|
On June 28 2014 02:53 PickyProtoss wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2014 02:37 Big J wrote:On June 28 2014 02:27 PickyProtoss wrote:On June 28 2014 01:55 Big J wrote:
Balancing has hardly ever been the reason why a player fell off.
INnoVation's main strength wasn't hellbats. It was his main strength in TvT, and even there I'd argue there were better TvTers at that time to begin with (like Bomber or Maru).
And he didn't fall off after the patch. He wasn't superdominant to begin with (Soulkey winning WCS season 1, Maru winning season 2; INnoVation only taking the season finals in that time periode, and no other title at all).
And same goes for others. Mvp/Nestea - dominant over various patches. Life being strong with BL/Infestor, in early HotS without it, and then bouncing back and forth.
MC, amazing player regardless of the balance state.
Sniper/Seed... falling off without any real updates happening.
People attribute far too much of an individuals performance to balance. INnoVation was the best Terran (shared with Taeja) at the end of WoL and the best Terran at the beginning of HotS. If the only reason for him falling off would be balance, then he could still be the best Terran, which he simply wasn't anymore towards the end of 2013. Not because "no more hellbat drops", but because other players simply got better and he didn't as much.
These days, it looks like he could be coming back to the very top of Terrans. Not by some magic patch, but by him stepping up is game again. Funny cause your argument supports the idea that Blizzard should not balance, if it makes not difference whether you patch or not then why do it? no it does not support it. It makes a difference for being the best player. It makes no difference for INnoVation being the best Terran. All the players that fell off didn't just fall off as the X-th best player, but also stoppped being the best player of their own race. Ergo the reason for them falling off cannot possible have been the balance change to begin with. The chances to win as Zerg or Protoss should be equal. That's what balance is for. The chance that DIMAGA wins the GSL instead of soO doesn't change through that. So soO's stardom doesn't get influenced by it. What does change INnoVations stardom is when you don't buff Terran after months of being dominated by Zerg and Protoss. So if balance doesnt effect how the best players of each race play, then why balance??? Why should the chance of Zerg beating Protoss be equal they are two different races? So what happens the people who play Zerg come up with really good ways of beating Protoss? They get patched? For instance, I have heard commentators like Tod saying that if Protoss comes out with a new build everyone will do it, whereas when it comes to Terran people do not do the same. This suggests there are cultural norms within each race and one norm is more adaptive than another. Thus, one race more likely to win than another!
Why should we play a game with more than 1unit then anyways? If it's ok that things aren't equally good, why even introduce them?
Edit: If you ask like that, of course you are going to have a point. There is no axiom in the world that forces designers to balance a game.
However, the blizzard designers gave out a goal that was racial balance. If you don't agree with that goal, it's OK. Most people don't. Most people are interested in racial balance for one reason or another. Including the ones that are in charge.
|
Brood War was patched for the last time over 10 years after its release. The last "balance patch" was only 3 years after the release of the original starcraft, everything after that was bug fixes and feature improvements (right click instead of R,click to rally, etc). It is now almost 4 years since the release of WoL. I don't know what this says about whether the game should continue to be "balanced." However I support just creating new maps and allowing the players an opportunity to defeat the strategies with new builds rather than simply rebalancing everything.
|
yeah but brood war was a better designed game and also lucked out with quite a few glitches that ended up being really important (muta stacking hold lurkers reaver AI etc)
|
It's all very well to talk about not trying for perfect balance, but the community at large (at least that part of it that posts on TL/SC2 Forums/Reddit) tends to be very vocal when it comes to balance. Of course, then parts of that community also whine about the game being stale etc but consistency is difficult to ask for in anyone, let alone SC2 players.
