unit in all matchup outside of cheeses, while being extremely oppressive in early game TvT. And ajusting mech vs protoss without breaking it versus zerg would have been possible, especially by tuning units like the banshee, the thor and the liberator, or doing very niche nerfs to protoss units preventing mech from ever working. My point is that if you could make mech viable vs protoss but without being the same than against zerg or terran. Relying less on tanks, for instance. But frankly i do agree that the game is such an intense clusterfuck right now, riddled with horrible designs (blink DTs are still in the game, i find myself chuckling softly while writing it) that a throughout rework would need to be done. Whats wrong with blink dts? they give players an option to create map specific cheeses and make creative build orders. There are alot of things I think are resonable to complain about but I dont understand whats so wrong with blink dts? Dude if you don't see how giving a permanently cloacked unit the same teleportation ability than another unit of the same race while making it so long cooldown wise/tech requirement wise that it won't really be used is bad design, i don't know what to say to you. Giving a harass unit that already has an escape mechanism (high movespeed, permacloack) another one that's already identified with the stalker is so lazy and terrible. It'd be like giving ghosts the ability to jump up cliffs like reapers, but making it an fusion core-required upgrade. Ghosts have the exact same movespeed than DT, +3 sight, and are ranged and are one of the strongest caster of the game. Dt stop being viable when the other has enough detection, blink dt is an attempt to make them a bit viable as harass in lategame (with poor sucess let's admit it). Of course you're not bringing a better solution to fix the issue but ask again for another riduculous buff for terran with for only argument a biased analogy. This post is amazing. I'm trying to show how blink DTs are bad design despite the fact that the ability is barely used, by comparing it to something as ridiculous as a fusion-core required cliff-jumping ghosts, and you manage somehow to interpret it as some kind a balance revendication. How ridiculously vindicative and obsessed are you about balance that you'd come to the conclusion that i'm advocating for cliff-jumping ghosts when i'm saying that giving blink to DTs when the ability is already associated with stalkers and incoherent with the design of the unit is bad design? Saw "I'd like" instead of "it'd like" sorry
|
|
On May 21 2018 14:42 washikie wrote: dont get why people keep saying the game is in an awfull state, are there some problems with ballance, yes, are there some problems with the way some matchups generaly play out (tvz always being either kill them before they get there or some kind of turtle fest, PvT being in a prity bad state where terran needs to do allins before protoss gets all there tools, PVZ being very volitile with lots of very powerful allins from both sides) But despite these problems the game is fairly balanced right now. I think that its in a much better state than periods where things have realy been out of whack (1-1-1 era, BL infestor era, Blink stalker allin, 3:00 oracle) Things are alright right now, not ideal but ok, when I load into a game in any matchup as any race I think I have at least a reasonable chance of winning that game, theres no sense of an inevitable loss like there were during periods of intense imbalance in the past. Things still certainly need to be tuned (imo especially tvp) but the game is moving in an alright direction.
It was not about winrates and racial balance.
1. Game allows almost no creativity and variation. The timers you are set on if you vary are too short, comebacks are hardly ever possible.
2. Unit interaction. While sudden DTs in broodwar were able to turn a game (at least I saw a pro match like 1-2 years ago by chance where that happened) in SC2 they discuss blink for DT, as the unit is more or less useless.
3. Broodwar had the game evolve and rock scissors paper somehow worked better. Lets look at PvT as an example. Protoss in broodwar can decide to either go air (carrier) or try and overpower the tank push with ground for a longer period of time before going for air (or not have to go for air as successful). But carriers are not that much of a game ender. In fact a terran who notices carrier switch early enough can overcome it and the game then usually evolves back into ground units after a solid trade off of units (due to lack of gas). Early advantages do not scale as much into later stages of the game and can be made up for. In SC2 when you see carrier you already know if you are able to still win a normal game at all or if you have to all-in quickly as your only chance.
4. Game pace. SC2 feels a bit like a minigame these days. Matches can end very quickly and frequently do so. Early game doesn't exist anymore, game starts at midgame and at 2-3 bases. Saturation of bases with inject, mules and chronoboost is almost instant and it is almost impossible to make a difference there for better players compared to lower players (both on relatively high level).
Etc.
I still see that gas is not a limiting rescource for terrans in many situations. That alone is a deal-breaker in a game where all races have equal access to resources and gas is defined to be the scarce one. Its corrupt design.
How do you balance a game where a player kills the refinery of a terran which makes the terran use the 3 SCVs that were working there instead work on minerals, that eventually gives him an advantage? ...lol
Zergs inability to attack off creep and other races inability to be efficient on creep induces passive gameplay and reduces options. It at least should be reviewed. I don't say the basic idea is bad, but it seems randomly implemented and brought on and on without revision.
Why doesn't zerg have a unit type that walks same speed on and off creep? Why do other races not have upgrades for certain units that grants speed bonus for them on creep? Could be a fun thing for e.g. Terran mech units (kerrigan brought the tech for that, if lore is important for you).
Just those 2 questions above show very well how basic the implementation of creep actually is and what is possible.
Why there isn't a Zerg spell - used on own units - which gives creep speed bonus off-creep for like 45 seconds?
And so on.
|
On May 22 2018 04:04 LSN wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2018 14:42 washikie wrote: dont get why people keep saying the game is in an awfull state, are there some problems with ballance, yes, are there some problems with the way some matchups generaly play out (tvz always being either kill them before they get there or some kind of turtle fest, PvT being in a prity bad state where terran needs to do allins before protoss gets all there tools, PVZ being very volitile with lots of very powerful allins from both sides) But despite these problems the game is fairly balanced right now. I think that its in a much better state than periods where things have realy been out of whack (1-1-1 era, BL infestor era, Blink stalker allin, 3:00 oracle) Things are alright right now, not ideal but ok, when I load into a game in any matchup as any race I think I have at least a reasonable chance of winning that game, theres no sense of an inevitable loss like there were during periods of intense imbalance in the past. Things still certainly need to be tuned (imo especially tvp) but the game is moving in an alright direction.
It was not about winrates and racial balance. 1. Game allows almost no creativity and variation. The timers you are set on if you vary are too short, comebacks are hardly ever possible. 2. Unit interaction. While sudden DTs in broodwar were able to turn a game (at least I saw a pro match like 1-2 years ago by chance where that happened) in SC2 they discuss blink for DT, as the unit is more or less useless. 3. Broodwar had the game evolve and rock scissors paper somehow worked better. Lets look at PvT as an example. Protoss in broodwar can decide to either go air (carrier) or try and overpower the tank push with ground for a longer period of time before going for air (or not have to go for air as successful). But carriers are not that much of a game ender. In fact a terran who notices carrier switch early enough can overcome it and the game then usually evolves back into ground units after a solid trade off of units (due to lack of gas). Early advantages do not scale as much into later stages of the game and can be made up for. In SC2 when you see carrier you already know if you are able to still win a normal game at all or if you have to all-in quickly as your only chance. 4. Game pace. SC2 feels a bit like a minigame these days. Matches can end very quickly and frequently do so. Early game doesn't exist anymore, game starts at midgame and at 2-3 bases. Saturation of bases with inject, mules and chronoboost is almost instant and it is almost impossible to make a difference there for better players compared to lower players (both on relatively high level). Etc. I still see that gas is not a limiting rescource for terrans in many situations. That alone is a deal-breaker in a game where all races have equal access to resources and gas is defined to be the scarce one. Its corrupt design.How do you balance a game where a player kills the refinery of a terran which makes the terran use the 3 SCVs that were working there instead work on minerals, that eventually gives him an advantage? ...lol Zergs inability to attack off creep and other races inability to be efficient on creep induces passive gameplay and reduces options. It at least should be reviewed. I don't say the basic idea is bad, but it seems randomly implemented and brought on and on without revision. Why doesn't zerg have a unit type that walks same speed on and off creep? Why do other races not have upgrades for certain units that grants speed bonus for them on creep? Could be a fun thing for e.g. Terran mech units (kerrigan brought the tech for that, if lore is important for you). Just those 2 questions above show very well how basic the implementation of creep actually is and what is possible. Why there isn't a Zerg spell - used on own units - which gives creep speed bonus off-creep for like 45 seconds? And so on.
If that would happen and zerg could attack anytime during the game, people would demand nerfs again, just like they demanded nerfs for all lair units due to zerg being able to attack on previous patches.
|
On May 22 2018 04:04 LSN wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2018 14:42 washikie wrote: dont get why people keep saying the game is in an awfull state, are there some problems with ballance, yes, are there some problems with the way some matchups generaly play out (tvz always being either kill them before they get there or some kind of turtle fest, PvT being in a prity bad state where terran needs to do allins before protoss gets all there tools, PVZ being very volitile with lots of very powerful allins from both sides) But despite these problems the game is fairly balanced right now. I think that its in a much better state than periods where things have realy been out of whack (1-1-1 era, BL infestor era, Blink stalker allin, 3:00 oracle) Things are alright right now, not ideal but ok, when I load into a game in any matchup as any race I think I have at least a reasonable chance of winning that game, theres no sense of an inevitable loss like there were during periods of intense imbalance in the past. Things still certainly need to be tuned (imo especially tvp) but the game is moving in an alright direction.
