Community Feedback Update - October 21

General Discussion
1 2 3 8 Next
This week’s balance update
Today, we'll be adding most of the changes we’ve been discussing to balance testing. Please check out the changes and let’s get more discussions going where needed.

We would also like to thank everyone for the great discussions regarding what to do with the Cyclone. This was one of those few times where there wasn’t a clear consensus to whether we should keep the Cyclone or revert it, but we agreed with the slight majority of players in that the current version is probably the more helpful option towards pushing Mech play.

Factory AA
One other thing we wanted to discuss regarding the Cyclone AA feedback was Mech AA. As some of you have also pointed out, the Thor is much more of a core option against air in testing. Not only did the Thor receive a buff vs. light air units, but also the armored air units that used to outrange the Thor now have equal or lower range as the Thor.

The main reason why we would like to push the Thor more so than the Cyclone as the core AA option is very simple: We believe the core Mech end game composition should consist of very powerful but less mobile units such as the Thor, Siege Tanks, BCs, etc. This is because the high mobility gameplay option is already provided well through Bio. For example, when being harassed by Mutalisks, I can stim pack and quickly chase them off. Using fast-moving cyclones to deal with them would feel very similar. In contrast, Thors battle Mutalisks in a different way: they need to be in position to really get strong damage against Mutalisks trying to fly in, which is more fitting for the Mech fantasy.

But that doesn’t mean we can’t increase the current effectiveness of the new Cyclone’s AA capabilities as long as it isn’t the main AA option throughout the whole game. We feel that there could be room here to increase its effectiveness, and we’ll start testing out some numbers as per your suggestion.
Next balance changes
Aside from the potential Cyclone AA damage changes, we would like to take a pass at Ultralisk armor and really focus on tuning of the new Tempest ability. With Ultralisk armor, we can try the popular suggestion of increasing the base armor by 1 point and reducing the armor the upgrade provides by 2 points for a slight buff to the base unit + a nerf to the overall unit after upgrades.

For the Tempest, we would like to ask you guys to help us out on testing this ability against heavy Siege Tank based compositions and Hydra/Lurker based armies.

KR feedback regarding SC2’s main goal

We’ve been seeing a lot of discussion from the KR community on two points: making the game easier, and toning down harassment so that the general pace of the game is slower.

We agree heavily with many players in our global community that SC2 is one of very few games where you are solely responsible for whether you win, or lose, and that these results are tied to the time, dedication, and skill which players put into mastering the game. The feeling of practicing and mastering a part of the game, and directly seeing my personal increase in skill, is truly unlike any other game in the world.

Our main goal for StarCraft 2 is to create the best game of its type that it can ever be, and not necessarily selling more copies of the game or increasing the playerbase. Those are also great secondary goals, but we don’t feel that we should be in a place where we start to hurt the main, most important goal of StarCraft 2.

In regards to harassment, we agree that some cases feel like it’s too much right now. We feel that we’ve taken a pass at the units that seem to have pushed this too much, such as: Adepts, Warp Prisms, and Tankivacs. Also, we’ve taken measures to strengthen defensive units such as Hydralisks (fending off early game harassment attacks) or the defensive based Mech play in general. We’re not saying we’ll hit this feedback perfectly from the start, and that’s why we would really love to encourage you guys to talk about specific changes that are needed rather than talking too much in general. For example, if the Adept specifically needs to be nerfed more in a specific way, of course now is the best time to try out that specific nerf.

Please remember that this is a group effort, and we’re all trying to make the game better by working together. Thanks as always and let’s continue working at it even though we know this isn’t easy!
10/21/2016 09:45 AMPosted by Dayvie
we would like to take a pass at Ultralisk armor and really focus on tuning of the new Tempest ability. With Ultralisk armor, we can try the popular suggestion of increasing the base armor by 1 point and reducing the armor the upgrade provides by 2 points for a slight buff to the base unit + a nerf to the overall unit after upgrades.

Thank you for addressing this, finally, that's all we wanted from you. Ultralisks shouldn't be bodied as hard as they were in HotS but shouldn't be 1A final boss units like they are now. Hopefully this works well. "Kill zerg before he gets Ultras" is a very frustrating philosophy for both Terran and Zerg. Terran doesn't want that kind of unfair pressure, and Zerg doesn't want to be all-inned all the time.

10/21/2016 09:45 AMPosted by Dayvie
In regards to harassment, we agree that some cases feel like it’s too much right now. We feel that we’ve taken a pass at the units that seem to have pushed this too much, such as: Adepts, Warp Prisms, and Tankivacs. Also, we’ve taken measures to strengthen defensive units such as Hydralisks (fending off early game harassment attacks) or the defensive based Mech play in general. We’re not saying we’ll hit this feedback perfectly from the start, and that’s why we would really love to encourage you guys to talk about specific changes that are needed rather than talking too much in general. For example, if the Adept specifically needs to be nerfed more in a specific way, of course now is the best time to try out that specific nerf.

