|
The game is not balanced around everyone, nor should it be. Aside from the fact that it's extremely impossible to do so, the fact of the matter is that you have no right to complain about balance when there are still a large number of things you can do to improve your game and overcome your opponent.
This is the attitude I don't get, and one of the reasons I think it's so hard to have a productive discussion on this issue. Why should the fact that there is room for improvement in my play - as is true for ALL players, regardless of skill level - mean that I don't have a "right" to discuss balance? Honestly, you do not need to be able to play like a progamer to understand how the game works.
That kind of attitude - a claim of entitlement and ownership over a topic like balance - is one of the main reasons why this discussion stays unproductive. It's also a reason why people are so unwilling to change their minds.
|
United States22883 Posts
On April 14 2011 03:40 Vlare wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2011 02:13 Jibba wrote:On April 14 2011 01:36 Vlare wrote:
It would be nice if there were a discussion forum for balance. However, since 99% of people on tlnet are simply not on a level to be commenting on balance I think it would be full of bullshit posts. That being said, a balance discussion of say 3.7k+ players could be useful. However, I am finding that as I play these level people more and more I find that most of them are quite bad and get by on cheese :\
So I think balance discussion should be reserved for very high level players only :\ There's a weaker correlation between understanding the game and ladder ranking than most people realize. Blizzard has made a system where it's far too easy to mass game at opportune times to make yourself seem good. Case in point, Combat-Ex is the #5 GM in America. While combat-ex may not be super duper. He still does beat "top level people" despite what he does.
Yes, he does. But he doesn't actually understand the game very well. He just does the same cheese and 4gate rush over and over, and it usually works against the medium-high people, and doesn't work against high level people. But since he plays 2-3x more games than everyone else, it's ok.
This is the attitude I don't get, and one of the reasons I think it's so hard to have a productive discussion on this issue. Why should the fact that there is room for improvement in my play - as is true for ALL players, regardless of skill level - mean that I don't have a "right" to discuss balance? Honestly, you do not need to be able to play like a progamer to understand how the game works. There's no way to convince you otherwise, but neither you nor I know enough about SC2 to competently discuss balance. People tend to believe they're a lot smarter/knowledgeable than they actually are, and this is especially true since WoW came out and now in SC2. If someone in 12th grade is stuck on a differential equation and you're in 6th grade algebra, you can't complain to them that math is too difficult or makes no sense because you have no idea what you're talking about.
When you lose games at the Gold level, it's not because of balance. It's because you're not good enough, and there's 1,000 things you should've done better to win.
EDIT: And to reiterate what the SotG guys said last night, they're still that 12th grader who has a long way to go. I think Day9 was pretty careful to say that he doesn't know if the game is balanced or imbalanced, just that a lot of territory is unexplored.
|
On April 14 2011 05:22 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2011 03:40 Vlare wrote:On April 14 2011 02:13 Jibba wrote:On April 14 2011 01:36 Vlare wrote:
It would be nice if there were a discussion forum for balance. However, since 99% of people on tlnet are simply not on a level to be commenting on balance I think it would be full of bullshit posts. That being said, a balance discussion of say 3.7k+ players could be useful. However, I am finding that as I play these level people more and more I find that most of them are quite bad and get by on cheese :\
So I think balance discussion should be reserved for very high level players only :\ There's a weaker correlation between understanding the game and ladder ranking than most people realize. Blizzard has made a system where it's far too easy to mass game at opportune times to make yourself seem good. Case in point, Combat-Ex is the #5 GM in America. While combat-ex may not be super duper. He still does beat "top level people" despite what he does. Yes, he does. But he doesn't actually understand the game very well. He just does the same cheese and 4gate rush over and over, and it usually works against the medium-high people, and doesn't work against high level people. But since he plays 2-3x more games than everyone else, it's ok. Show nested quote +This is the attitude I don't get, and one of the reasons I think it's so hard to have a productive discussion on this issue. Why should the fact that there is room for improvement in my play - as is true for ALL players, regardless of skill level - mean that I don't have a "right" to discuss balance? Honestly, you do not need to be able to play like a progamer to understand how the game works. There's no way to convince you otherwise, but neither you nor I know enough about SC2 to competently discuss balance. People tend to believe they're a lot smarter/knowledgeable than they actually are, and this is especially true since WoW came out and now in SC2. If someone in 12th grade is stuck on a differential equation and you're in 6th grade algebra, you can't complain to them that math is too difficult or makes no sense because you have no idea what you're talking about. When you lose games at the Gold level, it's not because of balance. It's because you're not good enough, and there's 1,000 things you should've done better to win.
Not to mention, he has this nasty habit of being an dishonest player and asking for a favor once in a while...
>.>
Combat-ex isn't good. He just plays a lot. it's like Jibba said - winning != skill != understanding of the game. In this case, Combat-ex just wins - and not against great players in tournament settings.
|
I have a suggestion for FF, I think it has been discussed before like a year ago. A lot of zergs complain about force field these days, usually because it ruins their game when they clearly had a superior force. The suggestion for balance is to make the FF a building with 1000 hp and +1 shield (might need adjustment). This would allow zergs to destroy the force field and attack, winning if they are superior and lucky, but if army's are even, or close to even, zergs will take heavy losses in trying to break the force field.
I believe this works to balance PvZ because in possibly losing many units as a zerg when FF is used against you, you can still macro faster and win if your mechanics are strong. Toss still should not lose as many units, like they do now when FF is used right, and they will still be able to macro with the zerg if their mechanics are strong.
Using FF to block the ramp would sometimes lower bane count when the z is dumb enough to crash into them; this perhaps because he thinks he can take your units with his lings.But this means as P you won't be able to FF your ramp (or his if your at the expo) forever.
I think this is the only balance needed for PvZ right now... well, I was thinking about suggesting Chrono= 50 energy and you would have to purchase an upgrade to lower cost, but I think if this is considered a good change, we should see how it effects the match up first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
