qxc Profile Blog Joined May 2009 United States 550 Posts #1



Blizzard's changes are in quotes. My comments are below. Before I go into the changes one by one, the most important thing to see here is that Blizzard is making big changes. Their philosophy as it relates to Starcraft is to do a lot of tweaks quickly and iterate rapidly during beta. When release hits they become much more conservative, much to the dismay of the community at times (broodlord/infestor + swarmhost + deathballs). Perhaps the most exciting part of the beta is that the game will be fresh every month or so as big balance patches get pushed out. Virtually all of the problematic units got addressed in some way for either being too strong or too weak. Right now, the two most obvious units that will need further attention are the cyclone (for being too versatile) and the colossus (for being too weak).



Gameplay Changes. Taken from: http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/18792769/ Blizzard's changes are in quotes. My comments are below. Before I go into the changes one by one, the most important thing to see here is that Blizzard is making big changes. Their philosophy as it relates to Starcraft is to do a lot of tweaks quickly and iterate rapidly during beta. When release hits they become much more conservative, much to the dismay of the community at times (broodlord/infestor + swarmhost + deathballs). Perhaps the most exciting part of the beta is that the game will be fresh every month or so as big balance patches get pushed out. Virtually all of the problematic units got addressed in some way for either being too strong or too weak. Right now, the two most obvious units that will need further attention are the cyclone (for being too versatile) and the colossus (for being too weak). Sorry guys. We just wanted to share every detail as soon as we can, so this part came across a bit confusing. Just to clarify a bit more:

We've tried so many various units and buildings, but it's looking like the Terran flying unit is the most solid option.

We're pretty sure that we'll go with the new Starport unit.

It will be a AA unit against masses of air units. It will have a more limited use vs. ground for when there are no air targets remaining.

What types of damage it will do, and how it'll interact with ground are things we're exploring at the moment.

We'll definitely keep everyone posted as we know more.

The above quote is taken from the reddit thread where Dkim followed up:



An anti air unit for Terran with splash damage is an odd choice as Terran rarely has trouble with a large number of air units except vs. zerg and even then it's mostly an issue when playing mech. Depending on this unit's implementation, it may mostly see use as an anti-muta unit in TvZ and not much elsewhere. Without additional information I can't say much more.



The above quote is taken from the reddit thread where Dkim followed up: http://www.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/3420ez/legacy_of_the_void_beta_balance_update_preview/ An anti air unit for Terran with splash damage is an odd choice as Terran rarely has trouble with a large number of air units except vs. zerg and even then it's mostly an issue when playing mech. Depending on this unit's implementation, it may mostly see use as an anti-muta unit in TvZ and not much elsewhere. Without additional information I can't say much more. Reaper

New grenade ability

This activated-ability will allow Reapers to launch a grenade that deals damage and knocks units in that area back. What we’re hoping for on this front is not necessarily to make Reapers a must have in every combat situation, but something that would allow micro with and against the Reaper to be more interesting early on, as well as something that could be a combat bonus in some situations.



It's no secret that reapers have long needed some love past the early game. While one of, if not the single strongest unit in the first few minutes of the game, the reaper quickly falls off and is never bought again. Virtually every other unit available early game also has mid/late game upgrades so that its effectiveness stays around with the reaper being the notable exception. To offset this mid/late game deficit, I'm hoping that the grenade is an upgrade off the barracks tech lab with some serious power so that it brings the reaper back as a viable unit past the very early game.



It's no secret that reapers have long needed some love past the early game. While one of, if not the single strongest unit in the first few minutes of the game, the reaper quickly falls off and is never bought again. Virtually every other unit available early game also has mid/late game upgrades so that its effectiveness stays around with the reaper being the notable exception. To offset this mid/late game deficit, I'm hoping that the grenade is an upgrade off the barracks tech lab with some serious power so that it brings the reaper back as a viable unit past the very early game. Minerals

Amounts changed from 100%/50% to 100%/60%

We discussed this a bit earlier this week and we feel that the pressure to expand might be too great in its current state. Our goal for Legacy of the Void is still to encourage more aggressive expansions, but we’d like to tune this a little bit in hopes of finding to the correct place.



