1. Withhold comment because I can't really tell how moving shot would affect the balance of units, besides that they'd have to be obviously be rebalanced.

2. Not going to happen, because the average player doesn't want to wrangle with an outdated 2 decades ago interface like Brood War. There's no reason infinite selection, MBS, and others shouldn't be in the game. Its pointless busy work for most, and an e-dick waving contest for a select few.

3. Most of the stock maps are pretty mediocre or bad. I'll Give you that. Backdoor gimmicks need to have way more HP, just like stacked temples and such from BW

4. Not even a valid complaint because its nonsense.

5. If this is true why does Zerg fast expand nearly every game, then proceed to decimate every other race in any sort of long-range macro game? FE are certainly more risky right now than they are in BW right now, which probably goes back to the map issue more than anything wrong with the actual gameplay.

6. Again, average player expects an interface from this decade.

7. Probably true. Spells across the board are weaker than BW counterparts to counteract this, except for FF, which is obviously insanely good. Modern interface comes into play once again, so don't expect it to change.

8. I've seen plenty of strong plays, unorthodox strategy, and so-on from top players (TLO, Nony, etc) Watching new strategies develop is a great WOW factor for me (for example, when the Bisu build developed, or Flash broke out the double armory push). Micro could be better but I think thats because a lot of players are lazy, as I've also seen great micro from players. But I'm guessing you consider moving shot the only micro that matters.

9. Another moving shot complaint. Yawn

10. Zerg whining, Nonsense

11. Incredibly strong spell that I think needs to be a bit balanced, I just don't know how. One of your few legit gripes IMO.

12. Planetary Fortress is an incredible investment in not only gas and minerals, but also the lost mining speed and scan from the from the orbital. Considering its power, its still barely used because of its true cost. A laughable complaint; for how much the Terran loses in getting a PF, you should have to send a lot to take it down.

13. What? I think the complaint for most of the beta was that harassing wasn't all that incredibly effective, especially against Zerg, because they can repower drones so quickly, and the creep speed boost allows speedlings to catch harassers. And harass could easily end the game in BW. Reaver drops, vulture run-bys, ling run-bys, and muta harass could all wipe out the entire economy of an opponent.

14. Spawn larva is by far the most powerful macro ability, allowing zerg to saturate expansions incredibly quickly, recover from both econ and army loss, and rapidly create a defense or a tech switch. Judging from your complaints, you are a Zerg player complaining about your races problems, even though in a straight up macro game they are DOMINANT versus the other races to the extent that they have to rely almost exclusively on timing pushes/cheese to win?

Spent too much time writing this after your thread got closed to not post this.

Dumb thread that deserved to be closed.

Simplistik

2026 Posts

May 05 2010 21:50 GMT

You seem to contradict yourself:

2. There isn't enough to do.
14. Spawn Larva is too much to do.

Meatloaf

Spain664 Posts

May 05 2010 21:52 GMT

agree in the units review.

not in the APM demand though... maybe because I'm a 50 APM noob and like SC2 is now i still can play and enjoy.

uNiGNoRe

Germany1115 Posts

May 05 2010 21:52 GMT

I can understand where you're coming from. And nearly all of your points are somehow true. I definitely agree on 14. Spawn larvae does need more time/effort to use.
But I really don't understand 13. How can you complain about harass being too strong. A harass heavy game does require more micro/multitasking. In my eyes strong harass only makes the game harder, which is a good thing.

decemvre1

Romania51 Posts

May 05 2010 21:54 GMT

On May 06 2010 06:50 Simplistik wrote:
You seem to contradict yourself:

2. There isn't enough to do.
14. Spawn Larva is too much to do.

I didn't say it was too much, i can easily manage to keep a very low energy on all queens, i was just saying it would be nice if T and P had more to do aswell.

KwarK

United States42870 Posts

May 05 2010 21:54 GMT

Icc rank?

Entertaining

Canada793 Posts

May 05 2010 21:55 GMT

I just dont understand why they took out highground advantage.

SoManyDeadLings

Canada255 Posts

May 05 2010 21:56 GMT

These points have been discussed to death, resurrected, died again, x 20000000000000 times here in TL.

Stop it with these threads. Blizzard won't listen, they're making a game with a commerical interest. Their PR puts up a nice feigned interest in what die-hard BW players have to say, but honestly, the majority of sales will probably come from the ten year olds that you described.

Plus, like many have said before, this is BETA. Let's pull out the original SC beta and see how balanced that game is?

