|
On January 08 2014 12:00 zlefin wrote:
While true that it's a hard position to be in; and nothing is ever perfect; that doesn't mean it couldn't have been done better. While there will always be haters; the % of them could be lower; and with a better game I believe they would be.
That's why Blizzard shouldn't be making these decisions. Kespa didn't care that everyone except the Zergs hated Battle Royal. They could experiment to their heart's content and just told their slaves players to suck it up.
Blizzard should make the game highly customizable and let the tournament organizers fiddle with it until they find something that works well. Eventually the tournament organizers would agree on some common rules, like they did in most major sport, perhaps with some minor differences (like the differences between NBA and Wolrd Basketball Association rules).
|
On January 08 2014 12:06 hypercube wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2014 12:00 zlefin wrote:
While true that it's a hard position to be in; and nothing is ever perfect; that doesn't mean it couldn't have been done better. While there will always be haters; the % of them could be lower; and with a better game I believe they would be. That's why Blizzard shouldn't be making these decisions. Kespa didn't care that everyone except the Zergs hated Battle Royal. They could experiment to their heart's content and just told their slaves players to suck it up. Blizzard should make the game highly customizable and let the tournament organizers fiddle with it until they find something that works well. Eventually the tournament organizers would agree on some common rules, like they did in most major sport, perhaps with some minor differences (like the differences between NBA and Wolrd Basketball Association rules).
The game is already extremely highly customizable blizz gave us the map editor for free.
I'm not sure what you're saying but as far as I know the tournaments could make whatever changes they want (even adding or removing units completely).
The problem is what you touched on.. there has to be consensus...that players and fans have to support the changes. As long as blizzard is keeping the game 'up to date' or until there is a large initial following, you won't see a mass shift to support such things.
Unless I don't understand what you're recommending.
|
well but david kong will never listen to us and dustin browder will just add more rocks-.-
|
TLADT24920 Posts
On January 08 2014 12:19 Mantaza wrote:
well but david kong will never listen to us and dustin browder will just add more rocks-.-
couldn't help but lol.
|
On January 08 2014 12:02 BisuDagger wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2014 09:46 kimaphan wrote:
David Kim has mentioned this before in interviews, but I can confirm that he does talk directly with a lot of pro-gamers and coaches on a regular basis. It's just one of many ways the team gathers information about game balance to figure out next steps. Some of that includes ladder and pro-match statistics, and watching and discussing pro-level games and tournaments constantly. David doesn't spend a ton of time engaging directly on the public forums because his focus is on the game. We have a community team that's dedicated to reporting feedback, which includes gathering it publicly when we publish proposed changes and test maps on PTR. They read the forums every day.
The interaction takes place more than you all realize and with many professional players who are highly skilled and have a history of providing useful feedback. It's not possible for the team to interact with every professional player in the scene, nor is it productive or efficient to crowdsource the process from start to finish. But I assure you discussions take place every time before we make a change, even if it's something small as a forum post on a hypothetical change. If this is true then I'm sure you've gotten tons of feedback with concerned fans that will never see  Bisu play SC2 again? Does your post confirm that LoTV will indeed make Sair/DT a viable SC2 strategy and the zealots will have the "Leg Enhancements" upgrade researchable at the Twilight Council? If so, I can't wait for the expansion! Here's a picture of Bisu. I recommend this one be printed out and go in your wallet in place of your children's photos. They'll understand. ![[image loading]](http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSVC2a6DN29tmMHzGkB_V14T_6Y_s2LXq8wi0-3KQHwWAgm7w1T)
Never change.
Also, this thread was pretty uninteresting until Kim came in and saved it for me. I like that she dispels the myth that Blizzard doesn't talk to progamers. They just talk with the ones that provide useful feedback. Aka, the ones who don't say "buff tank, make it more like BW. Ruin the pathing to make it harder."
|
On January 08 2014 06:23 StutteR wrote:
I don't know how any Zerg can watch those games and say, "That's the race I want play."
Maybe we don't want to play like those "make swarm hosts and sit there" Zergs, and like to play the tech switch and overrun style of Zerg. Maybe you shouldn't generalize everybody who plays a race into one style.
|
Lets go from controlling 12 units at a time to infinite units at a time.
Why are they massing death balls?
Lets make Zerg safer in the early game.
Why is BroodLord infestor so overpowered?
Lets give Terran a splash damage counter to light units.
Why are they dropping them on the mineral lines?
Lets inadvertently make Protoss bulletproof in the early game.
