It was never really strong unit or that other races didn’t have counter.
All nerfs I seen is to force it into its role. Not because it was op.
Really don’t see ideal behind its slow speed, can’t transfuse off creep. Poor anti air
It’s anti air can only stop low pop attack.
I guess you are too new and too low rank to understand some things.
Cant transfuse off creap is a very new thing. It got nerfed after zergs figured out that you can actually queenwalk and basically win against every kind of macro play vs protoss. It got invented vs the void ray meta spam but it turned out to be too good overall. Before the void ray meta protoss players just spammed all kinds of weird cheeses and all ins because playing standard wasnt really viable vs zerg. The queen nerf actually allowed protoss and zerg players to enjoy a macro match. This might be the biggest win for starcraft in last 6 years! Look how happy most players are in twitch chat.
The queen is not supposed to be a real unit rather a macro mechanic that adds a little bit of safety (thus its not included in the f2 all army button) but the game progressed and all the different forms of harassments patched in so queens are needed to deal with them. Mass Queens early are the ultimate answer to everything and are key to zerg in many ways. They allow MUCH faster creepspread, you are safe vs everything earlygame, you always have inject larva ready, they do good in combat because of transfuse, you dont need to waste larva to build units so you can get many more drones, they only cost 2 supply and only 150 bucks and can deal with every kind of air rush or air in general (bc or up to 4 carriers or 10 voids). So i really dont know why anyone in the world would think that queens have weak anti air.
YES! Its a macro unit. Its role is to accelerate your macro. Why cant mules attack? Why cant i buff my units with chrono speed to make them faster and attack faster?? thats so unfair!! No its not its a macro mechanic.
So i dont know what your problem is but please quit whining. Thats unbearable. We dont care if you dont make it into gold league but please dont create another topic everytime you lose on the ladder.
During this same time-period, Protoss had a consistent 57.5% PvZ win-rate in Grandmaster. The problem with the queen was merely that it was unpopular. If it were strong, Zerg would have been the race with a >50% win-rate.
That’s where the design of SC2 went wrong, e.g. when the designers started doing what was popular rather than solid design changes. Popular changes aren’t solid changes because most people have no clue how the game works (exhibit A: “sentry” who thinks queens were OP when Zerg had a 42% win-rate).
Game design should be soundly in the hands of people who understand how games work so that they can use data to form credible theories of the game, and who have the data required to be able to do that. Popular opinion should be irrelevant to the game design process.
Cry all you want. Actual pros made the balance patch. They know more than you do and than i do.
OMEGALUL. Saying pros dont understand the game.
And where is the game’s popularity now? If I log into Twitch, will there be a 10k streamer? Artosis is leaving Korea. How long will the GSL still be a thing?
Have you actually talked with a pro player? Have you asked them simple questions like how is a Z-score calculated? What even is a Z-score? What is the Z-score for this matchup’s win-rates? If you can’t answer this question on the spot, you aren’t qualified to even talk about game design, period.
Pro players can form theories of how the game works from their limited perspective, but the game is so large and so complicated that their games represent 0.000001% of the games played which means they know literally nothing about how the game typically progresses. The only way you answer that question is through data analysis / statistics.
It hasnt been popular since forever and now its actually more popular since the patch because they kinda fixed pvz. So you can still cry all you want but that doesnt make your statement correct 
Bnet “logic”.
That doesnt make any sense What are you on about? I never said you are right and i didnt do a 180.
This is utter nonsense. Batzy doing batzy things again.
Love your whataboutism. You failed because you didnt know the patch was from a group of ppl that actually know the game better than anyone else. Much much better than you.
I made a comment about how the game’s popularity has gone down. You responded to that comment by saying it’s correct then, in the same sentence, saying it’s wrong. The game design of SC2 should never be in the hands of people who can’t keep their argument consistent across a 3 sentence paragraph.
I think you either cant read or you cant process the information. You asked how the popularity is RIGHT NOW. I said it was horrible since forever but its MORE POPULAR since the pros did make the balance change that fixed pvz.
To make it very clear to you: The previous balance team destroyed the game and the game balance. The balance of the game is now much better with current balance team that consists of pros. Wow what a shocker. And they judged that queens were too good. Again, what a shocker
Batzy tripped and failed again 
Poor Batzy.