I'd like it if Blizzard left the game alone for extended periods, and made public statements to that effect, but I'm in a minority.
|
On June 28 2014 05:34 aZealot wrote:
It's all very well to talk about not trying for perfect balance, but the community at large (at least that part of it that posts on TL/SC2 Forums/Reddit) tends to be very vocal when it comes to balance. Of course, then parts of that community also whine about the game being stale etc but consistency is difficult to ask for in anyone, let alone SC2 players.
I'd like it if Blizzard left the game alone for extended periods, and made public statements to that effect, but I'm in a minority.
Agreed, I am all for patching bugs and making the game more efficient to play, but patches that make the units better or worse, MSC, Oracle, Hellbat, Infestor etc... it is detrimental to the players-> fanbase -> game.
|
Oh boy, another one of these threads, I'm sure this one will make a difference though.
|
Is that the rationale of Sports to you? Does a soccer team like Leeds United have the same chance of wining as Real Madrid? No, they are not playing on an equal playing ground. When Messi or Ronaldo dominate a sport does Fifa say hey we have to put them with a lesser team as to level the playing ground? In addition, balance changes can be triggered by populous opinion.
With all your pretentiousness you can't even see that in sports everybody is playing as "Terran", so there is nothing to be blamed but the person's skill (except for drugs in certain sports). Whereas in SC2 people can blame the race.
A better comparison to SC2 would be:
When Innovation or Flash dominate an esport does Kespa say hey we have to put them with a lesser team as to level the playing ground?
Next, you ask for one player to dominate
SC2 needs to have stars that we want to see win but if the game is consistently being re-balanced this will not occur as no one player can dominate.
and you follow up by wanting people who are better to lose to others, stopping them from being able to dominate.
I think that you are only going to attract a certain type of player with this mechanic, there is not enough luck involved, if you are playing someone who is better than you that is it, you are very unlikely to win
wth? Isn't the whole point of being way better than someone that you will dominate the other guy who is way worse? You don't even know what you want. It's no wonder you self-mutilate
Besides, you actually have more luck winning in SC2 because you can't cheese in sports. You don't see Manchester United winning the English Premier League or UEFA anytime soon right? Nor would you stand a chance against Djokovic even if he gives you a 3 point handicap every game, nor would you beat Kobe in basketball any time.
I play a game for fun not to learn a whole load of strats before I can make it out of Bronze league!!
if you want to play for fun, stay in Bronze league. Seriously.
If you want to play football for fun would you get 10 of your buddies to play against your local football club or your national team? No. you'd play with your friends, and in football, you and your friends would be in Wood league. (Assuming you didn't represent your school, in which you'd be in Aluminium)
Or better yet just pick a hedonistic game where everybody is a winner, it fits you more. Multilating yourself is waaaaaay stupider that someone making a bad game or making a game bad.
I could go on but in short: You are delusional, and definitely not as smart as you think you are.
And btw, no you don't need to learn a load of strats in bronze. I quit SC2 after 6 months of playing it and I'm sure I can beat a bronze player without knowing any strats or what the new units do, and all that while only using one hand -- Because I'm better.
On June 27 2014 22:56 Paljas wrote:
can comfirm, i only watch sc2 with a laptop on a cemetery, otherwise it just doesnt have the right atmosphere
Hahaha whoever said germans weren't funny? :D
|
There's not enough RNG in SC2 to hold my interest anymore. You know exactly who's going to win a battle based on their amount of units, unit composition, and position on the battlefield. Unfortunately the latter isn't as important as it was in BroodWar because units clump up so much into deathballs and die so quickly that often their position makes a negligible difference. I liked how in BW you had to manage individual clumps of units into a good position in each fight, mainly because you could only select 12 units at a time. This way, you could actually win battles even with a smaller supply of units than your opponent, which rarely happens in SC2. BW is a better spectator's game.