Again, thank you for acknowledging this. I know Blizzard likes to be silent on things and "no reply doesn't mean we didn't read it" but all we really ask is that you recognize our complaints about things like worker harass.

I hope you guys will address burrow-casting fungal growth, whether you think it needs a change or not. Currently it is totally devastating, you can lose entire armies (and lots of times the game) from a burrowed infestor that was hidden. 1 fungal means the rest are basically guaranteed to land. As well, infestors are devastating worker harass with this new ability as they can sometimes get into the base undetected, and wipe 10-16 workers in a few seconds with fungal growth.
Please also address reverting marauder stealth nerf (no mroe 2x attack but solid single attack)

AND replacing Pylon overcharge with something else, such as shield battery
I can't help but feel like when people talk about harassment being too strong, they're talking about things that can outright end the game without an opportunity to respond.

Those things would include a single oracle, a missed widow mine drop, 2 adepts. Things with minimal investment and massive payoffs. For example, 2-1-1 ending the game isn't "game ending harassment" because 16 marines, 2 medivacs and stim is a considerable investment compared to a single oracle, or a single medivac and 4 widow mines.

That said, there's always a proper response, so it'll never really be an issue to those who try, either way. Just a frustrating way to lose.

On another note, it'd be pretty cool if you acknowledged the shield battery. People don't like pylons killing their units, but would probably be okay with actual static D or units doing so, buffed by a shield battery.
Adept: Gas increased from 25 to 50.

Oracle: DPS reduced.

Little more harass nerfed.
Thanks Dayvie for Ultra nerf. This is what Terran players wanted
Thank you for finally addressing our concerns with worker harass. Glad to see koreans felt the same way.

What i think would be really good for starcraft, is try to push the early/mid game skirmishes to army units fighting army units instead of just worker harass.

Right now, it feels like their units are chasing my workers, and im chasing their units with slower beefier units, or faster but weaker units.

It feels like the speed differences between units are so great sometimes, that it always end up with a mid game of chasing faster units that are trying to kill our workers.

I dont know how you can encourage players to fight units with units, maybe if some units were slower, maybe if units didnt do optimal damage versus workers ( like 2 hits to kill workers for adepts might be too optimal, etc). Im not sure and its really hard to pinpoint.

Another responsible could be the super hard counters and assymetrical balance.

Most time two armies are close to engaging, it feels really easy to tell which army would come out on top, too easy. Also, the fights often end up very 1 sided, making it too risky to take a fight before optimal armies.

If the counters were softer, against armor/light tags for example, it might be less clear which army would win, which would encourage players to take more engagements, and leave the viewers on the edge of their seat during the entire battle... Like in broodwar xD.

For the ultralisks changes, i would be very very careful. You are buffing mech, and nerfing ultralisk.

Where would ultralisk have a place in the meta game after this?
Problem with taking Thor as primary anti air is that it's not strong enough AA to justify it being primary AA with the numbers now
It's a 6 supply unit that have trouble firing together with with anti light splash that's niche against muta or low dps anti air hip only good against low number of broodlords. It trades terribly to others due to the abysmal dps it has- slightly better than a single viking..
10/21/2016 09:45 AMPosted by Dayvie
Our main goal for StarCraft 2 is to create the best game of its type that it can ever be, and not necessarily selling more copies of the game or increasing the playerbase.


This seems ridiculous to me.

If you make the game better, more people will buy it. If the game isn't getting better, fewer people will buy it.

Yeah, there are ways to pander to get more people to buy the game, but that doesn't seem to be what the community is desiring: first and foremost a game should be fun.

SC2, currently, isn't fun for a large number of people. It's not a question of "make the game easier / get more people to buy it" OR "keep the game hard, have low population".

People will play fun, hard games. SC2 is simply failing the majority of the world on the first part.
You can start to reducing harass by making pylon cannons not being able to target buildings. PPL going for mech openers against toss, this is a major problem.

And most terrans want cyclone to be an early - midgame AA cuz vs zerg or protoss, any form of air openings (i.e. mutalist/pheonix) you are forced to stay in your base and turtle till later stages.
Watching the PvX match up will be better if they keep the nerfed Tempest ground attack range.

Since BL attack range got reduced I think you should also nerf the Tempest air attack range.
10/21/2016 11:54 AMPosted by Snake
For the ultralisks changes, i would be very very careful. You are buffing mech, and nerfing ultralisk.

BL/Infestor/Viper/Queen is the answer to test map mech, not ultralisks. Ultralisks are the answer to bio. This is the conclusion Vibe came to and I'm inclined to believe him as he has hundreds of test map games played.
Can you please consider looking at Infested Terrans? This spell hasn't been looked at since WoL. Can you at least tell us what your eyes going to do with it, or at least tell us what you think of it?
10/21/2016 11:52 AMPosted by Somebody
Adept: Gas increased from 25 to 50.

Oracle: DPS reduced.

Little more harass nerfed.