Thus proving my theory correct. Like I said, if you want to win debates you need to form logically consistent arguments which don’t prove your opponents points for them. SC2’s game design went downhill the moment Blizzard started making popular changes. That’s where SC2 went from being the king of esports to being a meme that only a small minority of APM spammers play.
My theory was that popular opinion can’t make good design choices because most people don’t know anything about the game. Your genius rebuttal was to point out that pro players proposed a Zerg nerf during a time period when Zerg’s win-rate was 43%, thus definitively proving my point.
At first you said:
Because you thought the queen nerf was because of popular change.
It wasnt because the balance patch wasnt made by the previous balance team. It wasnt a popular change. It was because pro players judged queens are op. Nice goalposting btw
Again, so maybe you understand it now: Balance team has changed. Now pros balance the game and not some goofy popularity change team.
Then: bad, Now: good.
Batzy understands?
But the damage cant be undone.
Please see:
Reading comprehension is your friend. If even pro players know literally nothing about the state of the game, how is anyone else supposed to? 
People who don’t know basic game statistics should not be making game design decisions.
Yes…reading comprehension is your friend. 100% as i said.
Yes, yes. Batzy knows more about the game than pros Man. Go see a doctor. Please.
Actually thinking pros know nothing about the game 
I think the discussion ends here. Thank you for getting played.
Please explain to me how proposing a Zerg nerf when Zerg’s win-rates are 43% indicates good game knowledge. Clearly they were unaware as to the basic facts about the game’s state and proposed a nerf based on their egregious personal biases rather than the game’s actual state.
This is why the game’s design is in the toilet. They are making design changes completely blind, and of course you will make bad design decisions when blind. With the game designed badly, people don’t play it. Amazing! 
People who don’t know basic game statistics should not be making game design decisions.
If queens was problem was Protoss but not Terran should answer relie in Protoss.
Queens are spell casters that has energy so wouldn’t better focus buff feed back give aoe ability since ghost is Protoss problem as well.
Reason I have problem forcing Zerg macro theme they kinda forgot to apply to Zerg units.
Zerg is just much gas guzzerling as toss.
???
Problem with queens is that they are too strong early game with queen march. Which isnt a thing vs terran. The queen nerf only slightly affects zvt
???
Queens are a macro unit with spells yes. But do you think protoss can produce hts at 5 minutes when queen walks hit??? Queens are a problem early game.
???
dont know what that is even supposed to mean.
???
nope. ney. no. never. Lategame yes ofc but overall? nope.
The argument against this statement goes like this:
In the pro scene, people find zerg is OP somehow.
Others watch pros and get inspired. They try to copy it, and get destroyed by normal players.
Also, the games popularity going down could be due to the game just sucking, with not enough money in it.
If you wanna try a GROWING rts check out aoe3 de, less mechanically demanding while still having high mechanical ceilings, tons of opportunity for creativity through the exp/card system, devs very active releasing a patch per month with dlcs alore, I think its playerbase was up 70% the past month and its twitch viewership similiar.
That’s not an argument, that’s just bias. Point to where in the data your theoretical ideas are so that we know they exist in reality and not in your head. That’s exactly the kind of bias that destroyed SC2. Personal experience, anecdotes, etc, are totally irrelevant in a game as complex as SC2. The ways you win and the ways you lose comprise 0.0000000001% of all the ways to win/lose. The only way to answer these kinds of questions is through statistics, period.
There is a high correlation between design changes and steep drop-offs in game popularity, and those design changes are usually rooted in some kind of popular opinion which, usually, originates from a YouTube video or a tournament game.
For example, people lost their minds that Serral was winning lots of tournaments with brood infestor. They based their entire understanding of the game on the tournament finals, and so they cried and cried and blizzard removed the infested terran. Except, if you look at pro level statistics for that time period, zerg had a negative win-rate in game scenarios where infestors were made. Serral was the exception, not the trend, and they used the exception to define game balance which is patently insane.
This is exactly why Republics exist, by the way. People figured out a long time ago that popular opinion was less than useless so representatives would be elected and then those representatives would go and vote. It’s a proxy for popular opinion, but it adds an extra layer of protection because to play the election game it requires a certain amount of intelligence so it filters out bad candidates.
SC2 professionals voting for their own interests is closer to an oligarchy, and that’s a terrible political system.