You're hoping Blizzard would consider your input... well, good luck.

Kare

Norway786 Posts

May 05 2010 21:56 GMT

#10

I wrote alot as an answer after your thread got closed and im to lazy to write it again. But I can say that everything you say in this blog, I agree to.

WiljushkA

Serbia1416 Posts

May 05 2010 21:56 GMT

#11

On May 06 2010 06:50 Simplistik wrote:
You seem to contradict yourself:

2. There isn't enough to do.
14. Spawn Larva is too much to do.

my thoughts exactly

also, you played 1300 matches in a game you hate?
i do agree with you on some points, but they obviously dont ruin the game for me. on some other points i think youre exagarating.

teh leet newb

United States1999 Posts

May 05 2010 21:58 GMT

#12

I agree that macro/casting is much easier now. My mechanics have always been pretty poor, but I can hold my own in Platinum because playing P is just so goddamn easy (even easier than BW). However, I don't think that makes the game any less fun; I actually enjoy playing it more than BW because it looks cooler, the friend system is much better, and matchmaking is much better.

decemvre1

Romania51 Posts

May 05 2010 21:59 GMT

#13

On May 06 2010 06:52 uNiGNoRe wrote:
I can understand where you're coming from. And nearly all of your points are somehow true. I definitely agree on 14. Spawn larvae does need more time/effort to use.
But I really don't understand 13. How can you complain about harass being too strong. A harass heavy game does require more micro/multitasking. In my eyes strong harass only makes the game harder, which is a good thing.

This is a somewhat biased complaint because i am zerg, and as well all know it, zerg gets harrased to DEATH in all matchups exept zvz. Its not that there shouldn't be any harassing going on... but that harassing should not end the game. Running in with 6 or 7 reapers and killing off your opponents early ongoing tech can end a game. And thats not what harrassing should be about.

Kare

Norway786 Posts

May 05 2010 21:59 GMT

#14

On May 06 2010 06:56 WiljushkA wrote:

Show nested quote +

When he has been in the community for 10 years and playing bw for 10 years, dont you think he really wanted to play alot of starcraft 2 just to get into it? It is so silly to write these snippy comments to a guy that has played alot and done alot of research in the game.

QibingZero

2611 Posts

May 05 2010 21:59 GMT

#15

3 and 5 are related, honestly.

Or rather, 5 exists mostly because of 3.

Aesop

Hungary11297 Posts

May 05 2010 22:00 GMT

#16

I am actually sympathetic to the OP since he obviously took the time to test it thoroughly. But I do not have an equally strong opinion about the game. All the "WE'VE TRIED EVERYTHING" things appear plausible, but on the other hand, we discovered moving larvae like when? a year ago?

Things like one-base-play are likely to change too. When people find the economic niches, maybe something like FE will become standard.

Chill

Calgary25981 Posts

May 05 2010 22:00 GMT

#17

1300 games?! There's no way... How are you only 1600-1700 at 1300 games?

When Brood War was competitive, many of the top players had 50 APM. It takes awhile to learn the game. Not sure why people keep ignoring this and expecting everyone to be fully comfortable with every unit.

goswser

United States3546 Posts

May 05 2010 22:01 GMT

#18

If you want a blizzard employee to read it, just post it on their forums, they might delete it after, but someone will probably read it first. I agree with a lot of this, I think a fix to forcefields would be to make it so they don't push units out of the way, i.e. it can only be cast on empty ground, this would make it much harder to use at least, though the other spells need fixing too.

KwarK

United States42870 Posts

May 05 2010 22:02 GMT

#19

Also I disagree. But I take offence to your complaints about having nothing to do with your apm and multitasking. If anything this gives you a bigger advantage than in bw. Think of all the tards attack moving a single group of units. Think how much your bw trained ability to divide your army into several control groups of different types to manage tactics, create concaves, hard counter particular aspects of his army and focus fire. The new sc2 newbs won't be doing that because they never learnt how and the interface doesn't tell them they need to learn it. But you know how and you're complaining that other people aren't being taught it? Seriously?

swanized

Canada2480 Posts

May 05 2010 22:03 GMT

#20

you know this is a 2010 game... it is meant so that you don't need as much skill then BW to play

a game like Broodwar would not sell anymore

this game has no e-sport potential, but don't listen to Dustin Browder... they don't REALLY want it to become an e-sport... they want it to sell

only the manliest of nerds will go on playing BW so yah stop complaining about that game and go back to good old 12 years old engine that made a game REALLY epic