This change feels nice, although I'm not concerned one way or another. I enjoyed the previous iteration of mineral patches. The game felt fast and right. A number of people have been advocating for the 'double harvester' model popularized on TL by zeromus (available here:



This change feels nice, although I'm not concerned one way or another. I enjoyed the previous iteration of mineral patches. The game felt fast and right. A number of people have been advocating for the 'double harvester' model popularized on TL by zeromus (available here: www.teamliquid.net/forum/legacy-of-the-void/482775-a-treatise-on-the-economy-of-scii) and will criticize Blizzard for not implementing that model. This is a long beta and there's plenty of time to test other forms of economies. We've already seen that Blizzard is paying attention and is more willing to try things out in this time, but the whole DH idea wasn't noticed that long ago. We'll have to see if Blizz thinks it's an idea worth testing on the servers. Protoss

Warp-in duration reverted to Heart of the Swarm.

Our goals on this front were to weaken Protoss Warpgate all-ins and increase strategic decision making for where to use each warp in. The resource changes look to already be getting us into a good spot for the all-in case. Focusing on strategic use however, it currently feels too punishing for the Protoss. We’re finding that you’ll always want to pick the safer warp-in spot for your units. In changing this, we’ll create more interesting decisions for the other player on whether or not to go for the vulnerable units that are warping in, or to continue battling the units already on the field. Therefore, we’d like to see how this works out with just the increased damage and the warp-in time reverted back to its original value.



Warp-in feels like garbage in LoTV. In HoTS, warp-in felt like a middle finger to your opponent. You got a pylon in their base, on top of their mineral line, in their laundry room, etc and you just warped in 20 zealots and there wasn't much they could do unless they already had a significant amount of units there. Blizzard obviously identified this as an issue and pushed a bunch of nerfs through to warp-in (extended duration and double damage during warp-in time). Unfortunately, warp-gate suddenly felt like a floppy pool noodle and lost almost all of its versatility for combat-oriented warp-ins. Keeping the damage increase while reverting the duration is a good compromise to give the ability some of its old versatility while making it less oppressive.



Warp-in feels like garbage in LoTV. In HoTS, warp-in felt like a middle finger to your opponent. You got a pylon in their base, on top of their mineral line, in their laundry room, etc and you just warped in 20 zealots and there wasn't much they could do unless they already had a significant amount of units there. Blizzard obviously identified this as an issue and pushed a bunch of nerfs through to warp-in (extended duration and double damage during warp-in time). Unfortunately, warp-gate suddenly felt like a floppy pool noodle and lost almost all of its versatility for combat-oriented warp-ins. Keeping the damage increase while reverting the duration is a good compromise to give the ability some of its old versatility while making it less oppressive. Adept

Adept’s weapon’s damage point changed from .4 to default (0.167)

We heard your feedback in that the Adept feels clunky to use, so we made some tweaks in this area.



This basically means the adept can move and shoot a bit more fluidly than before. For anyone who's played the beta and tried using the adept, you know this is a good change. The adept had worse last hitting potential than crystal maiden, and that's saying a lot.





This basically means the adept can move and shoot a bit more fluidly than before. For anyone who's played the beta and tried using the adept, you know this is a good change. The adept had worse last hitting potential than crystal maiden, and that's saying a lot. Cyclone

Can no longer target air.

New upgrade: allows Cyclones to target air (fusion core requirement, researched from factory tech lab). 100/100 cost.

The Cyclone is currently too good at stopping early game harassment. This is the opposite of what we want in Legacy of the Void, as we want to see more harassment play happening on both sides. The idea here is to still have Cyclones as an option early on, but not so all-around to the point that most harassment openings can be prevented just by opening Cyclones. In the late game, when the upgrade is researched, we believe players’ bases would be spread out so much that even though the Cyclones themselves become well-rounded options, opponents fighting against them will have numerous harassment options and can more readily find vulnerable positions.



