|
United States15275 Posts
On December 04 2012 05:40 vOdToasT wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2012 01:53 HaXXspetten wrote:On December 04 2012 01:47 HollowLord wrote:
Stop yelling at Blizzard about balance, let's go back to yelling at them about LAN. Because if anything ruins the game it's that. well at least that's something we can all agree on On December 04 2012 01:52 MattBarry wrote:
You're right, let's wait 5 years for a solution to maybe happen. Have fun watching with the 10 people left still interested in the scene look at BW before you say that Brood War in 2000 was actually fun. HotS right now (2 years after SC2, like BW in 2000) is not. That's because of boring gameplay and bad design. You can't fix that no matter how many innovative and amazing players get better at playing the game. When ZvP was 55% in favour of Zerg on most maps, was it the same boring slow ass composition that beat Protoss every game? No. When TvZ was 55% in favour of Terran, was it a boring deathball every game? No. We've seen StarCraft 2 go from stupid all ins and colossus void ray to maxed out roach attacks and infestor broodlord. Yes, the strategies are changing, but they're all fucking boring so it doesn't matter. Because the game is fundamentally boring, without interesting tools. If you let people work with garbage, they're going to come up with garbage.
BW in 2000 barely ever proceeded past 3 base. SC2 only advanced this far because it followed the same patterns as BW. Your comparison is irrelevant.
|
I'll be honest, im sick of most of SC2 general and strategy i literally come on TL for General (Which can also be a pain but thats something else) and occasionally for some interesting blogs to read.
|
On December 04 2012 05:47 CosmicSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2012 05:40 vOdToasT wrote:On December 04 2012 01:53 HaXXspetten wrote:On December 04 2012 01:47 HollowLord wrote:
Stop yelling at Blizzard about balance, let's go back to yelling at them about LAN. Because if anything ruins the game it's that. well at least that's something we can all agree on On December 04 2012 01:52 MattBarry wrote:
You're right, let's wait 5 years for a solution to maybe happen. Have fun watching with the 10 people left still interested in the scene look at BW before you say that Brood War in 2000 was actually fun. HotS right now (2 years after SC2, like BW in 2000) is not. That's because of boring gameplay and bad design. You can't fix that no matter how many innovative and amazing players get better at playing the game. When ZvP was 55% in favour of Zerg on most maps, was it the same boring slow ass composition that beat Protoss every game? No. When TvZ was 55% in favour of Terran, was it a boring deathball every game? No. We've seen StarCraft 2 go from stupid all ins and colossus void ray to maxed out roach attacks and infestor broodlord. Yes, the strategies are changing, but they're all fucking boring so it doesn't matter. Because the game is fundamentally boring, without interesting tools. If you let people work with garbage, they're going to come up with garbage. BW in 2000 barely ever proceeded past 3 base. SC2 only advanced this far because it followed the same patterns as BW. Your comparison is irrelevant.
Wait, you’re telling us that BW took years to develop to the current level of depth and balance? Are you saying that BW 2000 is garbage compared to the current BW metagame? Madness.
|
On December 04 2012 00:57 Zelniq wrote:
most pros right now are so busy training for or participating in the next tournament, using the same strategies/builds that others are, and don't have the time or will to really spend tons and tons of hours for possible solutions/new builds, and re-work their whole gameplay/re-learn all the new timings and defenses that they'd need to learn for any new build.
I've been saying this for a really long time and it's really good to hear someone with more experience in the scene echo it.
I really don't think we would have settled into the homogenization that we see in a lot of pro games if there was more time between tournaments to actually develop new strategies. In the end, the safer way to play the game as a professional is to continue with the status quo and let the chips fall where they may.
|
I 100% agree with everythng you said.
