There's a definitive difference between high level players, and those who simply think they are high level. I've seen onyx/champion level players say things like "Forge doesn't need eco nerfs, Sentienels are fine, Inferno is fine, jackrabbits are fine." Should I automatically agree with them because of an emblem next to their name? I don't think so. Most of the time they consider it fine because it's what they use to win. It wasn't too long ago I saw a thread the opposite of this one, that demanded the Kodiak sentinels be nerfed, posted by yet another champion ranked player. I believe it was from one of the iZ Here guys. So who should I side with on that one?
I couldn't disagree more. I think you knocked it out of the park.
Balance changes aren't solely based on high level play. You only make up like 1% of the community. Get that through your head.
Its coming from kids who got beat by people trolling them with anders. Not because anders was good but because the person using her was just a superior player and now because of that shes getting nerfed yet again.
Lol wow they ruined anders but didn't even touch kinsano.this
flame hog drop wasn't touched?what?
flame hogs will beat gauss how is that fair?
Heat of battle how is that fair to any other unsc?
how does one counter heat of battle? oh wait you don't.
Also LOL only a handful of anders players that 'cheese' LOL how is a Kodiak defense cheese. cheese is when you eradicate or inferno a main base and leave the base stripped.
it makes me wonder if shipmaster will still be able to teleport an army into his turrets, and the turrets will still single handedly destroy an army. probably will because that's not cheese at all.
i am mad as well, i loved playing anders defensively. the fact that almost no one played anders defensively is complete -Yoink-. where is this cheese -Yoink- coming from
Even if high level players made up 1% of the community (that number must be a lot higher) they still provide the most accurate feedback due to the sole reason that THEY UNDERSTAND the game. We talked about this in another thread, there's just no other way to balance the game, data + high level feedback are the driving tools to balance the game out.
I'm pretty sure 1% is a hyperbole, and even if that was the case the 1% should have the priority. Not to please high level players but to balance the game out.
Now, I know people in here are generally mad at Yoda, I know he can be pretty obnoxious, but that his personality. I think he's been pretty reasonable all along and providing proof or at least evidence that suggests Anders is dead.
There are many people in this thread talking all sorts of none sense without anything to back them out other than mentioning how Yoda is being overly dramatic.
Casual players can have an understanding of the game as well. Not ever 'casual' is someone who just picked up the game yesterday. I would consider myself a casual simply because I'm an old man now pushing 30 and I don't have the time to dedicate to the competitive scene. But I still play nearly every day since launch and know the ins and out of just about every leader.
I'd personally value the opinion of someone who has experience under their belt of every leader than that of someone who just mains whatever the FOTM happens to be at the time because it's the easiest way to grind MMR. But maybe that's just my bias, apparently everyone has one according to this thread.
Can you point me out to posts claiming "Forge doesn't need eco nerfs, Sentienels are fine, Inferno is fine, jackrabbits are fine." because I read this forum every day and I swear I've not seen those around. I would understand that if it was just the first week after a patch, I even once thought Locust were balanced. I haven't lost yet any game against Locust Spam, but they've helped me win a lot of games and I see them being spammed more often than any other unit, so something must be wrong, so I changed my mind, but again, the meta was shifting.
The meta can be quite funny, because before Flayerr started spamming Locusts I saw no one doing it, and if you think about it they became more dominant AFTER they were nerfed.
Now regarding the Kodiak change. I was actually in favor of a nerf to the sentinels spawned by Kodiaks (I even made a rant thread about it) however, I don't think that nerfing the Kodiak is particularly a good approach. And I think the issue is that Ander's kodiaks were pretty much the last tool she had to defend herself, take that away and she's at a worst position. She got 2 nerfs and 2 buffs. But the buffs don't exactly pay off for the nerfs in my opinion.
Some people might claim Anders Kodiaks were fine because that's all she has left, and others might claim they're ridiculous. If high level players make these two claims it is easy to figure out who is right. My guess? both are RIGHT! you can adjust the leader in ways that can address both sides of the discussion.
I do agree with you on appreciating people that play every leader. Sadly not everyone does it. I don't do it, I've played Decimus and Atriox mainly, so I provide feedback regarding those two and feedback on other leaders from a defending point of view, which is also important.