It was not about winrates and racial balance. 1. Game allows almost no creativity and variation. The timers you are set on if you vary are too short, comebacks are hardly ever possible. 2. Unit interaction. While sudden DTs in broodwar were able to turn a game (at least I saw a pro match like 1-2 years ago by chance where that happened) in SC2 they discuss blink for DT, as the unit is more or less useless. 3. Broodwar had the game evolve and rock scissors paper somehow worked better. Lets look at PvT as an example. Protoss in broodwar can decide to either go air (carrier) or try and overpower the tank push with ground for a longer period of time before going for air (or not have to go for air as successful). But carriers are not that much of a game ender. In fact a terran who notices carrier switch early enough can overcome it and the game then usually evolves back into ground units after a solid trade off of units (due to lack of gas). Early advantages do not scale as much into later stages of the game and can be made up for. In SC2 when you see carrier you already know if you are able to still win a normal game at all or if you have to all-in quickly as your only chance. 4. Game pace. SC2 feels a bit like a minigame these days. Matches can end very quickly and frequently do so. Early game doesn't exist anymore, game starts at midgame and at 2-3 bases. Saturation of bases with inject, mules and chronoboost is almost instant and it is almost impossible to make a difference there for better players compared to lower players (both on relatively high level). Etc. I still see that gas is not a limiting rescource for terrans in many situations. That alone is a deal-breaker in a game where all races have equal access to resources and gas is defined to be the scarce one. Its corrupt design.How do you balance a game where a player kills the refinery of a terran which makes the terran use the 3 SCVs that were working there instead work on minerals, that eventually gives him an advantage? ...lol Zergs inability to attack off creep and other races inability to be efficient on creep induces passive gameplay and reduces options. It at least should be reviewed. I don't say the basic idea is bad, but it seems randomly implemented and brought on and on without revision. Why doesn't zerg have a unit type that walks same speed on and off creep? Why do other races not have upgrades for certain units that grants speed bonus for them on creep? Could be a fun thing for e.g. Terran mech units (kerrigan brought the tech for that, if lore is important for you). Just those 2 questions above show very well how basic the implementation of creep actually is and what is possible. Why there isn't a Zerg spell - used on own units - which gives creep speed bonus off-creep for like 45 seconds? And so on. I agree that the lack of early game is a bit dull. But everything else you've written here is nonsense.
|
I usually write nonsense!
E.g. I wrote about that the mine should become visible after having shot. Probably was complete nonsense to you back then.
If that would happen and zerg could attack anytime during the game, people would demand nerfs again, just like they demanded nerfs for all lair units due to zerg being able to attack on previous patches. Are you refering to the game getting more creative and strategic instead of mostly mechanic?
|
I still see that gas is not a limiting rescource for terrans in many situations. That alone is a deal-breaker in a game where all races have equal access to resources and gas is defined to be the scarce one. Its corrupt design.
This hasn't been true since patch 4.0 and the ghost cost change. Any higher-tech Terran army now includes some combination of Liberators, Tanks, Ghosts, and Ravens. It isn't uncommon to see Terrans using all their gas and floating a thousand+ minerals in the late game.
|
1. I gave some kind of brainstorming, not any determined suggestion.
2. Idc if it is true not true. It was in the game and I bet it is still an issue. Even more now as the marauder has been promoted. Also just cause you can spend gas in endgame, it doesn mean gas is a limiting factor for terran power as much as it is for other races.
Hence, if you read carefully, I wrote: "I still see that gas is not a limiting rescource for terrans in many situations"
Would you feel better if I changed that "many" into "some"?
As for other races "always a limiting factor of power" would have taken that place, it is still a factor to be considered and dealt with.
|
How are ultras dealing with marauders? o_o
|
On May 22 2018 07:19 LSN wrote: 1. I gave some kind of brainstorming, not any determined suggestion.
2. Idc if it is true not true. It was in the game and I bet it is still an issue. Even more now as the marauder has been promoted. Also just cause you can spend gas in endgame, it doesn mean gas is a limiting factor for terran power as much as it is for other races.
Hence, if you read carefully, I wrote: "I still see that gas is not a limiting rescource for terrans in many situations"
Would you feel better if I changed that "many" into "some"?
As for other races "always a limiting factor of power" would have taken that place, it is still a factor to be considered and dealt with. You're going to have to provide evidence that gas is "always" a limiting factor of power for other races. That's a pretty strong, and, IMO unsupportable, claim.
Edit: While you're at it, you should be more precise about what you mean by "gas is a limiting factor of power"--are you saying that spending gas allows you to build a more powerful composition, or are you making some sort of relative claim across races, i.e for a given level of power race x requires a lower ratio of gas to minerals than race y?
|
Its ok, I have to do nothing.
I left my brainstorming for the right people to extract ideas from it (or not) and not interested in your little skirmishes about your beloved terran race being so UP and I did it so wrong with what I said.
User was warned for this post.
|
On May 22 2018 07:54 LSN wrote: Its ok, I have to do nothing.
I left my brainstorming for the right people to extract ideas from it (or not) and not interested in your little skirmishes about your beloved terran race being so UP and I did it so wrong with what I said. I didn't mention balance at all in my post. Perhaps you're confusing me with someone else?
|
On May 22 2018 07:05 LSN wrote: I usually write nonsense!
E.g. I wrote about that the mine should become visible after having shot. Probably was complete nonsense to you back then. I always agreed that mines should be visable after shooting. It's much better from a design perspective that way even if terran became underpowered shortly following that patch.
|
Czech Republic12115 Posts
On May 21 2018 14:37 Thaniri wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2018 16:48 Anoss wrote:So now you can change the map, to have some game with more late game, but that will never affect the casual player. Cause when you are outside of this game, when you don't play since 2, 3, 4 or 5 years, this game look not fun. Nothing is easy and despit of what the majority of the players think, this is no more an intellectual game, its 90% mechanics 10% strategy. Yes you need to think to find some new build, but let's be honest, you all watch the GSL and copy paste. This is not what a strategic player should do, he should improve and think, not copy paste. I played 2 games vs a Diamond level 3 player today in TvZ. I beat him with a reaper expand both times. Not a big timing attack with 2-2 bio. Or even a medivac with marines. I killed him with a single reaper that would consistently get more than 5 drone kills before the 3:30 speed timing and fluster him enough that he had no creep spread or macro. My MMR is 4800 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQ5QnewXH5qatQBBUj8yAy6XglqSZrOsvBMaz7LlaN_Q44RnnDD26jhDD9b-1sxIq8ZaA9y6v-ut9wM/pubhtmlHis MMR was somewhere in the mid 3000's. According to this graph, he would have less than 1% chance of beating me. Roughly two "orders of magnitude" below me. Strategy would not matter. We even played a game where I went fast 3 base hellion banshee and he went 2 base muta. He could not have hard countered me more, and he still lost. Now here is the spooky thing. Serral has an MMR greater than 7000. I can wipe the floor with diamond players all day with a single reaper. I literally do not know the words to express how much better Serral would be than ME. In a simulation vs Serral, out of 1,000,000 games, I might expect to win ONCE. Where I'm 2 orders of magnitude above a diamond player. Serral is 6 orders of magnitude above a diamond player. The level of difference that can be measured is staggering. Now because of this, most people never get to play SC2 as a strategy game. You can almost always out-macro and out-micro your opponent into submission. But what happens when we get two people who are masters of the game? (Not masters league, those people suck at the game). If you watch a GSL ro4 match, there are mindgames, build order swaps, feints, multi pronged attacks, traps, everything that makes RTS a compelling genre. Just because you and I aren't good enough to play the game that way, doesn't mean that isn't the essence of the game. --- As to the part of your post that talks about BW. The phenomenon is compounded 50x there. Savior or Flash in their respective primes were so much better than everyone else that it strategy didn't matter. I'm not a broodwar history buff but IIRC Flash would literally constantly play the same strats on the same maps and no matter what his opponents wouldn't be able to stop it. --- Why this big rant post on some random balance update thing? I think this is true for anything. A michelin starred chef. Michael Jordan. Aleksandr Karelin. There are people who are such behemoths in their fields that mere men cannot compare. However that does not belittle the strategy element in, for example, greco-roman wrestling during Karelin's prime. Strategy still existed. It just so happened to be that Karelin was stronger, faster, and smarter than all of his opponents for almost 10 years straight. I'm not gonna google it but I think there was a point at which he won 6 world championships without having a point scored on him. Unfortunately my post has meandered since it is late in the night for me, but I hope I got my point across. Git gud son. + Show Spoiler +And this is the problem. If only top 100(and even that's questionable) of players can use the strategy, then we have a problem in a real time STRATEGY game. A huge problem. That's why people are leaving(and I am not saying this is the only reason, with my past experience I rather add this here), playing against someone who's a dumb player but he's so much mechanically advanced, that you don't have a chance - this isn't fun. I cannot count how many terrans won against me because they were just sending drop after drop until I finally crushed under the pressure(or their stutter stepping was so on point). But if I defended everything, they suddenly didn't know what to play. And believe me that such mechanically skilled players should be able to play TvP lategame on my level without balance whines, hell, if they understood the game I wouldn't be able to play against them(they would be leagues above me). But they weren't, they're whole "strategy" was to mechanically overwhelm the enemy. No strategy, no game sense, nothing. And while winning against such "beasts" feels good at the moment, these are not the games I remember.
And believe me I know how it looks from the other side, when I play my pathetic Terran(gold), I have no idea what to do. All I know about Terran - if I somehow survive cheeses and 2 base all-ins & I get into the late-game, I just build 30 marines at a time(on some maps even more), 10 medevacs at a time and I just stim a-move to victory. Sure, from time to time I meet a player who knows what a storm is, but generally speaking I win with the sheer power of my macro. The problem is - I have no idea how to play Terran. No. Clue. At. All. Ghosts? Nah, cannot stim bio ball. Marauders? Why? My mechanics are good enough to split on that level against banelings and I lose to storm anyway. Yeah, I build like 5 tanks so I don't have to worry about my home bases too much. If the enemy somehow builds one of the "dreaded" units(ultras/colossi) I just add liberators. Otherwise I just build marines and win. Is this a fair fight? It isn't. With my knowledge I should die to many of the players I'm facing but thanks to the game system I am not. And that's why I play Terran the least. I feel ashamed to play the race the way I play it. It's wrong, this is just wrong.
I put my rant into spoiler, but generally speaking I think the strategy portion should be bigger(imo 7(mechanics) : 3).
Git gud son doesn't help. It's offensive to many players, because you just admitted, that the player would have to get on a level of GSL RO4+ player. Think about that to let that sunk in. Even if we agree the strategy limit is around top 500 players(and we both know this number is much bigger than it's supposed to be), it's still not real to say to playrs git gud. They cannot get good to use strategy, there will be always someone so mechanically better that strategy won't matter.
We're talking about real time STRATEGY game where STRATEGY doesn't matter in most of the played games. (not streamed games, but played games)
Can this be fixed? I believe not(certainly not with balance patches).
|
On May 22 2018 04:04 LSN wrote: I still see that gas is not a limiting rescource for terrans in many situations. That alone is a deal-breaker in a game where all races have equal access to resources and gas is defined to be the scarce one. Its corrupt design.
Yeah sure, that's why there is no viable terran build order that's gazless. Because gaz isn't a limiting ressource, terran build orders all rely on gaz first/getting a lot of gaz fast to build those high gaz cost units to harass or survive the early game.
Makes sense.
|
On May 22 2018 07:05 LSN wrote:I usually write nonsense! E.g. I wrote about that the mine should become visible after having shot. Probably was complete nonsense to you back then. Show nested quote +If that would happen and zerg could attack anytime during the game, people would demand nerfs again, just like they demanded nerfs for all lair units due to zerg being able to attack on previous patches. Are you refering to the game getting more creative and strategic instead of mostly mechanic?
Nerfing swarm hosts, infestors and hydras and buffing all counters to mutas made the game more creative? Maybe to other races, because as far as i know there's only one way to beat what your opponent is doing as Zerg.
|
On May 22 2018 07:28 StarscreamG1 wrote: How are ultras dealing with marauders? o_o
No good zerg player attack bio with pure ultras, so it's the same as before.
|
On May 22 2018 10:02 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2018 14:37 Thaniri wrote:On May 17 2018 16:48 Anoss wrote:So now you can change the map, to have some game with more late game, but that will never affect the casual player. Cause when you are outside of this game, when you don't play since 2, 3, 4 or 5 years, this game look not fun. Nothing is easy and despit of what the majority of the players think, this is no more an intellectual game, its 90% mechanics 10% strategy. Yes you need to think to find some new build, but let's be honest, you all watch the GSL and copy paste. This is not what a strategic player should do, he should improve and think, not copy paste. I played 2 games vs a Diamond level 3 player today in TvZ. I beat him with a reaper expand both times. Not a big timing attack with 2-2 bio. Or even a medivac with marines. I killed him with a single reaper that would consistently get more than 5 drone kills before the 3:30 speed timing and fluster him enough that he had no creep spread or macro. My MMR is 4800 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQ5QnewXH5qatQBBUj8yAy6XglqSZrOsvBMaz7LlaN_Q44RnnDD26jhDD9b-1sxIq8ZaA9y6v-ut9wM/pubhtmlHis MMR was somewhere in the mid 3000's. According to this graph, he would have less than 1% chance of beating me. Roughly two "orders of magnitude" below me. Strategy would not matter. We even played a game where I went fast 3 base hellion banshee and he went 2 base muta. He could not have hard countered me more, and he still lost. Now here is the spooky thing. Serral has an MMR greater than 7000. I can wipe the floor with diamond players all day with a single reaper. I literally do not know the words to express how much better Serral would be than ME. In a simulation vs Serral, out of 1,000,000 games, I might expect to win ONCE. Where I'm 2 orders of magnitude above a diamond player. Serral is 6 orders of magnitude above a diamond player. The level of difference that can be measured is staggering. Now because of this, most people never get to play SC2 as a strategy game. You can almost always out-macro and out-micro your opponent into submission. But what happens when we get two people who are masters of the game? (Not masters league, those people suck at the game). If you watch a GSL ro4 match, there are mindgames, build order swaps, feints, multi pronged attacks, traps, everything that makes RTS a compelling genre. Just because you and I aren't good enough to play the game that way, doesn't mean that isn't the essence of the game. --- As to the part of your post that talks about BW. The phenomenon is compounded 50x there. Savior or Flash in their respective primes were so much better than everyone else that it strategy didn't matter. I'm not a broodwar history buff but IIRC Flash would literally constantly play the same strats on the same maps and no matter what his opponents wouldn't be able to stop it. --- Why this big rant post on some random balance update thing? I think this is true for anything. A michelin starred chef. Michael Jordan. Aleksandr Karelin. There are people who are such behemoths in their fields that mere men cannot compare. However that does not belittle the strategy element in, for example, greco-roman wrestling during Karelin's prime. Strategy still existed. It just so happened to be that Karelin was stronger, faster, and smarter than all of his opponents for almost 10 years straight. I'm not gonna google it but I think there was a point at which he won 6 world championships without having a point scored on him. Unfortunately my post has meandered since it is late in the night for me, but I hope I got my point across. Git gud son. + Show Spoiler +And this is the problem. If only top 100(and even that's questionable) of players can use the strategy, then we have a problem in a real time STRATEGY game. A huge problem. That's why people are leaving(and I am not saying this is the only reason, with my past experience I rather add this here), playing against someone who's a dumb player but he's so much mechanically advanced, that you don't have a chance - this isn't fun. I cannot count how many terrans won against me because they were just sending drop after drop until I finally crushed under the pressure(or their stutter stepping was so on point). But if I defended everything, they suddenly didn't know what to play. And believe me that such mechanically skilled players should be able to play TvP lategame on my level without balance whines, hell, if they understood the game I wouldn't be able to play against them(they would be leagues above me). But they weren't, they're whole "strategy" was to mechanically overwhelm the enemy. No strategy, no game sense, nothing. And while winning against such "beasts" feels good at the moment, these are not the games I remember.
And believe me I know how it looks from the other side, when I play my pathetic Terran(gold), I have no idea what to do. All I know about Terran - if I somehow survive cheeses and 2 base all-ins & I get into the late-game, I just build 30 marines at a time(on some maps even more), 10 medevacs at a time and I just stim a-move to victory. Sure, from time to time I meet a player who knows what a storm is, but generally speaking I win with the sheer power of my macro. The problem is - I have no idea how to play Terran. No. Clue. At. All. Ghosts? Nah, cannot stim bio ball. Marauders? Why? My mechanics are good enough to split on that level against banelings and I lose to storm anyway. Yeah, I build like 5 tanks so I don't have to worry about my home bases too much. If the enemy somehow builds one of the "dreaded" units(ultras/colossi) I just add liberators. Otherwise I just build marines and win. Is this a fair fight? It isn't. With my knowledge I should die to many of the players I'm facing but thanks to the game system I am not. And that's why I play Terran the least. I feel ashamed to play the race the way I play it. It's wrong, this is just wrong. I put my rant into spoiler, but generally speaking I think the strategy portion should be bigger(imo 7(mechanics) : 3). Git gud son doesn't help. It's offensive to many players, because you just admitted, that the player would have to get on a level of GSL RO4+ player. Think about that to let that sunk in. Even if we agree the strategy limit is around top 500 players(and we both know this number is much bigger than it's supposed to be), it's still not real to say to playrs git gud. They cannot get good to use strategy, there will be always someone so mechanically better that strategy won't matter. We're talking about real time STRATEGY game where STRATEGY doesn't matter in most of the played games. (not streamed games, but played games) Can this be fixed? I believe not(certainly not with balance patches).
But the thing is, in any game or sport with a large mechanical aspect, the stronger mechanical player will generally win. If I play against an NHL player, it doesn't matter what strategy I use, because I will lose.
However, when faced with someone just a bit better or on my skill level, I can use strategy to make up for my mechanical errors. Similarly, in SC2, two equal mechanically skilled players will be left to tactics a strategy. Except for builds that are harder to stop than to play, the one player will have to outthink the other player. So a two bronze players of equal mechanics will have such poor mechanics, that it will be down to strategic situations like...I know I can't stop drops, so I will over build static defence. Here, one player is compensating for a mechanical lacking through a strategic decision.
It's just that mechanics often determine your ability to execute a strategy, and so we see it at the highest level that their mechanics are so good it's primarily strategy and tactics that determine the outcome.
And the thing is, cheese does still exist, and much weaker players have often taken games off of people who should be better players.
|
On May 22 2018 10:02 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2018 14:37 Thaniri wrote:On May 17 2018 16:48 Anoss wrote:So now you can change the map, to have some game with more late game, but that will never affect the casual player. Cause when you are outside of this game, when you don't play since 2, 3, 4 or 5 years, this game look not fun. Nothing is easy and despit of what the majority of the players think, this is no more an intellectual game, its 90% mechanics 10% strategy. Yes you need to think to find some new build, but let's be honest, you all watch the GSL and copy paste. This is not what a strategic player should do, he should improve and think, not copy paste. I played 2 games vs a Diamond level 3 player today in TvZ. I beat him with a reaper expand both times. Not a big timing attack with 2-2 bio. Or even a medivac with marines. I killed him with a single reaper that would consistently get more than 5 drone kills before the 3:30 speed timing and fluster him enough that he had no creep spread or macro. My MMR is 4800 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQ5QnewXH5qatQBBUj8yAy6XglqSZrOsvBMaz7LlaN_Q44RnnDD26jhDD9b-1sxIq8ZaA9y6v-ut9wM/pubhtmlHis MMR was somewhere in the mid 3000's. According to this graph, he would have less than 1% chance of beating me. Roughly two "orders of magnitude" below me. Strategy would not matter. We even played a game where I went fast 3 base hellion banshee and he went 2 base muta. He could not have hard countered me more, and he still lost. Now here is the spooky thing. Serral has an MMR greater than 7000. I can wipe the floor with diamond players all day with a single reaper. I literally do not know the words to express how much better Serral would be than ME. In a simulation vs Serral, out of 1,000,000 games, I might expect to win ONCE. Where I'm 2 orders of magnitude above a diamond player. Serral is 6 orders of magnitude above a diamond player. The level of difference that can be measured is staggering. Now because of this, most people never get to play SC2 as a strategy game. You can almost always out-macro and out-micro your opponent into submission. But what happens when we get two people who are masters of the game? (Not masters league, those people suck at the game). If you watch a GSL ro4 match, there are mindgames, build order swaps, feints, multi pronged attacks, traps, everything that makes RTS a compelling genre. Just because you and I aren't good enough to play the game that way, doesn't mean that isn't the essence of the game. --- As to the part of your post that talks about BW. The phenomenon is compounded 50x there. Savior or Flash in their respective primes were so much better than everyone else that it strategy didn't matter. I'm not a broodwar history buff but IIRC Flash would literally constantly play the same strats on the same maps and no matter what his opponents wouldn't be able to stop it. --- Why this big rant post on some random balance update thing? I think this is true for anything. A michelin starred chef. Michael Jordan. Aleksandr Karelin. There are people who are such behemoths in their fields that mere men cannot compare. However that does not belittle the strategy element in, for example, greco-roman wrestling during Karelin's prime. Strategy still existed. It just so happened to be that Karelin was stronger, faster, and smarter than all of his opponents for almost 10 years straight. I'm not gonna google it but I think there was a point at which he won 6 world championships without having a point scored on him. Unfortunately my post has meandered since it is late in the night for me, but I hope I got my point across. Git gud son. + Show Spoiler +And this is the problem. If only top 100(and even that's questionable) of players can use the strategy, then we have a problem in a real time STRATEGY game. A huge problem. That's why people are leaving(and I am not saying this is the only reason, with my past experience I rather add this here), playing against someone who's a dumb player but he's so much mechanically advanced, that you don't have a chance - this isn't fun. I cannot count how many terrans won against me because they were just sending drop after drop until I finally crushed under the pressure(or their stutter stepping was so on point). But if I defended everything, they suddenly didn't know what to play. And believe me that such mechanically skilled players should be able to play TvP lategame on my level without balance whines, hell, if they understood the game I wouldn't be able to play against them(they would be leagues above me). But they weren't, they're whole "strategy" was to mechanically overwhelm the enemy. No strategy, no game sense, nothing. And while winning against such "beasts" feels good at the moment, these are not the games I remember.
And believe me I know how it looks from the other side, when I play my pathetic Terran(gold), I have no idea what to do. All I know about Terran - if I somehow survive cheeses and 2 base all-ins & I get into the late-game, I just build 30 marines at a time(on some maps even more), 10 medevacs at a time and I just stim a-move to victory. Sure, from time to time I meet a player who knows what a storm is, but generally speaking I win with the sheer power of my macro. The problem is - I have no idea how to play Terran. No. Clue. At. All. Ghosts? Nah, cannot stim bio ball. Marauders? Why? My mechanics are good enough to split on that level against banelings and I lose to storm anyway. Yeah, I build like 5 tanks so I don't have to worry about my home bases too much. If the enemy somehow builds one of the "dreaded" units(ultras/colossi) I just add liberators. Otherwise I just build marines and win. Is this a fair fight? It isn't. With my knowledge I should die to many of the players I'm facing but thanks to the game system I am not. And that's why I play Terran the least. I feel ashamed to play the race the way I play it. It's wrong, this is just wrong. I put my rant into spoiler, but generally speaking I think the strategy portion should be bigger(imo 7(mechanics) : 3). Git gud son doesn't help. It's offensive to many players, because you just admitted, that the player would have to get on a level of GSL RO4+ player. Think about that to let that sunk in. Even if we agree the strategy limit is around top 500 players(and we both know this number is much bigger than it's supposed to be), it's still not real to say to playrs git gud. They cannot get good to use strategy, there will be always someone so mechanically better that strategy won't matter. We're talking about real time STRATEGY game where STRATEGY doesn't matter in most of the played games. (not streamed games, but played games) Can this be fixed? I believe not(certainly not with balance patches).
I mean Starcraft has always been about mechanics more than stratagey sure stratagey plays a role but if my opponent micros perfectly and has 1.5 times as much stuff as I do chances are he's gonna win. It's just the nature of the game if your looking for games where stratagey is the deciding factor go play a tbs or a card game. Sc2 is first and foremost a game of mechanics with some stratagey layered ontop.
I'm not sure having stratagey more than mechanics would nesisarily be a good thing. Take for example PVP. PvP is mostly decided by stratagey and not mechanics unlike the other matchups due to the deadlyness of allins in the mu and the fact that's at least in the early game of PvP both macro and micro tend to be trivial prior to the moment when players builds start giving them different sets of units. PvP can e fun but for most people it's considered one of the worst mu probably only zvz is considered to be less fun. Why? Because PvP is so dictated by stratagey that it feals coinflippy and poker like, it's low emphasis on mechanics makes the mu frustrating at times to play and not particularly exciting to watch.
|
On May 22 2018 14:38 washikie wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2018 10:02 deacon.frost wrote:On May 21 2018 14:37 Thaniri wrote:On May 17 2018 16:48 Anoss wrote:So now you can change the map, to have some game with more late game, but that will never affect the casual player. Cause when you are outside of this game, when you don't play since 2, 3, 4 or 5 years, this game look not fun. Nothing is easy and despit of what the majority of the players think, this is no more an intellectual game, its 90% mechanics 10% strategy. Yes you need to think to find some new build, but let's be honest, you all watch the GSL and copy paste. This is not what a strategic player should do, he should improve and think, not copy paste. I played 2 games vs a Diamond level 3 player today in TvZ. I beat him with a reaper expand both times. Not a big timing attack with 2-2 bio. Or even a medivac with marines. I killed him with a single reaper that would consistently get more than 5 drone kills before the 3:30 speed timing and fluster him enough that he had no creep spread or macro. My MMR is 4800 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQ5QnewXH5qatQBBUj8yAy6XglqSZrOsvBMaz7LlaN_Q44RnnDD26jhDD9b-1sxIq8ZaA9y6v-ut9wM/pubhtmlHis MMR was somewhere in the mid 3000's. According to this graph, he would have less than 1% chance of beating me. Roughly two "orders of magnitude" below me. Strategy would not matter. We even played a game where I went fast 3 base hellion banshee and he went 2 base muta. He could not have hard countered me more, and he still lost. Now here is the spooky thing. Serral has an MMR greater than 7000. I can wipe the floor with diamond players all day with a single reaper. I literally do not know the words to express how much better Serral would be than ME. In a simulation vs Serral, out of 1,000,000 games, I might expect to win ONCE. Where I'm 2 orders of magnitude above a diamond player. Serral is 6 orders of magnitude above a diamond player. The level of difference that can be measured is staggering. Now because of this, most people never get to play SC2 as a strategy game. You can almost always out-macro and out-micro your opponent into submission. But what happens when we get two people who are masters of the game? (Not masters league, those people suck at the game). If you watch a GSL ro4 match, there are mindgames, build order swaps, feints, multi pronged attacks, traps, everything that makes RTS a compelling genre. Just because you and I aren't good enough to play the game that way, doesn't mean that isn't the essence of the game. --- As to the part of your post that talks about BW. The phenomenon is compounded 50x there. Savior or Flash in their respective primes were so much better than everyone else that it strategy didn't matter. I'm not a broodwar history buff but IIRC Flash would literally constantly play the same strats on the same maps and no matter what his opponents wouldn't be able to stop it. --- Why this big rant post on some random balance update thing? I think this is true for anything. A michelin starred chef. Michael Jordan. Aleksandr Karelin. There are people who are such behemoths in their fields that mere men cannot compare. However that does not belittle the strategy element in, for example, greco-roman wrestling during Karelin's prime. Strategy still existed. It just so happened to be that Karelin was stronger, faster, and smarter than all of his opponents for almost 10 years straight. I'm not gonna google it but I think there was a point at which he won 6 world championships without having a point scored on him. Unfortunately my post has meandered since it is late in the night for me, but I hope I got my point across. Git gud son. + Show Spoiler +And this is the problem. If only top 100(and even that's questionable) of players can use the strategy, then we have a problem in a real time STRATEGY game. A huge problem. That's why people are leaving(and I am not saying this is the only reason, with my past experience I rather add this here), playing against someone who's a dumb player but he's so much mechanically advanced, that you don't have a chance - this isn't fun. I cannot count how many terrans won against me because they were just sending drop after drop until I finally crushed under the pressure(or their stutter stepping was so on point). But if I defended everything, they suddenly didn't know what to play. And believe me that such mechanically skilled players should be able to play TvP lategame on my level without balance whines, hell, if they understood the game I wouldn't be able to play against them(they would be leagues above me). But they weren't, they're whole "strategy" was to mechanically overwhelm the enemy. No strategy, no game sense, nothing. And while winning against such "beasts" feels good at the moment, these are not the games I remember.
And believe me I know how it looks from the other side, when I play my pathetic Terran(gold), I have no idea what to do. All I know about Terran - if I somehow survive cheeses and 2 base all-ins & I get into the late-game, I just build 30 marines at a time(on some maps even more), 10 medevacs at a time and I just stim a-move to victory. Sure, from time to time I meet a player who knows what a storm is, but generally speaking I win with the sheer power of my macro. The problem is - I have no idea how to play Terran. No. Clue. At. All. Ghosts? Nah, cannot stim bio ball. Marauders? Why? My mechanics are good enough to split on that level against banelings and I lose to storm anyway. Yeah, I build like 5 tanks so I don't have to worry about my home bases too much. If the enemy somehow builds one of the "dreaded" units(ultras/colossi) I just add liberators. Otherwise I just build marines and win. Is this a fair fight? It isn't. With my knowledge I should die to many of the players I'm facing but thanks to the game system I am not. And that's why I play Terran the least. I feel ashamed to play the race the way I play it. It's wrong, this is just wrong. I put my rant into spoiler, but generally speaking I think the strategy portion should be bigger(imo 7(mechanics) : 3). Git gud son doesn't help. It's offensive to many players, because you just admitted, that the player would have to get on a level of GSL RO4+ player. Think about that to let that sunk in. Even if we agree the strategy limit is around top 500 players(and we both know this number is much bigger than it's supposed to be), it's still not real to say to playrs git gud. They cannot get good to use strategy, there will be always someone so mechanically better that strategy won't matter. We're talking about real time STRATEGY game where STRATEGY doesn't matter in most of the played games. (not streamed games, but played games) Can this be fixed? I believe not(certainly not with balance patches). I mean Starcraft has always been about mechanics more than stratagey sure stratagey plays a role but if my opponent micros perfectly and has 1.5 times as much stuff as I do chances are he's gonna win. It's just the nature of the game if your looking for games where stratagey is the deciding factor go play a tbs or a card game. Sc2 is first and foremost a game of mechanics with some stratagey layered ontop. I'm not sure having stratagey more than mechanics would nesisarily be a good thing. Take for example PVP. PvP is mostly decided by stratagey and not mechanics unlike the other matchups due to the deadlyness of allins in the mu and the fact that's at least in the early game of PvP both macro and micro tend to be trivial prior to the moment when players builds start giving them different sets of units. PvP can e fun but for most people it's considered one of the worst mu probably only zvz is considered to be less fun. Why? Because PvP is so dictated by stratagey that it feals coinflippy and poker like, it's low emphasis on mechanics makes the mu frustrating at times to play and not particularly exciting to watch. Well i disagree, while you need a minimal mecanism to enter some leagues, the difference between players is not really mecanism.
