Suggestion on BW balance patch

General Discussion
Hi I'm a huge fan of starcraft from Korea, and I've been playing&watching starcraft for almost 10 years.
After the starcraft:remastered was released, became fascinated with this game once again, I enjoy watching pro-level games on Afreeca TV.
Not only ASL games, there are also plenty of pro-level games held everyday(called "sponsored match").
Every single match is recorded in this site(http://sponbbang.com/), and the record provides meaningful statistics on BW games.
What I want to say in this post is that "Terran's winning rate against other races is too high, so Terran needs to be nerfed".
You can check that Terran is recording winning rate of 57.5% against other races in last two months.
This is not just my own opinion, but it's already prevalent in most of Korean starcraft communities(althought some of terran players don't agree)
One can argue that high winning rate of Terran is due to some of prominent players such as Flash and Last, but excluding their record gives almost same result.
I want to hear opinions of NA communities and Blizzard starcraft teams.

Thank you for reading my post!
02/24/2018 07:04 PMPosted by dh7401
Hi I'm a huge fan of starcraft from Korea, and I've been playing&watching starcraft for almost 10 years.
After the starcraft:remastered was released, became fascinated with this game once again, I enjoy watching pro-level games on Afreeca TV.
Not only ASL games, there are also plenty of pro-level games held everyday(called "sponsored match").
Every single match is recorded in this site(http://sponbbang.com/), and the record provides meaningful statistics on BW games.
What I want to say in this post is that "Terran's winning rate against other races is too high, so Terran needs to be nerfed".
You can check that Terran is recording winning rate of 57.5% against other races in last two months.
This is not just my own opinion, but it's already prevalent in most of Korean starcraft communities(althought some of terran players don't agree)
One can argue that high winning rate of Terran is due to some of prominent players such as Flash and Last, but excluding their record gives almost same result.
I want to hear opinions of NA communities and Blizzard starcraft teams.

Thank you for reading my post!


Terran is favored at high level but it is the hardest race to master. The learning curve is very steep and its hard. Protoss has the easiest learning curve and low ceiling (hence why they are pretty good at 1500-2600/2700) Zerg is more balanced. It's a tradeoff. Are you willing to endure all the frustrations that come with playing terran and master it and enjoy the security and advantages that come with playing terran OR are you just satisfied with low ceiling limit and play protoss because your goal is just 2400 MMR
That's always a hot topic, leading to countless discussions and fights over the years.

I think there is no one, right answer in this case - long time ago community decided to stay with the balance of the game as it is, pushing the balance factor to the hands of map makers. If you ask me, there was a time, where the dominance (yeah, I know, that was a long time ago) was in favor of Zerg (July, sAvior and Jaedong) and Protoss players (Bisu and Stork), but probably Terran players can punish mistakes of enemies more than other races (vulture+mines as example).

[Btw, here's the old Kespa ranking: http://liquipedia.net/starcraft/KeSPA_Ranking and link to Six Dragons background in the case, that other readers are not aware of this part of SC period: http://liquipedia.net/starcraft/Six_Dragons ]

Usually, the SC2 is given as example of toying with the game balance - even after many years after balancing the system, there is no clear answer, is it good enough or not - and as we can see, a certain part of SC2 community have a habit of forcing devs to implement some kind of balance patches, which in many cases bringing even more chaos. Dunno what is the current state, but still keep seeing changes even now, many years after last expansion release.

I hope that my personal opinion will not lead to another war, but I think that SC balance seems to be just too well established over the years, to even try to change small things (which was discussed during SCR development with community and current pro players).

Cheers!
Just as a side note: people may despise SC2 and that's fine, but the frequent changes aren't because anyone expects to find an "ideal balance" at the end. There is no end. As an example, if SC1 was run like SC2, changes would be made to bring underused units to the scene, for the sake of variety, even if balance was reasonable at that point.

Now on topic, SC1 community seems to have a different opinion, disliking the idea of changes, and some of the arguments (even if, in my opinion, its not a matter of arguments but of preference), are pretty sound. For instance, if changes were to be made, and balance shifts, who's to say that in the end we'll be in a better situation than now. What if terran gets nerfed too hard? And how do you know, if that's the case, that it isnt a matter of terrans relearning the game?
I'd like to say that Terran at the highest level is probably the best race to play. Ranged units are good stuff and 3-3 is OP but the game is better like it is. Terrans have problems in many maps and in many situations. Nerfing terran would cause a great damage since (in my opinion) is the hardest race to master.
Btw, ASL5 qualifiers have just finished, and the race distribution in upcoming season is going to be: 11 Protosses, 9 Zergs, and 8 Terrans :-)

More info: http://liquipedia.net/starcraft/Afreeca_Starleague_Season_5
imo terran is a little bit easier to play in general which is fine. tanks don't need to be micro'd too much and are all about positioning, the same with vultures (except they require more control and better micro), and mines can punish mistakes easier. they might have a higher rate of wins because of a lot of new players coming into the fold and not understanding how each race works (they are different from sc2).

as someone who read the game manual when I had the original battle chest, the devs and even the manuals suggest that terran should be a race that a new player picks. they were pretty much designed to allow more turtle play while still remaining flexible. A protoss or a zerg who knows what they're doing still have an upper hand imo.

instead of jumping to conclusions I think we should look into how certain players actually win their games than the wins themselves. as a protoss player I still think it's balanced.
02/26/2018 02:24 PMPosted by Reichtoffen
imo terran is a little bit easier to play in general which is fine. tanks don't need to be micro'd too much and are all about positioning, the same with vultures (except they require more control and better micro), and mines can punish mistakes easier. they might have a higher rate of wins because of a lot of new players coming into the fold and not understanding how each race works (they are different from sc2).

as someone who read the game manual when I had the original battle chest, the devs and even the manuals suggest that terran should be a race that a new player picks. they were pretty much designed to allow more turtle play while still remaining flexible. A protoss or a zerg who knows what they're doing still have an upper hand imo.

instead of jumping to conclusions I think we should look into how certain players actually win their games than the wins themselves. as a protoss player I still think it's balanced.


such nonsense right here

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum