PTR Feedback and General Thoughts from a Long-Time Player

Background

I've been playing StarCraft II since Wings of Liberty, with most of my experience coming from WoL and Heart of the Swarm. My peak rank during HotS was around Top 150. In Legacy of the Void, my peak MMRs were approximately:

• Zerg: 4.8k
• Protoss: 4.3k
• Terran: 4.3k

Overall, I have roughly 10,000 games from the pre-12-worker era and around 1,000 games in LotV.

I've played around 20–30 PTR games as Zerg, and I've also discussed the patch extensively with a highly ranked Protoss player whose peak was around Top 120 in LotV. He has played roughly 10–20 PTR games.

These are some of our thoughts regarding the PTR and a few alternative ideas that may better align with the goals of recent patches.

General Thoughts

One important consideration is how infrequently StarCraft II receives balance updates. Historically, patches arrive anywhere from once per year to once every two years.

If Blizzard intends to patch the game more frequently moving forward, some of these concerns may become less relevant. However, if major patches remain rare, I believe caution should be exercised when implementing large-scale systemic changes.

Worker Reduction (12 → 8)

The idea behind reducing the starting worker count appears to be encouraging more early-game and mid-game strategic diversity.

While I believe this comes from a good place, I don't think it will provide a meaningful long-term solution to the current feeling of "staleness" in SC2. Instead, I suspect it will create a short-term shake-up that eventually settles back into familiar patterns.

From my experience, 8 workers appears to hit a sweet spot where Terran and Protoss can largely continue with their standard openings while still having access to early defensive tools such as Reapers and Adepts in time to shut down most Zerg aggression.
post regarding zerg earlygame

A Problem with Comparing This to WoL/Hots

One aspect I don't think has been fully considered is that many of the defensive tools available today either didn't exist in Wings of Liberty or were significantly delayed.

For example:

• Siege Tanks required an upgrade before being available.
• Shield Batteries didn't exist.
• Cyclones didn't exist.
• Oracles didn't exist.
• Swarmhosts was good
• Infestors had infested Terrans

Many of these units and mechanics are precisely why early Zerg aggression is far less effective today than it was during the 6-worker era. As a result, reducing worker counts alone does not recreate the strategic environment of early SC2.

Suggested Alternative

I would strongly recommend not implementing worker-count reduction and mineral changes simultaneously.

Instead:

1. Start with the mineral and gas changes.
2. Evaluate how the game develops.
3. If additional early-game interaction is still desired, then experiment with reducing the worker count.

Making both changes at once creates too many variables and makes it difficult to determine which changes are responsible for any resulting gameplay improvements—or problems.

Gateway / Warp Gate Changes

I recently read a Reddit post discussing the current Gateway and Warp Gate situation, and it articulated many of the same concerns I've had regarding Protoss design.

Post regarding gateways

The core issue is that Warp Gate is fundamentally flawed from a game design perspective. However, removing or heavily altering it also risks damaging what many Protoss players view as a core part of the race's identity.

This should not be dismissed lightly.

We've already seen many Zerg players leave over the years due to dissatisfaction with the direction of the race. I would hate to see the same happen to Protoss.

Alternative Idea: Gateway Efficiency Upgrade

Add a Cybernetics Core upgrade:

Gateway Efficiency (50/50 or 100/100)

This upgrade would reduce Gateway production times to the values currently proposed on the PTR:

Unit	Current Gateway	Efficient Gateway
Zealot	28s	18s
Adept	28s	18s
Stalker	28s	18s
Sentry	24s	16s
High Templar	40s	26s
Dark Templar	40s	26s

(Numbers can obviously be adjusted.)

This would allow Gateway-based play to remain viable without immediately replacing Warp Gate entirely.

Walling Issues

One practical problem with moving away from Warp Gates is that Protoss walls become significantly more awkward.

With Warp Gates, units can be warped directly into position. With Gateways, players would constantly need to manually move units in and out of wall-offs.

Possible Solution: Translucent Pylon Upgrade

Allow individual pylons to receive an upgrade:

• Costs ~50 minerals (or free), it will remove pylons powerfield permanently regardless if its in its translucent state or its solid state.
• Removes the pylon's power field.
• Allows units to pass through the pylon.
• Cannot activate if a unit is standing inside the pylon footprint.

Essentially, it would function similarly to a lowered Supply Depot.

Warp Gate as a Strategic Choice

Move Warp Gate research to the Twilight Council.

Cost: 50/50 or 100/100.

When transformed into Warp Gates:

• Players lose the benefits of Gateway Efficiency.
• Warp Gates function similarly to the current live version.

This creates meaningful tradeoffs:

Gateways

• Better sustained production.
• Stronger macro option.

Warp Gates

• Better reinforcement.
• Better mobility.
• Easier defensive positioning.

This is only one possible direction, but I believe preserving both styles would better maintain Protoss identity.

Ghost, High Templar, and Infestor Changes

Overall, I like the direction of reducing the power of spellcasters acting as complete armies by themselves.

Spellcasters should support armies rather than replace them.

Ghost

I both like and dislike the Ghost changes.

Current PTR changes:

• Supply: 2 → 3
• HP: 125 → 100
• Gains Light tag
• Attack range: 6 → 7
• Snipe energy: 50 → 75
• Snipe becomes uninterruptible

TvP

In TvP, Ghosts are primarily valued for EMP. Most Terran armies only require a handful of Ghosts.

Increasing their supply by 50% feels like a blunt nerf that doesn't really address the core issues of the matchup.

The late-game problems in TvP seem more related to the interaction between:

• Liberators
• Vikings
• Siege Tanks
• ghost

These units force Protoss into large Stalker counts, and Stalkers remain inefficient against much of the Terran army.

TvZ

In TvZ, however, large Ghost counts become common.

The issue occurs once Terran reaches:

• 8+ Orbitals
• ~20 SCVs
• Massive army supply

At that stage, Ghosts, Thors, Hellbats, Tanks, and Liberators already create an extremely difficult late-game composition for Zerg.

Giving Ghosts more range while making Snipe uninterruptible may actually make engagements even harder despite the HP reduction.

Suggested Ghost Alternative

• Remain at 2 supply
• HP reduced to 100
• Retain Light tag
• Range remains 6
• Attack damage remains 20
• Snipe costs 50 energy
• Snipe is interruptible by damage
• Snipe damage remains 130 + 40

This preserves their role while ensuring there is actual risk associated with using them.

High Templar

I think the High Templar changes are good overall.

The unit remains effective against:

• Zerglings
• Banelings
• Roaches
• Hydralisks

While receiving slight nerfs against units it historically has been too good against:

• Corruptors
• Brood Lords
• Lurkers

Suggested Change

None.

The current PTR version seems fine.

Infestor

I like the projectile changes.

My general opinion is that either projectile attacks should exist broadly across the game, or not at all. However, if they're going to exist, consistency is probably preferable.

I don't have strong opinions yet.

Suggested Change

No proposal currently.

I'd like to see more high-level games before forming a stronger opinion.

Mineral and Gas Changes

No concerns.

I actually think these changes alone could do a lot to revitalize mid-game aggression and strategic diversity.

Additional Zerg Changes I'd Like to See

Early Anti-Air Problem

One issue that the PTR does not address is Zerg's inability to pressure air-based openings.

Queens are currently the only realistic anti-air option in the early game.

As a result:

• Oracles are difficult to pressure.
• Banshees are difficult to pressure.
• Zerg aggression often requires dedicated Queen walks or Queen drops.

This removes a lot of strategic variety.

Suggested Solution: Hatchery-Tech Hydralisk Den

• Hydralisk Den available at Hatchery tech.
• Hydralisk range reduced from 6 → 4.
• Grooved Spines moved to Lair and grants +2 range.
• Final Hydralisk remains unchanged.

This gives Zerg a real anti-air option without dramatically altering late-game balance.

Queen Changes

I believe Queens are too effective as all-purpose units, particularly against Terran.

Similar to my views on Ghosts, I dislike units that can handle too many situations independently.

Queens should remain defensive tools, but should require support from actual combat units.

Suggested Changes

• Reduce anti-ground damage.
• Reduce anti-air damage.
• Increase armor by +1.

This keeps Queens durable while encouraging them to work alongside:

• Zerglings
• Roaches
• Hydralisks

rather than solving every problem by themselves.

An alternative would be reverting Spore Crawlers to their original damage and adjusting Queens accordingly.

Additional Protoss Changes I'd Like to See

Disruptors

Disruptors have essentially disappeared since their major nerf.

I would like to see them become a real unit again.

Perhaps:

• Restore one-shot potential.
• Reduce range.
• Increase cooldown.

The exact solution isn't important, but currently Protoss lacks meaningful Tier 3 ground options in many situations.

Colossi

I'd love to see Colossi become relevant again.

This doesn't necessarily require a damage buff.

The larger issue is that they feel too fragile for their cost.

Possible options:

• +1 armor
• +25 or +50 HP

This would strengthen their identity as anti-Marine, anti-Ling, and anti-Hydra units without necessarily increasing their offensive power.

Against Zerg, this could also create more interesting interactions with Vipers and High Templars.

Additional Terran Changes

At the moment, none.

I generally like Terran's overall design.

The Mule changes may end up being either extremely powerful or barely noticeable. I think more games need to be played before reaching conclusions.

TL;DR

• Worker reduction should not be implemented alongside mineral/gas changes.
• Gateway changes should preserve Protoss identity and maintain meaningful Gateway play.
• Ghost changes should focus on interaction and counterplay rather than supply increases.
• High Templar changes look good.
• Infestor changes need more testing.
• Mineral and gas changes are promising.
• Zerg needs earlier anti-air options than Queens alone.
• Queens should be less self-sufficient.
• Disruptors and Colossi deserve another look.
• Terran appears mostly fine for now.