Knowledge is far more important, and knowing what you should do to stay ahead or identify if you're behind and need to do something.
And maybe you know PvP, but all MU are decided by strategy.
It's coin-flip when you decide not to scout or prepare for some strategy, and play creedy.
In ZvZ, i drone scout, my first worker is rallied directly to the natural of my opponent, and it will arrive in time on most map to block hatch first for a few seconds, or i will knows he is pool first, or all-in me.
Most pro never do that, and they prefer to identify the build with the timing of the lings and with overlord, and defend with their first lings + workers, it may work but if lings dodge overlord, or the build is slightly changed to look like a normal build you may die.
It's a choice, a strategy, i consider it's more likely i lose on a cheese at my level than because of the few mineral i've lost because i've scouted, and somehow i recover for this mineral lost because i block his hatch, or even if i don't i know he is macroing so i can full drone for a moment because i know what is doing.
At pro level, all pros know each other and prepare for strats based on the usual playstyle of some player, they rarely won because of "micro" or better mecanism, they all have nearly the same mecanism.
|
On May 22 2018 10:02 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2018 14:37 Thaniri wrote:On May 17 2018 16:48 Anoss wrote:So now you can change the map, to have some game with more late game, but that will never affect the casual player. Cause when you are outside of this game, when you don't play since 2, 3, 4 or 5 years, this game look not fun. Nothing is easy and despit of what the majority of the players think, this is no more an intellectual game, its 90% mechanics 10% strategy. Yes you need to think to find some new build, but let's be honest, you all watch the GSL and copy paste. This is not what a strategic player should do, he should improve and think, not copy paste. I played 2 games vs a Diamond level 3 player today in TvZ. I beat him with a reaper expand both times. Not a big timing attack with 2-2 bio. Or even a medivac with marines. I killed him with a single reaper that would consistently get more than 5 drone kills before the 3:30 speed timing and fluster him enough that he had no creep spread or macro. My MMR is 4800 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQ5QnewXH5qatQBBUj8yAy6XglqSZrOsvBMaz7LlaN_Q44RnnDD26jhDD9b-1sxIq8ZaA9y6v-ut9wM/pubhtmlHis MMR was somewhere in the mid 3000's. According to this graph, he would have less than 1% chance of beating me. Roughly two "orders of magnitude" below me. Strategy would not matter. We even played a game where I went fast 3 base hellion banshee and he went 2 base muta. He could not have hard countered me more, and he still lost. Now here is the spooky thing. Serral has an MMR greater than 7000. I can wipe the floor with diamond players all day with a single reaper. I literally do not know the words to express how much better Serral would be than ME. In a simulation vs Serral, out of 1,000,000 games, I might expect to win ONCE. Where I'm 2 orders of magnitude above a diamond player. Serral is 6 orders of magnitude above a diamond player. The level of difference that can be measured is staggering. Now because of this, most people never get to play SC2 as a strategy game. You can almost always out-macro and out-micro your opponent into submission. But what happens when we get two people who are masters of the game? (Not masters league, those people suck at the game). If you watch a GSL ro4 match, there are mindgames, build order swaps, feints, multi pronged attacks, traps, everything that makes RTS a compelling genre. Just because you and I aren't good enough to play the game that way, doesn't mean that isn't the essence of the game. --- As to the part of your post that talks about BW. The phenomenon is compounded 50x there. Savior or Flash in their respective primes were so much better than everyone else that it strategy didn't matter. I'm not a broodwar history buff but IIRC Flash would literally constantly play the same strats on the same maps and no matter what his opponents wouldn't be able to stop it. --- Why this big rant post on some random balance update thing? I think this is true for anything. A michelin starred chef. Michael Jordan. Aleksandr Karelin. There are people who are such behemoths in their fields that mere men cannot compare. However that does not belittle the strategy element in, for example, greco-roman wrestling during Karelin's prime. Strategy still existed. It just so happened to be that Karelin was stronger, faster, and smarter than all of his opponents for almost 10 years straight. I'm not gonna google it but I think there was a point at which he won 6 world championships without having a point scored on him. Unfortunately my post has meandered since it is late in the night for me, but I hope I got my point across. Git gud son. + Show Spoiler +And this is the problem. If only top 100(and even that's questionable) of players can use the strategy, then we have a problem in a real time STRATEGY game. A huge problem. That's why people are leaving(and I am not saying this is the only reason, with my past experience I rather add this here), playing against someone who's a dumb player but he's so much mechanically advanced, that you don't have a chance - this isn't fun. I cannot count how many terrans won against me because they were just sending drop after drop until I finally crushed under the pressure(or their stutter stepping was so on point). But if I defended everything, they suddenly didn't know what to play. And believe me that such mechanically skilled players should be able to play TvP lategame on my level without balance whines, hell, if they understood the game I wouldn't be able to play against them(they would be leagues above me). But they weren't, they're whole "strategy" was to mechanically overwhelm the enemy. No strategy, no game sense, nothing. And while winning against such "beasts" feels good at the moment, these are not the games I remember.
And believe me I know how it looks from the other side, when I play my pathetic Terran(gold), I have no idea what to do. All I know about Terran - if I somehow survive cheeses and 2 base all-ins & I get into the late-game, I just build 30 marines at a time(on some maps even more), 10 medevacs at a time and I just stim a-move to victory. Sure, from time to time I meet a player who knows what a storm is, but generally speaking I win with the sheer power of my macro. The problem is - I have no idea how to play Terran. No. Clue. At. All. Ghosts? Nah, cannot stim bio ball. Marauders? Why? My mechanics are good enough to split on that level against banelings and I lose to storm anyway. Yeah, I build like 5 tanks so I don't have to worry about my home bases too much. If the enemy somehow builds one of the "dreaded" units(ultras/colossi) I just add liberators. Otherwise I just build marines and win. Is this a fair fight? It isn't. With my knowledge I should die to many of the players I'm facing but thanks to the game system I am not. And that's why I play Terran the least. I feel ashamed to play the race the way I play it. It's wrong, this is just wrong. I put my rant into spoiler, but generally speaking I think the strategy portion should be bigger(imo 7(mechanics) : 3). Git gud son doesn't help. It's offensive to many players, because you just admitted, that the player would have to get on a level of GSL RO4+ player. Think about that to let that sunk in. Even if we agree the strategy limit is around top 500 players(and we both know this number is much bigger than it's supposed to be), it's still not real to say to playrs git gud. They cannot get good to use strategy, there will be always someone so mechanically better that strategy won't matter. We're talking about real time STRATEGY game where STRATEGY doesn't matter in most of the played games. (not streamed games, but played games) Can this be fixed? I believe not(certainly not with balance patches).
Maybe you shouldn't play a game like starcraft because it is mechanically difficult?
go play Warhammer 40,000 or chess or something lol.
maybe some other rts made by stardock games if you want some easy strategy wins. The thing is the skill caps on those games are nothing compared to mechanically difficult games.
|
Czech Republic12115 Posts
On May 23 2018 00:15 aish wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2018 10:02 deacon.frost wrote:On May 21 2018 14:37 Thaniri wrote:On May 17 2018 16:48 Anoss wrote:So now you can change the map, to have some game with more late game, but that will never affect the casual player. Cause when you are outside of this game, when you don't play since 2, 3, 4 or 5 years, this game look not fun. Nothing is easy and despit of what the majority of the players think, this is no more an intellectual game, its 90% mechanics 10% strategy. Yes you need to think to find some new build, but let's be honest, you all watch the GSL and copy paste. This is not what a strategic player should do, he should improve and think, not copy paste. I played 2 games vs a Diamond level 3 player today in TvZ. I beat him with a reaper expand both times. Not a big timing attack with 2-2 bio. Or even a medivac with marines. I killed him with a single reaper that would consistently get more than 5 drone kills before the 3:30 speed timing and fluster him enough that he had no creep spread or macro. My MMR is 4800 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQ5QnewXH5qatQBBUj8yAy6XglqSZrOsvBMaz7LlaN_Q44RnnDD26jhDD9b-1sxIq8ZaA9y6v-ut9wM/pubhtmlHis MMR was somewhere in the mid 3000's. According to this graph, he would have less than 1% chance of beating me. Roughly two "orders of magnitude" below me. Strategy would not matter. We even played a game where I went fast 3 base hellion banshee and he went 2 base muta. He could not have hard countered me more, and he still lost. Now here is the spooky thing. Serral has an MMR greater than 7000. I can wipe the floor with diamond players all day with a single reaper. I literally do not know the words to express how much better Serral would be than ME. In a simulation vs Serral, out of 1,000,000 games, I might expect to win ONCE. Where I'm 2 orders of magnitude above a diamond player. Serral is 6 orders of magnitude above a diamond player. The level of difference that can be measured is staggering. Now because of this, most people never get to play SC2 as a strategy game. You can almost always out-macro and out-micro your opponent into submission. But what happens when we get two people who are masters of the game? (Not masters league, those people suck at the game). If you watch a GSL ro4 match, there are mindgames, build order swaps, feints, multi pronged attacks, traps, everything that makes RTS a compelling genre. Just because you and I aren't good enough to play the game that way, doesn't mean that isn't the essence of the game. --- As to the part of your post that talks about BW. The phenomenon is compounded 50x there. Savior or Flash in their respective primes were so much better than everyone else that it strategy didn't matter. I'm not a broodwar history buff but IIRC Flash would literally constantly play the same strats on the same maps and no matter what his opponents wouldn't be able to stop it. --- Why this big rant post on some random balance update thing? I think this is true for anything. A michelin starred chef. Michael Jordan. Aleksandr Karelin. There are people who are such behemoths in their fields that mere men cannot compare. However that does not belittle the strategy element in, for example, greco-roman wrestling during Karelin's prime. Strategy still existed. It just so happened to be that Karelin was stronger, faster, and smarter than all of his opponents for almost 10 years straight. I'm not gonna google it but I think there was a point at which he won 6 world championships without having a point scored on him. Unfortunately my post has meandered since it is late in the night for me, but I hope I got my point across. Git gud son. + Show Spoiler +And this is the problem. If only top 100(and even that's questionable) of players can use the strategy, then we have a problem in a real time STRATEGY game. A huge problem. That's why people are leaving(and I am not saying this is the only reason, with my past experience I rather add this here), playing against someone who's a dumb player but he's so much mechanically advanced, that you don't have a chance - this isn't fun. I cannot count how many terrans won against me because they were just sending drop after drop until I finally crushed under the pressure(or their stutter stepping was so on point). But if I defended everything, they suddenly didn't know what to play. And believe me that such mechanically skilled players should be able to play TvP lategame on my level without balance whines, hell, if they understood the game I wouldn't be able to play against them(they would be leagues above me). But they weren't, they're whole "strategy" was to mechanically overwhelm the enemy. No strategy, no game sense, nothing. And while winning against such "beasts" feels good at the moment, these are not the games I remember.
And believe me I know how it looks from the other side, when I play my pathetic Terran(gold), I have no idea what to do. All I know about Terran - if I somehow survive cheeses and 2 base all-ins & I get into the late-game, I just build 30 marines at a time(on some maps even more), 10 medevacs at a time and I just stim a-move to victory. Sure, from time to time I meet a player who knows what a storm is, but generally speaking I win with the sheer power of my macro. The problem is - I have no idea how to play Terran. No. Clue. At. All. Ghosts? Nah, cannot stim bio ball. Marauders? Why? My mechanics are good enough to split on that level against banelings and I lose to storm anyway. Yeah, I build like 5 tanks so I don't have to worry about my home bases too much. If the enemy somehow builds one of the "dreaded" units(ultras/colossi) I just add liberators. Otherwise I just build marines and win. Is this a fair fight? It isn't. With my knowledge I should die to many of the players I'm facing but thanks to the game system I am not. And that's why I play Terran the least. I feel ashamed to play the race the way I play it. It's wrong, this is just wrong. I put my rant into spoiler, but generally speaking I think the strategy portion should be bigger(imo 7(mechanics) : 3). Git gud son doesn't help. It's offensive to many players, because you just admitted, that the player would have to get on a level of GSL RO4+ player. Think about that to let that sunk in. Even if we agree the strategy limit is around top 500 players(and we both know this number is much bigger than it's supposed to be), it's still not real to say to playrs git gud. They cannot get good to use strategy, there will be always someone so mechanically better that strategy won't matter. We're talking about real time STRATEGY game where STRATEGY doesn't matter in most of the played games. (not streamed games, but played games) Can this be fixed? I believe not(certainly not with balance patches). Maybe you shouldn't play a game like starcraft because it is mechanically difficult? go play Warhammer 40,000 or chess or something lol. maybe some other rts made by stardock games if you want some easy strategy wins. The thing is the skill caps on those games are nothing compared to mechanically difficult games. Yes,. this helps the population...
On May 22 2018 14:38 washikie wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2018 10:02 deacon.frost wrote:On May 21 2018 14:37 Thaniri wrote:On May 17 2018 16:48 Anoss wrote:So now you can change the map, to have some game with more late game, but that will never affect the casual player. Cause when you are outside of this game, when you don't play since 2, 3, 4 or 5 years, this game look not fun. Nothing is easy and despit of what the majority of the players think, this is no more an intellectual game, its 90% mechanics 10% strategy. Yes you need to think to find some new build, but let's be honest, you all watch the GSL and copy paste. This is not what a strategic player should do, he should improve and think, not copy paste. I played 2 games vs a Diamond level 3 player today in TvZ. I beat him with a reaper expand both times. Not a big timing attack with 2-2 bio. Or even a medivac with marines. I killed him with a single reaper that would consistently get more than 5 drone kills before the 3:30 speed timing and fluster him enough that he had no creep spread or macro. My MMR is 4800 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQ5QnewXH5qatQBBUj8yAy6XglqSZrOsvBMaz7LlaN_Q44RnnDD26jhDD9b-1sxIq8ZaA9y6v-ut9wM/pubhtmlHis MMR was somewhere in the mid 3000's. According to this graph, he would have less than 1% chance of beating me. Roughly two "orders of magnitude" below me. Strategy would not matter. We even played a game where I went fast 3 base hellion banshee and he went 2 base muta. He could not have hard countered me more, and he still lost. Now here is the spooky thing. Serral has an MMR greater than 7000. I can wipe the floor with diamond players all day with a single reaper. I literally do not know the words to express how much better Serral would be than ME. In a simulation vs Serral, out of 1,000,000 games, I might expect to win ONCE. Where I'm 2 orders of magnitude above a diamond player. Serral is 6 orders of magnitude above a diamond player. The level of difference that can be measured is staggering. Now because of this, most people never get to play SC2 as a strategy game. You can almost always out-macro and out-micro your opponent into submission. But what happens when we get two people who are masters of the game? (Not masters league, those people suck at the game). If you watch a GSL ro4 match, there are mindgames, build order swaps, feints, multi pronged attacks, traps, everything that makes RTS a compelling genre. Just because you and I aren't good enough to play the game that way, doesn't mean that isn't the essence of the game. --- As to the part of your post that talks about BW. The phenomenon is compounded 50x there. Savior or Flash in their respective primes were so much better than everyone else that it strategy didn't matter. I'm not a broodwar history buff but IIRC Flash would literally constantly play the same strats on the same maps and no matter what his opponents wouldn't be able to stop it. --- Why this big rant post on some random balance update thing? I think this is true for anything. A michelin starred chef. Michael Jordan. Aleksandr Karelin. There are people who are such behemoths in their fields that mere men cannot compare. However that does not belittle the strategy element in, for example, greco-roman wrestling during Karelin's prime. Strategy still existed. It just so happened to be that Karelin was stronger, faster, and smarter than all of his opponents for almost 10 years straight. I'm not gonna google it but I think there was a point at which he won 6 world championships without having a point scored on him. Unfortunately my post has meandered since it is late in the night for me, but I hope I got my point across. Git gud son. + Show Spoiler +And this is the problem. If only top 100(and even that's questionable) of players can use the strategy, then we have a problem in a real time STRATEGY game. A huge problem. That's why people are leaving(and I am not saying this is the only reason, with my past experience I rather add this here), playing against someone who's a dumb player but he's so much mechanically advanced, that you don't have a chance - this isn't fun. I cannot count how many terrans won against me because they were just sending drop after drop until I finally crushed under the pressure(or their stutter stepping was so on point). But if I defended everything, they suddenly didn't know what to play. And believe me that such mechanically skilled players should be able to play TvP lategame on my level without balance whines, hell, if they understood the game I wouldn't be able to play against them(they would be leagues above me). But they weren't, they're whole "strategy" was to mechanically overwhelm the enemy. No strategy, no game sense, nothing. And while winning against such "beasts" feels good at the moment, these are not the games I remember.
And believe me I know how it looks from the other side, when I play my pathetic Terran(gold), I have no idea what to do. All I know about Terran - if I somehow survive cheeses and 2 base all-ins & I get into the late-game, I just build 30 marines at a time(on some maps even more), 10 medevacs at a time and I just stim a-move to victory. Sure, from time to time I meet a player who knows what a storm is, but generally speaking I win with the sheer power of my macro. The problem is - I have no idea how to play Terran. No. Clue. At. All. Ghosts? Nah, cannot stim bio ball. Marauders? Why? My mechanics are good enough to split on that level against banelings and I lose to storm anyway. Yeah, I build like 5 tanks so I don't have to worry about my home bases too much. If the enemy somehow builds one of the "dreaded" units(ultras/colossi) I just add liberators. Otherwise I just build marines and win. Is this a fair fight? It isn't. With my knowledge I should die to many of the players I'm facing but thanks to the game system I am not. And that's why I play Terran the least. I feel ashamed to play the race the way I play it. It's wrong, this is just wrong. I put my rant into spoiler, but generally speaking I think the strategy portion should be bigger( imo 7(mechanics) : 3). Git gud son doesn't help. It's offensive to many players, because you just admitted, that the player would have to get on a level of GSL RO4+ player. Think about that to let that sunk in. Even if we agree the strategy limit is around top 500 players(and we both know this number is much bigger than it's supposed to be), it's still not real to say to playrs git gud. They cannot get good to use strategy, there will be always someone so mechanically better that strategy won't matter. We're talking about real time STRATEGY game where STRATEGY doesn't matter in most of the played games. (not streamed games, but played games) Can this be fixed? I believe not(certainly not with balance patches). I mean Starcraft has always been about mechanics more than stratagey sure stratagey plays a role but if my opponent micros perfectly and has 1.5 times as much stuff as I do chances are he's gonna win. It's just the nature of the game if your looking for games where stratagey is the deciding factor go play a tbs or a card game. Sc2 is first and foremost a game of mechanics with some stratagey layered ontop. I'm not sure having stratagey more than mechanics would nesisarily be a good thing. Take for example PVP. PvP is mostly decided by stratagey and not mechanics unlike the other matchups due to the deadlyness of allins in the mu and the fact that's at least in the early game of PvP both macro and micro tend to be trivial prior to the moment when players builds start giving them different sets of units. PvP can e fun but for most people it's considered one of the worst mu probably only zvz is considered to be less fun. Why? Because PvP is so dictated by stratagey that it feals coinflippy and poker like, it's low emphasis on mechanics makes the mu frustrating at times to play and not particularly exciting to watch.
I did NOT write that. Read what I wrote again and then reply to what I wrote. I made it bold so you can see it. (put in italics what i disagree with)
|
On May 23 2018 01:05 deacon.frost wrote:
Yes,. this helps the population...
why should we sit here and listen to this kid who doesn't understand the game is mechanically difficult? I'm doing him a favor
|
On May 23 2018 00:15 aish wrote:
chess [...] The thing is the skill caps on those games are nothing compared to mechanically difficult games.
Now that's an exceptionally stupid thing to say.
|
Strategy does matter, my mechanics are pretty fucking trash and always have been yet I get GM everytime I come back and play because people suck at playing strategically and try to play like a robot when I play very far outside the box.
|
On May 23 2018 03:18 GoSuNamhciR wrote: Strategy does matter, my mechanics are pretty fucking trash and always have been yet I get GM everytime I come back and play because people suck at playing strategically and try to play like a robot when I play very far outside the box.
