SC2 Innovation + Balance = Impossible? Sadness... - Page 2

guN-viCe

United States687 Posts

November 13 2010 08:58 GMT

#21

everyone says mothership is lame. ive said since beta that the mothership is overpowered.

it is what it is... a big ship that cloaks everything, does some dmg, and works great as a big shield.

it also can completely disable half of ur opponents army for 10~ seconds

the fact that its hard to tech, costs 400/400, and you can only build 1, are moot points.

its a late game support unit... and it fills that role quite nicely imo.

ps. im not saying the unit can`t be tweaked/become better, i honestly just think blizz wants it to be in a niche role

TheYango

United States47024 Posts

November 13 2010 10:38 GMT

#22

On November 13 2010 08:32 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:

Show nested quote +

I disagree , when the players do find something interesting it is removed from the game or nerfed into uselessness by blizzard.

Example - the extra 7% (or 9% or w/e it was) mineral mining early game mechanic

Mineral boosting wasn't interesting. It was something you did because there was no loss from doing it, and no gain from not doing it.

Also, from a balance perspective, it would be a nightmare to deal with in the long run. How do you balance early game timings properly when they fluctuate by 0-7% for no defensible reason?

Bosu

United States3247 Posts

November 13 2010 11:00 GMT

#23

The standard strategies and popular cheese change every couple weeks with or without patches. There is a ton of stuff to learn still.

Not to mention there will be 2 more expansions. So much potential.

d3_crescentia

United States4054 Posts

November 13 2010 11:03 GMT

#24

On November 13 2010 10:57 Artifex wrote:

Show nested quote +

Don't get me wrong here Plexa, I just feel that that way of thinking isn't correct. If supply depots cost only 50 minerals but would only grant 4 supply (ignoring the loss of SCV mining time), then that would be a Terran skillset which adds to the overall difficulty of the race and raises the overall skill ceiling...

In my opinion Zerg creep is just a useless feature that a "skilled" Zerg HAS to use in order to be effective, just like the Terran would have to utilise more APM and "skill" to build twice the depots.

Hopefully you get what I'm saying, you can throw whatever into the game and claim its to "raise the skill ceiling".

Except that creep functions territorially/geometrically instead of some arbitrary one-dimensional limit. That creep can be spread to deny expansions is something substantial already.

iPlaY.NettleS

Australia4373 Posts

November 13 2010 12:25 GMT

#25

On November 13 2010 19:38 TheYango wrote:
Mineral boosting wasn't interesting. It was something you did because there was no loss from doing it, and no gain from not doing it.

Also, from a balance perspective, it would be a nightmare to deal with in the long run. How do you balance early game timings properly when they fluctuate by 0-7% for no defensible reason?

It was something that seperated the pros from the newbs , like muta stacking in brood war , mineral jumping (with probe/scv/drone) in brood war , perfect splitting in brood war.

Look at the long term TvZ balance in the Korean Proleague and you'll see it goes between 40-60% win rate for either T or Z when new strategies etc are developed and the balance ebbs for months.Nowdays you wouldn't see that short term imbalance in favour of T or Z when a new strategy is developed as blizzard will just nerf that particular strategy without waiting enough time for a counter to be developed.The rate things are going SC2 will have more useless units than brood war.

(Coming from a z/p player in sc2 who doesn't agree with the supply depot before rax and the factory for reaper speed upgrades)

Prev 1 2 All

Please or register to reply.

SC2 Innovation + Balance = Impossible? Sadness... - Page 2

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming