EPTPatching is a bad idea - Page 3
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
TurboDreams
United States427 Posts
| ||
FakeSteve[TPR]
Valhalla18444 Posts
| ||
|
NukeTheBunnys
United States1004 Posts
tl:dr patching is going to change a lot more things then just the surface changes, and we need time to figure out all the repercussions | ||
|
cocosoft
Sweden1068 Posts
| ||
|
tacrats
476 Posts
On September 21 2010 05:41 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote: i just hope they don't take the wow arena route, patching every couple of months and shifting the balance all over the place. rts games need stability. i dont play WoW but i assume they did such things to keep players interested with more dynamic changes? I hope for sc2 they just plan to find a good equilibrium point and leave it at that and only patch if necessary. | ||
|
Tazza
Korea (South)1678 Posts
| ||
|
avilo
United States4100 Posts
On September 21 2010 05:41 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote: i just hope they don't take the wow arena route, patching every couple of months and shifting the balance all over the place. rts games need stability. As of right now, and the last half of beta, they have sadly been going that route, also the command and conquer route of patching. What I mean by that is, they take whatever is whined about the most for a short period of time, and assume/deduce that whatever that is must be imbalanced because "everyone" says it is, and they patch the game, making it an entirely new game every time. It's the worst way to patch an RTS. | ||
|
Bleb
Croatia278 Posts
T has to many viable options in tvz... It's as simple as that It's not just one opening zergs are having problems with | ||
|
Kvz
United States463 Posts
| ||
|
Gudeldar
United States1200 Posts
| ||
|
cuppatea
United Kingdom1401 Posts
| ||
|
slam
United States923 Posts
| ||
|
tacrats
476 Posts
On September 21 2010 05:44 avilo wrote: As of right now, and the last half of beta, they have sadly been going that route, also the command and conquer route of patching. What I mean by that is, they take whatever is whined about the most for a short period of time, and assume/deduce that whatever that is must be imbalanced because "everyone" says it is, and they patch the game, making it an entirely new game every time. It's the worst way to patch an RTS. i disagree. beta patches dont count. 1.1 only has minor changes which are justified. | ||
|
Ordained
United States779 Posts
When I first saw the magic box back in beta I was stunned that something like that was in the game. I was scared to even use it because I know Blizzard has the tools to take something like that out now. (Glad they kept that in by the way.) There are a few tricks like this but they are few and far between. Look at Voidray "Fazing" that was patched so quick your head actually spun a bit. Which can hinder creativity, (granted fazing made voidrays godmode but still.) But some changes need to be made. This game will never be balanced fully if you keep waiting for some miracle player to find a miracle glitch and never patch what is actually imbalanced. You bring up the reaper opening as an example. Sure Zergs are getting good at stopping it but it give the Terran WAY too much of an advantage. They can expand easilly because the reaper is ridiculously cheap and they can tech swap into the reaper's counter faster than anyone can scout. With mules they can afford to cut workers and can rebuild an army just as fast as Zerg or Protoss thanks to add-on swapping. The reaper opening is so much more than "oh dang they counter zerglings" it gives the Terran a free expansion while denying the Zerg by building barracks that you will build anyway. | ||
|
in7e.sCream
Germany48 Posts
| ||
|
Sqq
Norway2023 Posts
| ||
|
Motiva
United States1774 Posts
I mean sure, the WoW Arena or GW methods aren't ideal for RTS, but that seems to be a different argument to me. | ||
|
Exyia
United States17 Posts
These aren't gamebreaking, and their reasonings behind each change in the situation report sound extremely reasonable to me. For instance, they said they're finding reapers a bit too effective, especially early-game. So they're increasing the build time. They are NOT breaking the unit. The reaper is still the same unit. I won't go into too much detail, but I don't think blizzard is overdoing it with this patch. The reaper is still the same unit, the bunker rush is now easier to deal with, but is STILL the same building. Tanks are the only unit getting a major change, but it's definitely for the better to define their role as a supportive armored-unit counter. I can see what you're afraid of, but I'm not afraid of it THIS patch | ||
|
dreamend
64 Posts
On September 21 2010 05:52 Motiva wrote: Your comparing the evolution that occurred after several years and several patches to convey that a 2month old game with 0 patches needs 0 patches? I'm not sure I follow? then read it again, please | ||
|
Gigaudas
Sweden1213 Posts
On September 21 2010 05:48 in7e.sCream wrote: i really hope there are more changes then the 3-5 posted in the SR1 seriously. This. The game is not balanced and I think that patching a lot now will be good for SC2 in the long run. Some patches will fail but it can be reversed with the next patch. Besides, we won't have stability until a while after the last expansion so might as well patch away now  | ||
| ||