The funny paradox is that I would expect a GM player to be good enough to recognize their own flaws. Whereas I wouldn't expect a diamond player to be good enough to recognize their own flaws.
Since you're GM I'm willing to bet you can pull off "probes and pylons" now lets try to find a single diamond player who can do "probes and pylons" properly.
|
I cannot fathom people honestly suggesting that the problem with SC2 is that it is too mechanics driven and not strategic enough. Brood War is on a totally different level mechanics wise and it is the longest running esport of all time.
The reason for its longevity in my opinion are related in part to how hard it is, because it makes it more exciting when you see a player who’s reaver micro is beyond anything you could ever execute. Furthermore, the difficulty of the game serves as a bit of a come back mechanic, as your army grows and you have more bases to manage it is way easier to make mistakes in control or defense.
Furthermore, battles tend to last longer and games are substantially back and forth with apparent “lead changes” occurring often throughout many matches. In SC2 as both a player and spectator my opinion it has always seemed like in many games it comes down to a single decisive battle or action resulting in an insurmountable deficit for one player. It is probably less like this now than in the past but it is still a problem.
Don’t mistake my intentions — I’m not trying to make this another in a long line of BW vs SC2 posts. I’m just using the BW example to illustrate some of the problems I see in SC2 from a spectator standpoint. It is perhaps true that making the game easier would expand the player base for a while but it does not lead to a better spectator experience. Starcraft is just inherently not a game like LoL or OW that anyone can play at an okayish feeling level. These games are supposed to be hard, and that is what makes the game so beautiful.
SC2 is already a very strategic game. It is true that you can always have better mechanics and win on the back of that, but that is precisely as it should be. With matchmaking, you play against players of similar skill in which case strategy **absolutely does matter**. The game is an RTS, not turn based; it is Starcraft, not tooth & tail. It is the way it is for a reason, and in my eyes too many concessions have already been made in the name of being casual friendly. At this point in SC2’s lifecycle, making the mechanics more forgiving and the game more strategic is absolutely not the correct route to go.
I wasn’t around in the glory days of BW, I was just a casual and I was pretty young. SC2 was the first RTS I was ever “good” at, but over time I lost interest and learned Brood War instead because I just find the insane skill ceiling and back-and-forth nature of the games to be more appealing. To be fair, BW is an accidentally perfect game in my eyes and that is an unreasonable standard to expect from any game.
My opinion is that the biggest problems in SC2 probably are: “terrible terrible damage” executed in a way that makes battles far too short, they are seemingly over before they even start; Protoss design in general is problematic (I say that as a primarily P player though I was high masters as random as well); macro mechanics skew the game and race balance and only have to exist because of the addition of MBS & automine (I know, this complaint is *so* 5 years ago); the elimination of the early game imo was a mistake; and others I can’t recall of the top of my head.
I still try to watch SC2 often but I just can’t get excited about most of the matches I see. I’m not just trying to shit on LoTV — I *want* to love it, I want to feel the passion I used to feel for the game. But I personally can’t.
I hope this post isn’t going to just pull discussion further into the weeds so to speak, but I felt compelled to say it. I apologize if this is an unhealthy contribution to the discussion, and it is a bit stream of consciousness.
|
8715 Posts
It's a bit ridiculous how helpless some people act about the mechanical difficulty of SC2. If a 10 year old child begins practicing piano for 1 hour a day, after a year she will consistently be doing more difficult maneuvers with her fingers than what a lot of SC2 tasks require. Maybe you've come to resent mechanics because you haven't improved them in so long. It's not such a big deal to put aside a little bit of time figuring out how to do these tasks and then deliberately practicing them for a while in the unit trainer so that you can do them in a real game.
But if that is such a big deal, then I guarantee there are people out there who understand the game better such that if you said "I can't do X, Y, or Z because they're too mechanically difficult" then they'd have other answers to improve your win rate. If you can't find these answers yourself, then don't go on forums saying the game doesn't reward strategy enough. You've just reached your limit.
|
On May 27 2018 03:08 NonY wrote: It's a bit ridiculous how helpless some people act about the mechanical difficulty of SC2. If a 10 year old child begins practicing piano for 1 hour a day, after a year she will consistently be doing more difficult maneuvers with her fingers than what a lot of SC2 tasks require. Maybe you've come to resent mechanics because you haven't improved them in so long. It's not such a big deal to put aside a little bit of time figuring out how to do these tasks and then deliberately practicing them for a while in the unit trainer so that you can do them in a real game.
But if that is such a big deal, then I guarantee there are people out there who understand the game better such that if you said "I can't do X, Y, or Z because they're too mechanically difficult" then they'd have other answers to improve your win rate. If you can't find these answers yourself, then don't go on forums saying the game doesn't reward strategy enough. You've just reached your limit.
Pretty much this.
In my eyes, it's almost as if there are two types of Starcraft players. The first type relishes the challenge of the game and it's mechanics, finding the unlimited skill ceiling to be part of the appeal & beauty Starcraft. The fact that you can always improve, you can always work on your mechanics, motivates them to keep playing in pursuit of becoming a better player.
The other kind seemingly finds this same aspect of the game to be an insult. "if only the mechanics were easier," they wrongly assume, "then I could actually show off my brilliant strategic mind!" Rather than work on improving by analyzing replays, voraciously consuming new information about the game, they log onto the forums and demand that the game change. Better that the game change to accommodate their lack of skill than they work to actually improve themselves.
Kinda like Nony said, being a skilled musician is hard. Should we fucking nerf the piano? Aahhhh imba world, the mechanics are too hard. I can compose amazing symphonies in my head, I'd be a virtuoso if not for these stupid mechanics.
Starcraft is beautiful in large part because it is hard. It is an RTS, but don't assume that "strategy" is more important than "real time" -- if you want strategy unfiltered by mechanical skill and amazing physical feats (more or less) then play a different game. I don't mean to be combative or hostile, but it's upsetting because this type of thinking imo hurt the development of SC2 a lot.
Brood war is hard but it was casual friendly too because of custom maps. It's a shame really, I think if WoL had come out with the (free) arcade from the get go the game could have been even more popular among players. Casual mindsets are accommodated by casual game modes, if you prefer that then don't play on the competitive ladder.
Im srsly not gatekeeping here btw, anyone can and should play Starcraft however they want. No question about that. But it's okay to acknowledge that you're just not that good at the game and you may never be able to be GM or whatever. I will never be Flash, hell I will likely never be top 2500 in US West for all I know...But that's ok -- I still love working on my mechanics and striving to be better. So If you're gold league then you're gold league, enjoy the game for what it is rather than asking that it change to accommodate your desire to be better.
SC2 is a game, and you are welcome to play it as just a game without worrying about being good. I love playing basketball and I'm fucking atrocious at it, but I don't ask that the standard hoop height be reduced accordingly. If you want to be good at SC2 (like basketball) you have to practice and work for it. As one of many examples, I once spent like 30 mins in a row just practicing my drone split in Brood War. Start-split-reset game; start-split-reset game. Or sat there against the computer, marking down time stamps to see if I'm hitting the bechmark of have a Nexus started with 3 dragoons @ ~4:10 with the 1 gate FE build I stole from a Bisu replay. Deliberate. Practice.
PS huge congrats on the new baby Nony~
|
The piano doesn't have mechanics that serve no purpose but to make playing it more difficult. The game would still have an insane skill cap if you removed things like macro mechanics and gave players the ability to customize what information they have available. (e.g. a production tab, upgrade tab, or whatever along those lines)
|
On May 27 2018 06:26 Boggyb wrote: The piano doesn't have mechanics that serve no purpose but to make playing it more difficult. The game would still have an insane skill cap if you removed things like macro mechanics and gave players the ability to customize what information they have available. (e.g. a production tab, upgrade tab, or whatever along those lines)
But what do you think this would accomplish? Like is this a discussion about what is good for the longevity of the game, what is good for maintaining a healthy competitive scene, what is good for casual players?
And adding a production tab isn't removing an unnecessary mechanic, it's adding a new interface feature that eliminates another factor that differentiates skilled players. I get it, I really do, but I don't think it will make the game better and I will probably never believe otherwise. Easier does not equal better.
As for the macro mechanics, as it stands they have already made them more forgiving (multiple injects etc) and they hardly represent ths insurmountable challenge. For example, to be a top tier Zerg you have to inject well and spread creep. you have to manage your econ and unit production. That's how you play the game. To play the trombone you have to manage your breathing, you have to know how to position the rod thingy etc. It's the nature of the beast, and we can either complain that it's not easier for us to play or practice and improve.
Also note that they added macro mechanics out of a concern that with MBS and automine removed, infinite unit selection added and other such changes there may not be enough for top tier talented players to do to differentiate themselves. They wouldn't have to exist if not for some design decisions I personally tend to disagree with, at least in implementation.
That's my opinion, and I know there is a reasonable limit. Like the video I think hotbid made years ago about the disgruntled Warcraft 2 player talking about how BW is way too easy etc. Obviously there is a line. But in SC2 I already dont send my workers to mine. I can push a single button to control my whole army. I can press a single button to select all of my warp Gates and begin producing. There is a counter for my probe count. Where does automation stop? Should my units move themselves out of fire when their health gets lower? Maybe my nexus should just produce probes automatically until it hits saturation.
What makes the game easier does not necessarily make it better, and yes it is true what makes it harder does not by necessity make it better. But to suggest SC2 is too far on the "hard" side of the spectrum to me now to me is nonsense. Imo many people think they want a "more strategic game" but they don't really -- they want the game to be easier, so they can be better, because most players with bad mechanics think they are hidden strategic masterminds
|
Also there is a nice analogy with electronic music here.
You can just lay down notes, but guess what? most people still suck at writing music, and practicing an instrument can makes you better at writing music IF you're not brainlessly playing existing songs, which is the same than practicing an 2 base All-in (except those one will goes away from what you want and you HAVE to deal with it). Some gets does both (electronic&instrument) and are good, and some does only one and are good. It all depends on the people
|
Czech Republic12115 Posts
On May 27 2018 03:08 NonY wrote: It's a bit ridiculous how helpless some people act about the mechanical difficulty of SC2. If a 10 year old child begins practicing piano for 1 hour a day, after a year she will consistently be doing more difficult maneuvers with her fingers than what a lot of SC2 tasks require. Maybe you've come to resent mechanics because you haven't improved them in so long. It's not such a big deal to put aside a little bit of time figuring out how to do these tasks and then deliberately practicing them for a while in the unit trainer so that you can do them in a real game.
But if that is such a big deal, then I guarantee there are people out there who understand the game better such that if you said "I can't do X, Y, or Z because they're too mechanically difficult" then they'd have other answers to improve your win rate. If you can't find these answers yourself, then don't go on forums saying the game doesn't reward strategy enough. You've just reached your limit. You missed the point. Some people want to play for fun, not to get better(they didn't reach their ceiling, they don't care, I know how to get better I just don't practice and focus on things I need to get better(e.g. regular supply block on 70, 140 & 190). On lower levels the mechanically better player will always won. I am diamond protoss. My Terran is trash(gold). I have no clue what I'm doing, but since my mechanics are so much better than the usual gold player(unless it's a master player who's leaving 50 games and then playing 50 games, met those) I won pretty consistently. Again, I have no clue what I'm doing. I don't follow any BO, I just build tons of rax, tons of orbitals and I try to get into the lategame where I just mule heavily and with 180 army supply I just stim a-move(with slight splitting against banes). This is what I resent. This is stupid. If someone has better knowledge of the game than I do and they don't have a chance because my "mechanics" are so much better, it's stupid in a strategy game.
FFS, I got beaten by GM who just built marines medevac against colossi storm. THINK ABOUT THIS. No matter how good my storms were, no matter how my positioning was better, their macro was so much better they just a-moved into victory. No strategy involved, pure mechanical victory. yes, they are better, no doubts there, but I find this type of games dumb.
|
On May 27 2018 06:50 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2018 03:08 NonY wrote: It's a bit ridiculous how helpless some people act about the mechanical difficulty of SC2. If a 10 year old child begins practicing piano for 1 hour a day, after a year she will consistently be doing more difficult maneuvers with her fingers than what a lot of SC2 tasks require. Maybe you've come to resent mechanics because you haven't improved them in so long. It's not such a big deal to put aside a little bit of time figuring out how to do these tasks and then deliberately practicing them for a while in the unit trainer so that you can do them in a real game.
But if that is such a big deal, then I guarantee there are people out there who understand the game better such that if you said "I can't do X, Y, or Z because they're too mechanically difficult" then they'd have other answers to improve your win rate. If you can't find these answers yourself, then don't go on forums saying the game doesn't reward strategy enough. You've just reached your limit. You missed the point. Some people want to play for fun, not to get better(they didn't reach their ceiling, they don't care, I know how to get better I just don't practice and focus on things I need to get better(e.g. regular supply block on 70, 140 & 190). On lower levels the mechanically better player will always won. I am diamond protoss. My Terran is trash(gold). I have no clue what I'm doing, but since my mechanics are so much better than the usual gold player(unless it's a master player who's leaving 50 games and then playing 50 games, met those) I won pretty consistently. Again, I have no clue what I'm doing. I don't follow any BO, I just build tons of rax, tons of orbitals and I try to get into the lategame where I just mule heavily and with 180 army supply I just stim a-move(with slight splitting against banes). This is what I resent. This is stupid. If someone has better knowledge of the game than I do and they don't have a chance because my "mechanics" are so much better, it's stupid in a strategy game. FFS, I got beaten by GM who just built marines medevac against colossi storm. THINK ABOUT THIS. No matter how good my storms were, no matter how my positioning was better, their macro was so much better they just a-moved into victory. No strategy involved, pure mechanical victory. yes, they are better, no doubts there, but I find this type of games dumb.
But that's Starcraft man. Why do you think it is somehow better that wins be determined by strategy rather than mechanical skill? It's just how the game is and in my opinion should be.
If we are playing football, and your team is being coached by Bill Belichek but is full of only highschool level players, whereas my team is coached by a fucking banana milkshake but is composed of college level players your team may have the sickest strat but you will get trounced (ignore age difference implied by college/Highschool, I just mean skill level). That's the way it bloody is, same goes for basketball, same goes for just about everything.
If you're not as good at the base fundamentals of the game, I should absolutely be able to wreck you with just zealot/dragoon because I'm better at the game.
Personally I never find my matches dumb because I can always identify a way in which it is my fault I lost, but I find that type of match soooo much less dumb than losing to a DT because my strategy didn't involve detection. That's what you're gonna get in practice, that is the end result of what you're suggesting -- build/strategy/unit comp > mechanical skill, and that may sound appealing in theory but it is so shitty in practice. Implementing a change to move the game in that direction is probably the best way to kill competitive SC2 forever.
|
On May 27 2018 06:50 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2018 03:08 NonY wrote: It's a bit ridiculous how helpless some people act about the mechanical difficulty of SC2. If a 10 year old child begins practicing piano for 1 hour a day, after a year she will consistently be doing more difficult maneuvers with her fingers than what a lot of SC2 tasks require. Maybe you've come to resent mechanics because you haven't improved them in so long. It's not such a big deal to put aside a little bit of time figuring out how to do these tasks and then deliberately practicing them for a while in the unit trainer so that you can do them in a real game.
But if that is such a big deal, then I guarantee there are people out there who understand the game better such that if you said "I can't do X, Y, or Z because they're too mechanically difficult" then they'd have other answers to improve your win rate. If you can't find these answers yourself, then don't go on forums saying the game doesn't reward strategy enough. You've just reached your limit. You missed the point. Some people want to play for fun, not to get better(they didn't reach their ceiling, they don't care, I know how to get better I just don't practice and focus on things I need to get better(e.g. regular supply block on 70, 140 & 190). On lower levels the mechanically better player will always won. I am diamond protoss. My Terran is trash(gold). I have no clue what I'm doing, but since my mechanics are so much better than the usual gold player(unless it's a master player who's leaving 50 games and then playing 50 games, met those) I won pretty consistently. Again, I have no clue what I'm doing. I don't follow any BO, I just build tons of rax, tons of orbitals and I try to get into the lategame where I just mule heavily and with 180 army supply I just stim a-move(with slight splitting against banes). This is what I resent. This is stupid. If someone has better knowledge of the game than I do and they don't have a chance because my "mechanics" are so much better, it's stupid in a strategy game. FFS, I got beaten by GM who just built marines medevac against colossi storm. THINK ABOUT THIS. No matter how good my storms were, no matter how my positioning was better, their macro was so much better they just a-moved into victory. No strategy involved, pure mechanical victory. yes, they are better, no doubts there, but I find this type of games dumb. Ahhh the old "I'm a strategical mastermind but because of how the game is designed I'm not as highly ranked as I should be" I think you're forgetting what the RT in RTS stands for.
|
My main complain in this patch is they removed raven as only viable option late game. If protoss players did really strugle vs mass raven, nerf was ok. But we should be provided some other late game option. PDD would be nice.
They did buff marauder, but so far the only use i found for it are 2 base timing attacks. And I don't really like that... I might as well cheese every game, if I am just aiming to do one finisher.
Watching most pros - like Demuslim, etc... the best advice I can get was do not go late game. And that really doesn't make game fun at all. TvP was fav matchup for me.
|
|
On May 27 2018 06:18 Immaterial wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2018 03:08 NonY wrote: It's a bit ridiculous how helpless some people act about the mechanical difficulty of SC2. If a 10 year old child begins practicing piano for 1 hour a day, after a year she will consistently be doing more difficult maneuvers with her fingers than what a lot of SC2 tasks require. Maybe you've come to resent mechanics because you haven't improved them in so long. It's not such a big deal to put aside a little bit of time figuring out how to do these tasks and then deliberately practicing them for a while in the unit trainer so that you can do them in a real game.
But if that is such a big deal, then I guarantee there are people out there who understand the game better such that if you said "I can't do X, Y, or Z because they're too mechanically difficult" then they'd have other answers to improve your win rate. If you can't find these answers yourself, then don't go on forums saying the game doesn't reward strategy enough. You've just reached your limit. Pretty much this.
Pretty much this not. Not at all.
I can only talk for myself, but when talking of mechanics, it is always in a relative way compared to strategical options to affect the game and never in an absolute way.
You can look in an absolute way at it and come to that result, this would not provide much wisdom to yourself or the world hovewer.
In an absolute point of view SC2 mechanics are just right, could be even a bit more if I was younger. I even believe SC2 mechanics are too easy to be maintained at certain levels.
However the mechanical impact feels a bit too much compared to what you can do with them in terms of strategical decision making, which is not much. Its a bit like chess with only 3-4 variations in the first 10-15 turns (not the mechanics, but the strategy).
In the relative world of evaluation mechanics, and calling them "too much", this is equivalent with claiming strategy is too few. This goes hand in hand with few comeback potential: As players you play and rank with have similar/equal mechanics as you, you can hardly make up for e.g. a disadvantage by being strategically superior.
Mechanics are even a bit to easy to maintain, as they are too easy to keep up in mechanically challenging situations. That makes it useless to try and interrupt an opponent in "creative" ways and to try to come back over that. Players of the same level as you won't get interrupted more than yourself from that and when you are in disadvantage 90%:100%, both players are mechanically capable of utilizing the full capacity of their current macro, then those 90% vs 100% macro, fully mechanically utilized by both players, is the only thing that matters, and you can be stragically superior and creative as much as you want, you wont cut it.
This is where BW is different. The higher requirement of mechanics to utilize the macro + micro potential the current situation is offering to you is even helpful to have it more easily interrupted by actions of your opponent, it is more volatile overall and especially in these situations, where you cannot build units in 10+ production buildings while microing a fight, which you easily can in SC2.
In BW you can create mechanically more difficult situations for your opponent, hence the interruption is harder (more volatile as well in general), hence it matters less who was ahead in macro or mechanics. Both players cannot mechanically use their macro/micro potential of their current situations 100% anywere, so there is alot more going which has impact on that volatility.
Didn't go too much into detail, but this is what the mechanics debate is about. SC2 ends up being decided about mechanics mostly, while having less mechanics than BW. It is less possible to overcome mechanic differences between players with strategical superior play, as all players almost all the time play at current situation 100% mechanics (micro + macro), no matter what you do to interrupt them.
|
|
|
|