Then we need to get mines not to one shot workers that only take AoE damage
10/21/2016 12:00 PMPosted by blackvegeta
10/21/2016 11:54 AMPosted by Snake
For the ultralisks changes, i would be very very careful. You are buffing mech, and nerfing ultralisk.

BL/Infestor/Viper/Queen is the answer to test map mech, not ultralisks. Ultralisks are the answer to bio. This is the conclusion Vibe came to and I'm inclined to believe him as he has hundreds of test map games played.


Yes this is probably right, but taking a unit that isn't even a part of the meta and nerfing it doesn't seem very bright. I always defended a Ultra armor nerf, but with the buffs to mech and mech likely becoming the meta in TvZ, the Ultralisk nerf is not needed.

It depends on what the meta will look like after all the changes are live, if bio is still frequently used, the Ultralisk does need a nerf, especially with all the buffs Zerg got against bio, but if Mech is the only way to play Terran the Ultralisk does not need an armor nerf, mech units already counter Ultras very efficiently, there would be absolutely no need for a nerf.
10/21/2016 11:56 AMPosted by Edowyth
10/21/2016 09:45 AMPosted by Dayvie
Our main goal for StarCraft 2 is to create the best game of its type that it can ever be, and not necessarily selling more copies of the game or increasing the playerbase.


This seems ridiculous to me.

If you make the game better, more people will buy it. If the game isn't getting better, fewer people will buy it.

Yeah, there are ways to pander to get more people to buy the game, but that doesn't seem to be what the community is desiring: first and foremost a game should be fun.

SC2, currently, isn't fun for a large number of people. It's not a question of "make the game easier / get more people to buy it" OR "keep the game hard, have low population".

People will play fun, hard games. SC2 is simply failing the majority of the world on the first part.


Sc2 IS fun, just not everybody is into RTS games. Even if they made this game the easiest game in the world to get into while retaining the skill cap, not many people would join, just because it's not their cup of tea. It gets complicated, it requires understanding beyond just learning a few sets of abilities, it's not team based, it's not what people are used to. The game will never reach WoL numbers, never ever again.

You just have to understand that and accept it.

RTS games are just not that popular by nature.
When today will the test map be updated with the new changes?
Great community feedback overall. Thank you, Dayvie.

We are saying that the game is too hard for long ago. Do you only mention it now because KR feedback said so?

Also, PLEASE, address and possibly reduce the GIMMICKS on the game like the Reaper grenade and the new Tempest ability. I think Protoss players doesn't need one more gimmicky skill to micro with. SC2 players are full of so many gimmicks LotV added.

Here's a decent thread with a lot of support from the community regarding the state of the game for the Blizzard team to read: http://us.battle.net/forums/en/sc2/topic/20749747072

10/21/2016 09:45 AMPosted by Dayvie
Our main goal for StarCraft 2 is to create the best game of its type that it can ever be, and not necessarily selling more copies of the game or increasing the playerbase. Those are also great secondary goals, but we don’t feel that we should be in a place where we start to hurt the main, most important goal of StarCraft 2.


To finish, I would think twice before saying such a thing if I were you, Dayvie. Do you realize that if there is not enough players who actually HAVE FUN AND PLAY THE GAME, it doesn't matter if the game is a legendary masterpiece or not, the game will ultimately fail. What's the point in having the perfect game that nobody have fun and play it?
Wow, thank you so much david kim and team.

it really sounds like the game is finally going in the right direction again.

i personally disagree with things like reducing game speed etc. but i think it's important to really keep an eye on strong harassment because some things are just too powerful right now.

harassment with strong damage potential should be equally hard to execute.

adepts for example are really easy to use and there's almost no difference between a weak player shading adepts into mineral lines and a pro doing it. one of the biggest issues is that the shade can get canceled at any time which forces the defender to split his forces or to guess where the shade will go through. defending adepts usually requires a lot more apm than using adepts, which is another problem. the shade cooldown is too long and the shade distance is also very long... i'd personally prefer to have a shorter shade range but a small movement speed buff for the adept as compensation.

liberators with range upgrade are another example. we dont see them that often anymore in the current mappool but on maps like dusk towers, ranged liberators were extremely easy to set up, but very hard to defend.

banshee's are a good example how harassment SHOULD be. banshee's can deal a lot of damage if the player has the skill to use them properly.

player like maru could literally kill weaker players with a banshee, because he has the skill to use them.

meanwhile a weaker player would probably lose the banshee very quickly without doing meaningful damage or getting behind at macroing because of a lack of apm and multitasking abilities.

(unfortunately banshees are really weak in the current meta, but you get the idea^^)
Cyclone: In my opinion the unit is too strong early and too weak later in the game.Increasing his Hp,while nerfing a bit its vs ground post upgrade damage could be a decent way to go IMHO
Ultralisk: So hyped about this change,finally.
Tempest: The new ability seems more balanced than the last one,I'll try it for sure.
Last note,for the first time Koreans agree with us in something:give us less workerharassment !

P.s:Look at the reaper granade,TvT would be way better without it

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum