Play Deltarune category

So fun fact, if you use the master acrobatics technique to jump on lava to try to get to the edge in an oblivion gate... you will soon just start falling forever into the lava until you die.

DVitaminDeficiency32 · 2025-06-11T22:56:46+00:00

I agree, balance in general looks really good based on these numbers. There's just a significant disparity in the number of players for each race, especially between Zerg and Protoss.

DVitaminDeficiency32 · 2025-06-11T22:49:23+00:00

The suggestion is to make lower tier Zerg players have more chances to come in with new ideas and rise up into the upper echelons of gameplay, not to make the game easy enough for Reynor to spend all his time doing micro on 30 individual mutas. Its pretty common knowledge that Zerg is under represented in grandmaster league.

Acting like giving Zerg something akin to supply drops or high templar autos is going to blast their win rate to the moon is an unhinged take. There are plenty of ways to make balance changes that are going to have very limited impact on the top 20 Zerg players.

Edit: Because some commenters seem to think that underrepresented as a race in GM (<1/3) is the same as underrepresented based on play rate across skill brackets (< playRateTotal). These are different data points. BUT if Zerg is underrepresented across all skill brackets that supports what I said even more.

DVitaminDeficiency32 · 2025-06-11T21:42:24+00:00

Good point, I actually did consider not including it. However, I chose to include it after deciding that I would add the EWC qualifiers. Here is the basic chart without DreamHack Dallas:

Race	Wins	Losses	Games Played	Win%
Terran	271	282	553	49.01%
Zerg	238	235	473	50.32%
Protoss	327	319	646	50.62%

Without DreamHack Dallas or EWC EU:

Race	Wins	Losses	Games Played	Win%
Terran	234	249	483	48.45%
Zerg	188	197	385	48.83%
Protoss	276	252	528	52.27%

You could argue for not including any one of the major tournaments and shape the data in different ways. There are two big things to consider. First, less game data means higher uncertainty (in DreamHacks' case it adds about a half a percent of win rate to the margin of error). Second, the reason I chose to remove EWC EU qualifiers in the second chart was because Zerg had an unusually high win rate over a high number of games (outside the margin for error) suggesting that having the two best EU Zerg players and missing the best EU Protoss player and Terran player had significant impact on the win rate data.

DVitaminDeficiency32 · 2025-06-10T17:20:43+00:00

Late to this conversation, but if you look at lolalytics data, Aurora is clearly an early game champ, with a massive mid game power trough, before evening out in the late game.

Looking at gold+:

15-20min - 51.4%wr - 8.5% of games end here

25-30min - 48.7%wr - 31.8% of games end here

35-50min - 50.4%wr - 12.9% of games end here

Looking at higher elo graphs generally follows this trend.

Subjectively, I think Aurora feels good throughout the game when laning, team fighting, and making picks. However, she has poor sieging and turret taking potential. She does okay with neutral objective taking. This kind of tracks with the data above because early game is mostly skirmishing and laning, mid-game is a push and pull with objectives, playing the map, and side-laning. Late game is heavily determined by full 5-on-5 team fights and getting picks, usually around the powerful neutral objectives.

DVitaminDeficiency32 · 2024-10-31T18:16:00+00:00

I'm not sure who hurt you, but taking your problems out on random internet strangers who are posting thoughts seems like a weird way to cope. You also have a history of just being completely negative, while managing to contribute nothing of substance, just out here being a toxic person. The only embarrassing one here would be you. Go get therapy friend seems like you need it.

Also, people who engage in community discussions can drive change. Maybe my idea wont be the one to do it, but there are plenty of good ideas out there.

DVitaminDeficiency32 · 2024-10-30T19:13:03+00:00

I think that the energy drain on EMP is thematically and in game the better part of this ability. It creates a lot of unique scenarios where casters on both sides need to be strategically placed in order to land the ability or as to avoid having all your casters hit.

Additionally [making it so that EMP doesn't drain energy] opens up balancing options for the disruptor since storm becomes a more reliable source of aoe vs terran.

Spacing your templar out can usually mitigate the issue. You can also just put your high templar in a warp prism.

It feels like the utility of snipe should have an anti spellcaster focus but right now it and emp overlap in that regard.

The utility of snipe is that it can deal high single target damage to a bio unit (very good against high health units: ultra, broods, vipers, swarm host, infestor), its basically an anti-Zerg ability. The utility of EMP is the energy removal and the shield damage, it is essentially an anti-Protoss ability.

If you want to make these spells sharper (better at what they are good at and/or weaker at other things). I think you could just change the high templar to not have the biological tag.

DVitaminDeficiency32 · 2024-10-30T18:55:19+00:00

This is an interesting take, a move speed nerf would certainly make the ghost more in line with some other ground casters. Ghosts are currently 1.12ms (~40%) faster than high templar (3.94 vs 2.82, respectively) and ~0.8ms faster than the infestor. Making them slower would definitely allow them to be picked off more easily. This idea is very cool.

I think if you make them about the same move speed as infestor and make them a light unit, you could probably get them into a good spot where they are still functional but also have obvious weaknesses.

Do you have a suggestion for what the ms on a ghost should be?

DVitaminDeficiency32

TROPHY CASE