This is an interesting take on the cyclone. The biggest issue with the cyclone right now is that its weaknesses seem to be pretty marginal compared to the number of situations in which it excels. By removing the air portion of the game for the first significant chunk of time, it opens it up quite a bit. This may be enough, but it may also just mean that now everyone is forced to open air vs terran since it's the only thing that really deals with cyclones early on. More obvious changes to me would be a reduction in movement speed and/or health.



This is an interesting take on the cyclone. The biggest issue with the cyclone right now is that its weaknesses seem to be pretty marginal compared to the number of situations in which it excels. By removing the air portion of the game for the first significant chunk of time, it opens it up quite a bit. This may be enough, but it may also just mean that now everyone is forced to open air vs terran since it's the only thing that really deals with cyclones early on. More obvious changes to me would be a reduction in movement speed and/or health. Ravager

Weapon period changed from 0.8 to 1.6

Weapon range reduced from 6 to 4

There looks to be some Ravager early game all-ins that are very difficult to stop. While we don’t know with 100% certainty that this is actually a problem, we decided to tone down the Ravager anyway so that we can see more units being used on the Zerg side. We have many more strategies and units that need to be tested and hope this change brings these into play. We chose these specific changes to create a clear distinction between Ravagers and Roaches. In short, Roaches will be better units for cost efficiency, whereas Ravagers are meant to be built in strategic numbers when their ability can prove useful.





You know the stats of a unit are really off when they're literally reducing its damage output by 1/2 and significantly reducing its range. These changes may render the ravager as a more utility based unit rather than a super powerhouse of damage which seems all around a good thing. The ravager, like the cyclone, seemed to be too strong in too many situations.



You know the stats of a unit are really off when they're literally reducing its damage output by 1/2 and significantly reducing its range. These changes may render the ravager as a more utility based unit rather than a super powerhouse of damage which seems all around a good thing. The ravager, like the cyclone, seemed to be too strong in too many situations. Swarm Host

Cost changed to 200/100/3

No longer requires to upgrade for flying locusts (flying locusts are enabled from the start)

Locust health down from 65 to 50

Swarm hosts can burrow move at 2 speed

We also talked about Swarm Host changes earlier this week. With the Swarm Host, we’d like to explore getting to a good place sooner than with most unit changes in Void. The main reason is that HotS could potentially use a different design of the Swarm Host. We’d like to use the beta as a rough testing ground to see how the unit can turn out in both games potentially. Our goal here was to do the cost/supply cost changes to make Swarm Hosts more accessible. Locust health has also been reduced so that the mass Swarm Host case isn’t so good, and the Swarm Host burrow move change should help them be more effective at harassment.



There are too many changes here to really predict how it's going to work but they're all pretty exciting ones. The cost reduction means that swarm hosts won't be "the tech" that zerg goes for and can instead supplement other compositions. The supply reduction is nice in allowing z's other army to be a bit larger and the removal of locusts as an upgrade means that swarmhosts are going to be useful right out of the box. It's hard to tell what burrow movement will do here, but I'm hoping for some James Bond-esque plays. The reduced locust health also means that swarm hosts will have even less luck actually fighting real units, which may be okay but it's hard to tell. Losing 15 hitpoints from 65 is a big change and the effectiveness of the unit will go drastically whenever it's actually fighting units. Expect this swarm host to be more useful in hitting the soft unprotected areas of an opponent's base rather than trying to trade head on as we saw in the past.





There are too many changes here to really predict how it's going to work but they're all pretty exciting ones. The cost reduction means that swarm hosts won't be "the tech" that zerg goes for and can instead supplement other compositions. The supply reduction is nice in allowing z's other army to be a bit larger and the removal of locusts as an upgrade means that swarmhosts are going to be useful right out of the box. It's hard to tell what burrow movement will do here, but I'm hoping for some James Bond-esque plays. The reduced locust health also means that swarm hosts will have even less luck actually fighting real units, which may be okay but it's hard to tell. Losing 15 hitpoints from 65 is a big change and the effectiveness of the unit will go drastically whenever it's actually fighting units. Expect this swarm host to be more useful in hitting the soft unprotected areas of an opponent's base rather than trying to trade head on as we saw in the past. Progamer Designer of Aeon's End