Blizzard's implementation with Battle.net 2.0 is another reason I left. I have no friends who play SC2, and it just felt so lonely whenever I logged on. Blizzard never bothered to put in-game tournaments in SC2, like they'd done in WC3, and the game just wasn't fun to play anymore. I had no incentive to continue playing. Their lack of chat channels for the longest time also attributed to that feeling of loneliness. If I ever get LOTV, it's likely only going to be for the single-player campaign because I like the lore.
|
On June 28 2014 07:14 JieXian wrote:Show nested quote +Is that the rationale of Sports to you? Does a soccer team like Leeds United have the same chance of wining as Real Madrid? No, they are not playing on an equal playing ground. When Messi or Ronaldo dominate a sport does Fifa say hey we have to put them with a lesser team as to level the playing ground? In addition, balance changes can be triggered by populous opinion.
With all your pretentiousness you can't even see that in sports everybody is playing as "Terran", so there is nothing to be blamed but the person's skill (except for drugs in certain sports). Whereas in SC2 people can blame the race. A better comparison to SC2 would be: Show nested quote +When Innovation or Flash dominate an esport does Kespa say hey we have to put them with a lesser team as to level the playing ground?
Next, you ask for one player to dominate Show nested quote +SC2 needs to have stars that we want to see win but if the game is consistently being re-balanced this will not occur as no one player can dominate. and you follow up by wanting people who are better to lose to others, stopping them from being able to dominate. Show nested quote +I think that you are only going to attract a certain type of player with this mechanic, there is not enough luck involved, if you are playing someone who is better than you that is it, you are very unlikely to win wth? Isn't the whole point of being way better than someone that you will dominate the other guy who is way worse? You don't even know what you want. It's no wonder you self-mutilate Besides, you actually have more luck winning in SC2 because you can't cheese in sports. You don't see Manchester United winning the English Premier League or UEFA anytime soon right? Nor would you stand a chance against Djokovic even if he gives you a 3 point handicap every game, nor would you beat Kobe in basketball any time. Show nested quote +I play a game for fun not to learn a whole load of strats before I can make it out of Bronze league!! if you want to play for fun, stay in Bronze league. Seriously. If you want to play football for fun would you get 10 of your buddies to play against your local football club or your national team? No. you'd play with your friends, and in football, you and your friends would be in Wood league. (Assuming you didn't represent your school, in which you'd be in Aluminium) Or better yet just pick a hedonistic game where everybody is a winner, it fits you more. Multilating yourself is waaaaaay stupider that someone making a bad game or making a game bad. I could go on but in short: You are delusional, and definitely not as smart as you think you are. And btw, no you don't need to learn a load of strats in bronze. I quit SC2 after 6 months of playing it and I'm sure I can beat a bronze player without knowing any strats or what the new units do, and all that while only using one hand -- Because I'm better. Show nested quote +On June 27 2014 22:56 Paljas wrote:
can comfirm, i only watch sc2 with a laptop on a cemetery, otherwise it just doesnt have the right atmosphere Hahaha whoever said germans weren't funny? :D
The overarching theme is SC2 is dead, thus when I say no one dominates (it implies professional players), I was arguing that this prevents a large fanbase entering from watching the esport, as the emotional investment of watching your favorite player not winning constantly leaves the consumer disillusioned. FYI women also play the sport not just guys. Whereas when I said if someone is better than you, you are less likely to win, I meant this from the perspective of a casual player, it was the theme of the paragraph, sorry if you mixed that up. I might have to label my paragraphs in the future.
A hedonistic game is not one where everyone wins (that would be a narcissistic game; see below), rather it is a sport where everyone derives pleasure from the experience. I argued based with the use of a very primitive and basic psychological principle (operant conditioning) that MOBA games are more hedonistic. You made a pretentious inference and subsequently made an ad hominem argument.
Your last comment makes you seem a bit narcissistic. To answer your second ad hominem argument I do not think I am smart. It appears as though you are threatened by what I said and now you are responding out of anger.
If I represented my school I would be Aluminium?? How could we play in aluminium, that would be quite 'hard'.
I do see Manchester winning the Premier league in the near future. Have you seen how Van Gaal has the Netherlands playing?
