EPTWe need to come down harder on Blizzard - and why - Page 2
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
yarders
United Kingdom194 Posts
| ||
|
Merlimoo
France192 Posts
On October 26 2011 19:27 yarders wrote: Let them experiment. Why shouldn't they. I don't have a problem with removing old units. If there adding three units to each race per expansion it only makes sense that some units must be removed. They even have explained why they had to have a small unit pool. | ||
|
Barbiero
Brazil5259 Posts
They did not see the game com a competitive point of view. SC2 is being designed as a competitive game rather than a "fun game to play", and if there is the need to remove a unit because it will be useless, they will do it. No point in overlapping units, for instance, or leaving useless units. Think of the BW Scout, as someone mentioned up there. | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
On October 26 2011 19:21 shadymmj wrote: Good! This is the point I want to seize on. Couple years ago, Blizzard assured us that sc2 would be the ultimate online rts (by sc2 I mean WoL). They said that the mothership and thor would be fantastic units, so on, so forth. By making so many changes, they are essentially admitting that they made so many mistakes, even with an extra long and extra large beta. Er, yes. They've said as much.... What makes you think they'll get it right this time? Practice makes perfect? SC1 had serious issues, BW addressed them. Heck they have 2 shots at it this time. Good chance they can get it right. | ||
|
RyF
Austria508 Posts
| ||
|
Sawofhackness
Afghanistan183 Posts
On October 26 2011 19:21 shadymmj wrote: Good! This is the point I want to seize on. Couple years ago, Blizzard assured us that sc2 would be the ultimate online rts (by sc2 I mean WoL). They said that the mothership and thor would be fantastic units, so on, so forth. By making so many changes, they are essentially admitting that they made so many mistakes, even with an extra long and extra large beta. What makes you think they'll get it right this time? Why are you "building a case" against Blizzard? You are just indulging in bitter speculation, instead of fairly judging the finished product. Try writing something normal and positive for once? /getting so tired of these type of posters | ||
|
shadymmj
1906 Posts
On October 26 2011 19:27 yarders wrote: Let them experiment. Why shouldn't they. I don't have a problem with removing old units. If there adding three units to each race per expansion it only makes sense that some units must be removed. because if they fixed the underlying mechanics within the game, the old units wouldn't have such difficult-to-resolve problems, and would therefore be able to be balanced. adding new units is not a bad thing, but adding new units without giving thought to what made the old ones a problem - that's the issue I have outlined in this thread. | ||
|
Davideogame
United States7 Posts
On October 26 2011 19:21 shadymmj wrote: Good! This is the point I want to seize on. Couple years ago, Blizzard assured us that sc2 would be the ultimate online rts (by sc2 I mean WoL). They said that the mothership and thor would be fantastic units, so on, so forth. By making so many changes, they are essentially admitting that they made so many mistakes, even with an extra long and extra large beta. What makes you think they'll get it right this time? It's very hard to balance an asymmetric game, even with extensive play-testing (see WoW, TF2, and BW). Sure they make mistakes, but WoL is by and large a very balanced game. There's no point in keeping a unit in the game if its function largely overlaps with other units, but you can't know what a unit's function is for sure until the metagame has had time to establish itself. | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
| ||
|
firehand101
Australia3152 Posts
| ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10947 Posts
Could someone explain me Blizzards tought process that lead to the Tempest please? "Huge" Mutaballs are a problem because Phoenix can't deal with them. ---> Remove the Carrier (instead of buffing/balancing it) and put in a Corsair on roids. Does this make sense to anyone? Does anyone think this is a good idea? Either "help" the Phoenix to better deal with huge balls or "change it/remove it".. Don't remove the iconic Protoss unit just because you are not able to figure out how to balance Colossi/Corruptor-Viking/Carrier relationships... | ||
|
Merlimoo
France192 Posts
I reassure myself knowing that they have better tools than us to address the balance problem. In term of race philosophy or orientation, even if I really would like some stuffs of my own, it is their game, their choices. | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
On October 26 2011 19:35 Velr wrote: Could someone explain me Blizzards tought process that lead to the Tempest please? "Huge" Mutaballs are a problem because Phoenix can't deal with them. ---> Remove the Carrier (instead of buffing/balancing it) and put in a Corsair on roids. Does this make sense to anyone? Does anyone think this is a good idea? Uh, should they have given interceptors and AoE attack instead or something? What do you suggest they did? Either "help" the Phoenix to better deal with huge balls or "change it/remove it".. Don't remove the iconic Protoss unit just because you are not able to figure out how to balance Colossi/Corruptor-Viking/Carrier relationships... The phoenix doesn't need help, it just doesn't fulfil the role of stopping mass air. Against mass air you need either: a godly single target unit (phoenix can't be that strong) or aoe. | ||
|
Skwid1g
United States953 Posts
Honestly most of what you said is just flat out wrong. On October 26 2011 19:35 Velr wrote: Could someone explain me Blizzards tought process that lead to the Tempest please? "Huge" Mutaballs are a problem because Phoenix can't deal with them. ---> Remove the Carrier (instead of buffing/balancing it) and put in a Corsair on roids. Does this make sense to anyone? Does anyone think this is a good idea? Either "help" the Phoenix to better deal with huge balls or "change it/remove it".. Don't remove the iconic Protoss unit just because you are not able to figure out how to balance Colossi/Corruptor-Viking/Carrier relationships... The phoenix isn't the corsair. It's a decent AA unit but it's more of a harassment unit than anything. Although I'd rather just have the tempest and the carrier, rather than having to remove one. | ||
|
Eppa!
Sweden4641 Posts
On October 26 2011 19:21 shadymmj wrote: Good! This is the point I want to seize on. Couple years ago, Blizzard assured us that sc2 would be the ultimate online rts (by sc2 I mean WoL). They said that the mothership and thor would be fantastic units, so on, so forth. By making so many changes, they are essentially admitting that they made so many mistakes, even with an extra long and extra large beta. What makes you think they'll get it right this time? Dusty said that they where wiling to take risks to make game play more fun (like they did in BW). | ||
|
Daralii
United States16991 Posts
On October 26 2011 19:38 Skwid1g wrote: The phoenix isn't the corsair. It's a decent AA unit but it's more of a harassment unit than anything. Although I'd rather just have the tempest and the carrier, rather than having to remove one. Wouldn't be surprised if they do exactly that, honestly. This is the second time they've removed the carrier in favor of a unit called the tempest(very different units, though) during SC2's development. | ||
|
Merlimoo
France192 Posts
The model works for our society, didn't it ? Humm... wait a minut?!? xD | ||
|
Roblin
Sweden948 Posts
On October 26 2011 19:29 Zephirdd wrote: Old expansions like AoE2 into AoE2:tC, AoM into AoM:TT, SC into SC:BW, never removed units because they had one thing in common. They did not see the game com a competitive point of view. SC2 is being designed as a competitive game rather than a "fun game to play", and if there is the need to remove a unit because it will be useless, they will do it. No point in overlapping units, for instance, or leaving useless units. Think of the BW Scout, as someone mentioned up there. its not the competitive point of view, its the fact that having 30 units per race is a clusterfuck nightmare to even approach balancing, and even worse, new players might leave the game simply because its to complicated. blizz has stated previously something along the lines of "in SC1, it was believed to be too few units, with 7-9 units per race, so they added some in BW and made it 10-12 units per race, and 10-12 was found to be a good number of units, not too few, and not too many, however, it was also agreed upon that a few more and it would be too much, then came WOL, where blizz designed each race to fit the standard of BW, 10-12 units, because they found that that is a a good number of units, however, this means it is impossible to just cram more units in there for the exapnsions, and as such, some units will be removed to make room for the new units." if OP have any complaints about this, please turn to the blizz forum. | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
On October 26 2011 19:38 Skwid1g wrote: The phoenix isn't the corsair. It's a decent AA unit but it's more of a harassment unit than anything. Although I'd rather just have the tempest and the carrier, rather than having to remove one. It would make endgame Protoss unkillable as either carrier/collo or tempest/collo would be unbeatable. With only tempest/collo it can be beaten by heavy ground army. | ||
motbob
United States12546 Posts
| ||
| ||