Why are storms suddenly overpowered?
|
Reality vs Hydra game was interesting, I thought the crowd enjoyed it as well.
swarmhosts game can be interesting occasionally, it's just they are rarely used aggressively and the turtling style is just boring as hell
|
On January 08 2014 12:14 thurst0n wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2014 12:06 hypercube wrote:On January 08 2014 12:00 zlefin wrote:
While true that it's a hard position to be in; and nothing is ever perfect; that doesn't mean it couldn't have been done better. While there will always be haters; the % of them could be lower; and with a better game I believe they would be. That's why Blizzard shouldn't be making these decisions. Kespa didn't care that everyone except the Zergs hated Battle Royal. They could experiment to their heart's content and just told their slaves players to suck it up. Blizzard should make the game highly customizable and let the tournament organizers fiddle with it until they find something that works well. Eventually the tournament organizers would agree on some common rules, like they did in most major sport, perhaps with some minor differences (like the differences between NBA and Wolrd Basketball Association rules). The game is already extremely highly customizable blizz gave us the map editor for free. I'm not sure what you're saying but as far as I know the tournaments could make whatever changes they want (even adding or removing units completely). The problem is what you touched on.. there has to be consensus...that players and fans have to support the changes. As long as blizzard is keeping the game 'up to date' or until there is a large initial following, you won't see a mass shift to support such things. Unless I don't understand what you're recommending.
I meant letting tournaments customize unit build times, health, damage etc. Even some of the hidden variables that control turning radius or how units clump up.
|
Bisutopia19299 Posts
|
How much does David Kimm actually listen? I feel like he has his own vision and very little sways his idea of unit design. I personally think 3-4 of the units are just not good for the game ( like the ones ret pointed out ), and we need to make everything a little less of a hard counter.
|
On January 08 2014 13:06 BisuDagger wrote:Blah wrong forum.Might as well add a pic while I'm here. + Show Spoiler +
First I clicked on the pic, and then I saw your new sig for the first time... LOLed pretty hard.
-----
Anyways, only part of the problem with SC2 is balancing. Even if if the game was perfectly balanced, it is still lacking in many key factors that would make it entertaining for players and viewers. In order for any significant improvement in these areas, fundamental changes to the gameplay mechanics, would need to be made. Probably not viable at this point. Lessons to be learned though, for the future.
|
On January 08 2014 13:24 DooMDash wrote:
How much does David Kimm actually listen? I feel like he has his own vision and very little sways his idea of unit design.
My guess is he listens a lot. We just only see the one decision made, which inevitable can only please some people.
|
On January 08 2014 12:38 gkshriram wrote:
Lets go from controlling 12 units at a time to infinite units at a time.
Why are they massing death balls?
Lets make Zerg safer in the early game.
Why is BroodLord infestor so overpowered?
Lets give Terran a splash damage counter to light units.
Why are they dropping them on the mineral lines?
Lets inadvertently make Protoss bulletproof in the early game.
Why are storms suddenly overpowered?
Exactly. They have to be uber careful or else reddit will cry again about how retarded x is.
|
On January 08 2014 12:57 ETisME wrote:
Reality vs Hydra game was interesting, I thought the crowd enjoyed it as well.
swarmhosts game can be interesting occasionally, it's just they are rarely used aggressively and the turtling style is just boring as hell
They're rarely used 'aggressively' because their range is so big that there is no point in putting them in harm's way :/.
|
On January 08 2014 13:53 tili wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2014 13:24 DooMDash wrote:
How much does David Kimm actually listen? I feel like he has his own vision and very little sways his idea of unit design. My guess is he listens a lot. We just only see the one decision made, which inevitable can only please some people.
Listening != Acting upon.
DB and DK made an okay game, NEEDS a lot of improvement if they want to catch up to BW.
|
Katowice25012 Posts
On January 08 2014 12:02 BisuDagger wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2014 09:46 kimaphan wrote:
David Kim has mentioned this before in interviews, but I can confirm that he does talk directly with a lot of pro-gamers and coaches on a regular basis. It's just one of many ways the team gathers information about game balance to figure out next steps. Some of that includes ladder and pro-match statistics, and watching and discussing pro-level games and tournaments constantly. David doesn't spend a ton of time engaging directly on the public forums because his focus is on the game. We have a community team that's dedicated to reporting feedback, which includes gathering it publicly when we publish proposed changes and test maps on PTR. They read the forums every day.
The interaction takes place more than you all realize and with many professional players who are highly skilled and have a history of providing useful feedback. It's not possible for the team to interact with every professional player in the scene, nor is it productive or efficient to crowdsource the process from start to finish. But I assure you discussions take place every time before we make a change, even if it's something small as a forum post on a hypothetical change. If this is true then I'm sure you've gotten tons of feedback with concerned fans that will never see Bisu play SC2 again? Does your post confirm that LoTV will indeed make Sair/DT a viable SC2 strategy and the zealots will have the "Leg Enhancements" upgrade researchable at the Twilight Council? If so, I can't wait for the expansion! Here's a picture of Bisu. I recommend this one be printed out and go in your wallet in place of your children's photos. They'll understand.