In football not everyone plays as 'Terran'. There are underlying cultures and historical influences that players from particular countries learn. Therefore, when they learn the game they learn in different ways: Spanish tiki-taka, if your English you may be more focused on defense such as Italian. Dutch and Brazilian more flare, German's more industrious. Although they use the same ball and have the same number of players the underlying philosophies make different playing styles. Moreover, look at how the game has changed (being patched), diving has become a norm, tackling is now discouraged much more so than before. Soccer has become a much more passive game in terms of defense. So please move from the concrete stage of development to the abstract and you might see what is before your eyes!
So I am disillusioned, so when someone has an opinion you think it is wise and just to create ad hominem arguments and then insult them in order to prove what point? I am just raising my opinion that is all, I am not asking you to believe in it. I am not suggesting I have solved every issue at hand, I am just raising an alternative perspective, not as a means of causing controversy, rather I am merely using the knowledge I have learnt as a psychologist to try and explain why a game I love is spiraling down the drain and losing momentum, and if you feel you have the power to sanction me for this, so be it. But I will use my logic to respond and not fallacies!
|
On June 28 2014 07:23 Epishade wrote:
There's not enough RNG in SC2 to hold my interest anymore. You know exactly who's going to win a battle based on their amount of units, unit composition, and position on the battlefield. Unfortunately the latter isn't as important as it was in BroodWar because units clump up so much into deathballs and die so quickly that often their position makes a negligible difference. I liked how in BW you had to manage individual clumps of units into a good position in each fight, mainly because you could only select 12 units at a time. This way, you could actually win battles even with a smaller supply of units than your opponent, which rarely happens in SC2. BW is a better spectator's game.
Blizzard's implementation with Battle.net 2.0 is another reason I left. I have no friends who play SC2, and it just felt so lonely whenever I logged on. Blizzard never bothered to put in-game tournaments in SC2, like they'd done in WC3, and the game just wasn't fun to play anymore. I had no incentive to continue playing. Their lack of chat channels for the longest time also attributed to that feeling of loneliness. If I ever get LOTV, it's likely only going to be for the single-player campaign because I like the lore.
I agree man. Thank you for the valuable input. I was hoping for tournaments like in WC3!
|
What a long death animation, im still waiting for SC2 to die...
|
On June 28 2014 00:35 GeckoXp wrote:
SCII already died in 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013. You're a bit late to the party.
Hey, it's 2014 now, can't break the death streak, gotta keep it going 
[Edit] I also wonder if OP's heard of this guy called Taeja. Nah, Taeja's probably not that big enough of a star, too obscure for OP, Taeja hasn't like gone undefeated at dreamhack or won a bajillion of titles or anything
|
I honestly don't think SC2 is dying but I definitely think that it is not growing.
|
Korea (South)227 Posts
Every time I see the words SC2 dying, I feel annoyed. Yes, the scene isn't as large as it was back in the starting days, and certainly there are a lot of problems right now plaguing the scene and the popularity of SC2. However, to state a bunch of similar, repetitive, nonsensical reasons to somehow show that the scene is dead and gone is stupid. The game and the pro scene has never been more playable or enjoyable to watch than ever before, yet everybody want's to complain with a multitude of different reasons that all are simply weak in premise or arguments. If anyone remembers the stale games in late WoL, then you'll get what I mean.
|
You are arguing weak points. There's an obvious way to solve these issues - make the game more manual, bring back the mechanics where the difference in skillset will impact the outcome significantly enough. You get your stars back, you get new ceiling and basically sc2 becomes bw.
|
On June 28 2014 11:33 LlamaNamedOsama wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2014 00:35 GeckoXp wrote:
SCII already died in 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013. You're a bit late to the party. Hey, it's 2014 now, can't break the death streak, gotta keep it going [Edit] I also wonder if OP's heard of this guy called Taeja. Nah, Taeja's probably not that big enough of a star, too obscure for OP, Taeja hasn't like gone undefeated at dreamhack or won a bajillion of titles or anything
Yeah he has won, Dreamhacks and MLG wow, real top tier tournaments. How long did he last in IEM Katowice? Why dont Taeja play Code S? Global finals before Taeja retires we will see how good he is then when Kespa in the room. Personally I would like to see him win it (emotional investment in stars, nice to see Taeja get his dream retirement package), but his wrists prevent him from playing quite a lot.
|
On June 28 2014 12:58 usedtocare wrote:
You are arguing weak points. There's an obvious way to solve these issues - make the game more manual, bring back the mechanics where the difference in skillset will impact the outcome significantly enough. You get your stars back, you get new ceiling and basically sc2 becomes bw.
Only once in a great span of timeless time does someone etch onto the wall of Teamliquid such an epic legendary post that changes the very course of human history, and I believe you have done it today with these eloquent and powerful words. I do believe deep down in my heart that you are the light in the darkness, the ray of hope piercing the dark void of despair that shall save SC2 from inevitable doom. Finally, someone with an idea so profound that it will completely save StarCraft 2 and also make it become Brood War, bring the stars back, and create a brave new ceiling that we can only dream of aspiring to reach. User interface and fundamentals of rudimentary gameplay be damned! Let us reconstruct SC2 into the image of a game without MBS and much more limited unit selection, and less clumpy unit pathing AI! For, if there is any gripe of the plebeian concerning the overarching problem with games in this day and age, it is most definitely MBS. I look forward to seeing the stars glow once more, thanks to your genius recommendation, which could only have been divinely inspired.
|
On June 28 2014 14:49 ninazerg wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2014 12:58 usedtocare wrote:
You are arguing weak points. There's an obvious way to solve these issues - make the game more manual, bring back the mechanics where the difference in skillset will impact the outcome significantly enough. You get your stars back, you get new ceiling and basically sc2 becomes bw. Only once in a great span of timeless time does someone etch onto the wall of Teamliquid such an epic legendary post that changes the very course of human history, and I believe you have done it today with these eloquent and powerful words. I do believe deep down in my heart that you are the light in the darkness, the ray of hope piercing the dark void of despair that shall save SC2 from inevitable doom. Finally, someone with an idea so profound that it will completely save StarCraft 2 and also make it become Brood War, bring the stars back, and create a brave new ceiling that we can only dream of aspiring to reach. User interface and fundamentals of rudimentary gameplay be damned! Let us reconstruct SC2 into the image of a game without MBS and much more limited unit selection, and less clumpy unit pathing AI! For, if there is any gripe of the plebeian concerning the overarching problem with games in this day and age, it is most definitely MBS. I look forward to seeing the stars glow once more, thanks to your genius recommendation, which could only have been divinely inspired.
You have definitely improved since starting out as a support cast for some mexican teams on US East (or showmatches?) - I'm sorry I can't remember what it was. But, you should be eloquent enough now to generate wittier replies - this is pretty bleak. I guess MBS numbs even the more curious of minds.
I know the concept must be so rudimentary and obvious - it must be painful to admit. Once you come up with more ideas on why exactly former C+ players sporadically take games off of professional gamers - feel free to share. Maybe someone will finish both of your posts as a bonus, lmao
|
I think the only reason the StarCraft franchise will die is for the lack of competitive competition. It's one thing to play a game and get through the campaign, then play some online games. What then? You may get bored and move on to the next big hit. StarCraft is more than that. You can win money. Make a living. That's what makes this game worth being good at. Some folks are short sighted and think that this generation are the only ones that will play and be good at the game.
What of the up and coming kids that love gaming? StarCraft out the door? I think not. If the sponsors are still there and the other companies that back progamers, StarCraft will not die for a long time.
|
Uh excuse me but there are 20k GSL viewers who want to say, "WE DON'T THINK SO!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