On December 04 2012 01:59 MattBarry wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2012 01:53 HaXXspetten wrote:On December 04 2012 01:47 HollowLord wrote:
Stop yelling at Blizzard about balance, let's go back to yelling at them about LAN. Because if anything ruins the game it's that. well at least that's something we can all agree on On December 04 2012 01:52 MattBarry wrote:
You're right, let's wait 5 years for a solution to maybe happen. Have fun watching with the 10 people left still interested in the scene look at BW before you say that Too bad this game isn't brood war so looking at it would be pointless. In the first few years of brood war you could distinguish yourself solely on mechanics. That's not really possible in sc2
this made me chuckle.. you have no idea what you're talking about it comes to the first few years of BW
|
On December 04 2012 01:44 Zelniq wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2012 01:39 Salazarz wrote:
Pretty sure that most complaints are caused by the fact that the units / comps are stupid and boring and the games are stale as fuck, not the actual win-rate issues. Who cares if ZvP is 50/50 as long as every P win is an immortal timing and every Z win is a broodlord infestor turtle. Who cares if it's 'possible' for Terrans to win vs Z when 90% of Z wins are from spamming fungal growth. you keep using that word 'every'..as in how long have these things been going on? do you think that players have already reached the maximum skill potential, and have figured out the very best possible strategies?
Who cares if the players have 'reached the maximum skill potential' or not? The games aren't fun to watch, and no matter how much better T gets at dealing with fungals (don't get me wrong, I'm sure they'll get better at it, eventually), it'll still be boring and frustrating to watch Infestors doing what they do, because the unit is inherently boring - just like sentries are boring, just like hellions will never be vultures.
|
On December 04 2012 05:36 ktimekiller wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2012 01:23 Najda wrote:
I am equally tired of all the balance complaints. If people spent half the time they did complaining on trying to figure out a solution, we'd probably have a more balanced game. We need more "How do we beat this" instead of "This is unbeatable". Solving the current balance problem does not solve the issue of the game being fundamentally broken and boring. Sorry, but IT IS up to Blizzard to fix this game. We do not have private servers, nor the ability to patch the game ourselves. As much as we may play with the meta of this game, we are still trapped within the same boundaries set by the developers.
So stop complaining about balance and start complaining it's boring. Maybe you do personally, but the majority just cry imbalance.
|
Canada11511 Posts
On December 04 2012 06:20 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2012 05:47 CosmicSpiral wrote:On December 04 2012 05:40 vOdToasT wrote:On December 04 2012 01:53 HaXXspetten wrote:On December 04 2012 01:47 HollowLord wrote:
Stop yelling at Blizzard about balance, let's go back to yelling at them about LAN. Because if anything ruins the game it's that. well at least that's something we can all agree on On December 04 2012 01:52 MattBarry wrote:
You're right, let's wait 5 years for a solution to maybe happen. Have fun watching with the 10 people left still interested in the scene look at BW before you say that Brood War in 2000 was actually fun. HotS right now (2 years after SC2, like BW in 2000) is not. That's because of boring gameplay and bad design. You can't fix that no matter how many innovative and amazing players get better at playing the game. When ZvP was 55% in favour of Zerg on most maps, was it the same boring slow ass composition that beat Protoss every game? No. When TvZ was 55% in favour of Terran, was it a boring deathball every game? No. We've seen StarCraft 2 go from stupid all ins and colossus void ray to maxed out roach attacks and infestor broodlord. Yes, the strategies are changing, but they're all fucking boring so it doesn't matter. Because the game is fundamentally boring, without interesting tools. If you let people work with garbage, they're going to come up with garbage. BW in 2000 barely ever proceeded past 3 base. SC2 only advanced this far because it followed the same patterns as BW. Your comparison is irrelevant. Wait, you’re telling us that BW took years to develop to the current level of depth and balance? Are you saying that BW 2000 is garbage compared to the current BW metagame? Madness.
They may not be very skilled compared to 2010-11 pro-players, but the games are pretty entertaining (intentional present tense). This was the era of Boxer after all and very micro heavy. The problem is the battles were a little more in fits and starts as the macro/reinforcing was not as good as it was later. But there are all sorts of cool micro and multi-front battles and heavy drop play.
So perhaps rubbish skill-wise comparing the decade advance in skill. But not rubbish gameplay. And certainly not a rubbish spectacle or it never would have caught on as a spectating event.
|
The biggest thing is that for many of us, the current metagame is flawed not because it requires more patching, but because Blizzard has been doing too much patching, such as buffing queen range.
|
On December 04 2012 04:26 MCDayC wrote:
Totally agree, the current trend in the community towards balance whining has been completely toxic.
Absolutely. It's not Blizzard that's "killing the game" (lol) but a navel gazing community blind to their sense of entitlement. The most over-used words on TL are "bad design" and "fundamentally flawed". Good God, how many times have I read those words from the nth muppet on the forums convinced he is Moses bearing the tablets of the laws of great SC2 for the waiting masses.
The best thing for Blizzard to do is to ignore the community, and to live or die by their own work. Meanwhile, the community should get on with making the best of what they have. That said, I really do think Blizzard fucked up at the start of SC2 when they showed an over willingness to patch often and in haste. They satisfied and perpetuated an expectation that they would solve problems and smooth solutions, rather than letting players know, from the get-go, that it was in their hands.
|
P seems more developed than T in this regard. Im not sure what a P can do to beat infestor/BL, as far as I know all units have been tried and anything but a huge group of 10+ well upgraded carriers seem to fall short (and GL getting there).
T though.... ravens and ghosts are extremely underused. Have the pro really sat down and tested either of those or both for weeks? Ghosts should in theory have very good chances of being cost efficient vs infestors, and once infestors are taken out or weakened, vikings spread nicely can beat BL/corruptor. Add 2-3 PDDs or more to that should push it even further in the Ts favor. People seem to forget about PDD. HSM is nice and all vs clumped units, but should zergs know how to spread their stuff, which they already kinda do, PDD is often a better option. And doesnt require as many ravens with as much energy since 1 raven can drop 2 PDDs.
Ts are marinetanking it up forever nowadays. I dont know how many times I've seen them do the same good old move out at 150-170 supply pre-hive. And often they dont even get to their tower because the maxed or almost maxed Z is right outside waiting to trade their lair army away. And even if T wins the first battle, Z remaxes and wins next. Marinetank only seem to win when the harassment is on top, making it possible for the inferior army to be so much bigger they win anyway. Have pro really tried ghosts and/or ravens?
|
Some of these sentiments are just silly. Bad design resulted in significant imbalances that hurt the game as a competitive esport or even a viewing spectacle. For however poohpoohed theoryizing is quite a few early sentiments have been validated by time.
Do you think we would see more non-terran winners if the game hadn't been patched?
What about how balance influences map options? How would a smaller map, farther third or hell more rocks positively affect the game?
Honestly, the biggest problem is that moments of dominance aren't usually moments of brilliance in StarCraft II. 1/1/1... Hell where has Puma been lately? Bl/infestor... I could go on and on but how different is that doom army from Flash's 3/3 pushout? [Real question how many other zergs emulated Savior's style to dominant finishes ala bl/infest?]
Secondly a more basic problem is that how many micro fights do you see in the game?
What's the difference between  Light v  Tempest and Mvp v Squirtle?
+ Show Spoiler +
Many situations end up being binary even at the strategic level. Player A got a lead; does player B harass his way back into the game? Ok I'm drifting in design complaints.
Even at this point, you have to wonder the knock on effects of how what they changed affected what they originally intended to balance. Here I think of warp in storm and 25 mutas in a control group sauntering around. (Why does fungal have to snare air?)
Lastly, if we're at an advanced enough stage that we think every race is about balanced and some map features can cause some interesting strats to develop, how good are the map makers? Just think about the amount of dead airspace laying about sc2 maps for about 2 years. Then think about the number of BW maps with that flaw. The map maker's don't necessarily inspire a great deal of faith.
If you're going to have a community that revolves around discussing the game then don't complain when they talk about the warts. Patching is always too frequent until it isn't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