This is a good post. I can confirm Bisu is an extraordinarily handsome man and anyone's wallet would be vastly improved by having pictures of him sporting one of his many poses.
|
On January 08 2014 12:38 gkshriram wrote:
Lets go from controlling 12 units at a time to infinite units at a time.
Why are they massing death balls?
You're so wrong.
The difference between 1a and 1a2a3a4a is negligible. The reason Protoss doesn't just go 1a2a3a4a in Brood War isn't because players can't press that combination of keys, it's because it's dumb to 1a2a3a4a in to things like lurkers under dark swarm, siege tanks behind spider mines. and another Protoss army with superior positioning. You have to do more than simply attack move.
It is more effective to move your army in such a way that the Zerg has to continuously reposition his lurkers, which creates small holes in his positioning that you can use to snipe stuff, and to create a better engagement for yourself, which leads to better psionic storms and better concaves. And so on.
There's a lot of micro, with reavers and shuttles in your main army, sniping lurkers with dragoons, and so on. That's another reason you don't just 1a2a3a4a - that there's more to do with your army, even if we don't consider the positional space-controlling aspects of the game.
By the way: "Death balls" exist in Brood War, too. There is nothing wrong with a play style of having a singular, united, powerful army that wants to stay together being viable.You can play that style as Protoss in PvZ and as Terran in TvZ and TvP. But you can also play other styles. And perhaps most importantly: You can play a non "deathball" style vs a "deathball" style. And the "death ball" has micro potential, and is interesting to use and to play against.
|
On January 08 2014 13:02 hypercube wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2014 12:14 thurst0n wrote:On January 08 2014 12:06 hypercube wrote:On January 08 2014 12:00 zlefin wrote:
While true that it's a hard position to be in; and nothing is ever perfect; that doesn't mean it couldn't have been done better. While there will always be haters; the % of them could be lower; and with a better game I believe they would be. That's why Blizzard shouldn't be making these decisions. Kespa didn't care that everyone except the Zergs hated Battle Royal. They could experiment to their heart's content and just told their slaves players to suck it up. Blizzard should make the game highly customizable and let the tournament organizers fiddle with it until they find something that works well. Eventually the tournament organizers would agree on some common rules, like they did in most major sport, perhaps with some minor differences (like the differences between NBA and Wolrd Basketball Association rules). The game is already extremely highly customizable blizz gave us the map editor for free. I'm not sure what you're saying but as far as I know the tournaments could make whatever changes they want (even adding or removing units completely). The problem is what you touched on.. there has to be consensus...that players and fans have to support the changes. As long as blizzard is keeping the game 'up to date' or until there is a large initial following, you won't see a mass shift to support such things. Unless I don't understand what you're recommending. I meant letting tournaments customize unit build times, health, damage etc. Even some of the hidden variables that control turning radius or how units clump up.
Eh, tweaking balance like this is too much of a can of worms for the scene to handle. Blizzard pretty much has a stranglehold with their WCS system, and any big non-WCS tournament has to abide by WCS rules if they want to be eligible for WCS to stay relevant with players and viewers. It's too much of a risk for any big tournament to challenge this status quo, and any smaller tournament that does runs the risk of being swept away with irrelevancy by bigger leagues.
Plus, while the community sometimes has a general consensus on what's wrong with the game, we almost never can reach the same degree of consensus on specific solutions to these problems. It's a monumental uphill battle to get players, viewers, and tournaments to agree on many changes, let alone organize enough to make a respectable stand against Blizzard.
|
I find your optimism touching, and I sincerely hope blizzard will do something to make the game less stale, to make map control matter more, to make 4 mining bases worthwhile, and to make units more exciting and require more attention to movement/positioning like in BW... but I just can't imagine that it will ever happen. I was crushed when I realized that I don't enjoy watching or playing SC2 in the middle of 2012, because to this day I still love to watch and play BW (very poorly, with friends). Nothing would make me happier to see some magic happen to SC2 with the next expansion, with AI and tech tree overhauls and a complete redesign of Protoss, but it seems so far-fetched and improbable that I refuse to get my hopes up too much.
But I really feel for the progamers who see the flaws but feel like they can't have a voice due to perceived biases when suggesting large-scale overhaul. Thanks for coming out and saying this, I really hope blizzard will open their ears and re-captivate me with this potentially fantastic franchise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/vWCeRhG.png)
