With Diablo 2 receiving a patch and Warcraft 3 about to get a patch, Koreans are starting to get antsy and are expecting a patch for Brood War. Nobody knows if SC will or will not get a patch, but we can dream.
So, hoping Blizzard browses this forum, what would you like to see in a patch for StarCraft?
If you don't really care, what do you think this patch will address assuming we get one? Warcraft 3's patch is introducing a matchmaking system supposedly similar to modern games like StarCraft II, for example. Do you expect something like that?
EDIT: I kind of expected this to be a discussion about things other than balance, as mapmakers have that under control for the most part. I guess my two cents would be that I expect a fix for units that get stuck (fuck this bug) and maybe the ability to join chat channels in-game.
Slight buffs to DA, ghost, queens, and scouts would indeed be a nice way to freshen things up after a decade of no changes without disrupting the metagame balance too much.
Aside of that I believe patch should fix compatibility issue with win 64 OS blizzard is definitely working on a "remastered" starcraft, a friend of mine working for them confirmed me that there is such a project. There was also on tl a thread stating that blizzard was looking for developer on that topic.
On March 13 2016 02:01 phosphorylation wrote: Slight buffs to DA, ghost, queens, and scouts would indeed be a nice way to freshen things up after a decade of no changes without disrupting the metagame balance too much.
Ghosts and scouts you can make a case for, but queens and dark archons are both good and useful the way that they currently are. Ghosts are already okay though in TvP on turtle friendly maps like Heartbreak Ridge. However, it would be cool if ghosts could be used as an alternative to vessels on normal maps, too. So a slight increase in health and movement speed could be cool to see.
The only change to the dark archon that I support is letting it keep its shield after mind controlling, because there is no reason for the silly shield loss to be in the game.
I don't think dark archons even need a buff. They're absolutely fantastic and I think their spell costs are reasonable. Queens are amazing as well, maybe increase max mana pool of queens slightly so they can cast 2 spawn broodlings? Or add an upgrade to increase their mana regenration or something. It literally takes 3 minutes iirc to generate 150 mana for spawn broodling.
I'm quite unfamiliar with ghosts, I'm sure other people can contribute which aspects are particularly lacking. Same thing with scouts.
ghosts are just slow and fragile. however a speed buff will look out of place as its current speed is consistent with other (unstimmed) infantry units. so hp boost is nice
wraiths can cloak (which isnt very expensive) and are fully repairable mutas are cheap, have glaive bonus and can morph scouts are just pricey pieces of crap and their only niche is to mock a weak opponent. you even need to fork out so much just to get maximum speed! imo it should automatically have speed upgrade included and give some new ability that can be researched at fleet beacon, this keeps it line with the fighter planes of the other races
On March 13 2016 02:44 Probemicro wrote: ghosts are just slow and fragile. however a speed buff will look out of place as its current speed is consistent with other (unstimmed) infantry units. so hp boost is nice
imo it should automatically have speed upgrade included and give some new ability that can be researched at fleet beacon, this keeps it line with the fighter planes of the other races
No way. The first scout right out of the gate would be able to kite an infinite amount of scourge. This would be imba.
On March 13 2016 02:44 Probemicro wrote: ghosts are just slow and fragile. however a speed buff will look out of place as its current speed is consistent with other (unstimmed) infantry units. so hp boost is nice
imo it should automatically have speed upgrade included and give some new ability that can be researched at fleet beacon, this keeps it line with the fighter planes of the other races
No way. The first scout right out of the gate would be able to kite an infinite amount of scourge. This would be imba.
having the ability to kite an infinitw amount of scourge doesnt mean you are always able to do that. just like moving shot phoenixes in sc2 are not imba. not to mention the cost is still pricey and since the speed is now given automatically it can be readjusted to be in line with the other fighter planes and instead be given a proper niche ability like the other fighters do
Before any balance changes I would just like to see infrastructure changes, so that the game runs on newer versions of Windows without jumping through an ungodly number of hoops. Then I'd like to see things like matchmaking, graphics updates, widescreen support, etc etc. Of course, these will probably never happen, but I'd honestly rather see all of these before any attempts to fiddle with balance.
On March 13 2016 03:33 writer22816 wrote: Before any balance changes I would just like to see infrastructure changes, so that the game runs on newer versions of Windows without jumping through an ungodly number of hoops. Then I'd like to see things like matchmaking, graphics updates, widescreen support, etc etc. Of course, these will probably never happen, but I'd honestly rather see all of these before any attempts to fiddle with balance.
I am with you. I would love it if they added a match making system, widescreen support would be awesome.
1) Skipping anywhere in replay- so annoying if you miss something and have to reload the replay. 2) Automatchmaking 3) Antihack for their own servers- I mean if blizz is paying for it, why not remove hackers? 4) Increase sprite limit so the valkyrie bug is fixed. Balance is fine- maybe a slight buff to scouts/ghosts/queens.
No way. The first scout right out of the gate would be able to kite an infinite amount of scourge. This would be imba.
Does the Perfection needs a change? xD Maybe they can touch dragoon and goliaths to the point where they are not the dummiest units in the game. Sometimes their movement is annoying.. :/
We all know which units need work: Ghosts & Scouts.
Scouts: In PvZ they are too slow to run away from scourge so they are wasted money. In PvT they can be used to annoy the meching terran but are too expensive to be worth it. In PvP they are probably outright useless (I never saw any myself).
So give them the same starting speed as corsairs (so that they can run away from scourge) and make them cheaper (to make them more available in PvT). To balance this out I could live with a damage nerf to their anti-air and perhaps their health?
Ghosts: What is the role of the Ghost anyway? It has low health, low damage, slow speed and costs mostly gas. One would assume they are a spellcaster. But their "spells" arent all that great compared to other spellcasters. Overall they may not be a horrible unit but they just dont have a clear purpose. Do you use them to harass? (too little hp, too little damage, too little speed) Do you use them for support? (too much APM required to cast all those lock downs on individual targets) Do you use them for nukes? (costly, not guaranteed damage, takes a lot of time and effort)
Increased sprite cap so that valkyries don't have to freeze when there are a lot of actions going on. And also increase the limit for 'Cannot create more units' cap.
Ranked games, auto match making. Official Ladder. Stats. Tourneys. Complete observer mode. Server based games instead of P2P. And a million dollars yearly tournament. :D
On March 13 2016 07:07 00Zarathustra wrote: I want everything Starcraft 2 has. (competitive)
Ranked games, auto match making. Official Ladder. Stats. Tourneys. Complete observer mode. Server based games instead of P2P. And a million dollars yearly tournament. :D
ranked game? we have that already
Auto match making wouldn't be bad assuming there is enough players to make it relevant.
Official Ladder? Define official...
Stats, Tourneys? We have that already...
Complete observer mode? We can have players controls, upgrades, units, resources and visions, what is it that you need more?
Server based games instead of p2p? I am happy to be able to finish my game if I lose connection from the server. And I am also glad that even if all servers die I could still play with friends. So no, better not have that.
Medic: Make upgrades cheaper Ghosts: Cost too much gas, too little HP and armour Queens: Energy regen takes forever, gas expensive DA's: Too vulnerable after MC, Maelstrom too expensive Scouts: Speed upgrade should be researched by default, buff shields to need 3 scourge (they're great for PvZ harass) (I'd also like to see Valks need 3 scourge to kill)
An interesting question: if there's an upgrade that everyone ALWAYS gets - is there any point making it upgradable, instead of just enabling it by default? Case example is Siege Upgrade in SC2. Sure, things like Stim should be upgradeable, but I think Blind, Mind Control, Scout speed and Queen energy should be enabled by default.
As P I'll say, Something that allows P to play something other than FE with tight wall+canons all the time vs Z would be great, without making any big changes, would bring some freaking needed fresh air to the early game man. In my own experience, mutas with the stack back&forth attack exploit are too strong to allow P to open on 1 base, especially considering the ambiguity that Z can retain at that point. Archons can't deal with them because of the exploit (which imo is stupid), and you are at risk if you build many corsairs at that point because Z may crush them with some scourges so you need to stay @home once spire is up and if you make more corsairs but then it's a hydra attack or something you lose for investing all that gas + minerals... If you don't make more corsairs you'll be very slowed down / killed by mutas. It's possible that a change to scout would help for that, something that allows scouts to be stronger in small number of units situations. It could be great to allow some early scouts to be a bit useful as AtG attack/defense in the early game in PvT again, and against small number of mutas or hydras... Scout definitely needs help, cheaper, or quite a bit stronger. Probably a bit cheaper, and a bit stronger. Stronger how? Not explosive missiles, but normal, so they can hit muta full damage? A bit stronger ground attack? (12?) A change in the attack upgrade effect? A cost more in the vicinity of 200/125? As was said before, maybe give them their speed upgrade without research? Or their sight upgrade? Sometimes, I think Mutas should be Medium size, so that goons can hit them at 75% instead of 50%, and also hydras. Seriously ZvZ revolves too much around mutas.. And ZvT too much muta harrass all the time at start... just my opinion. If the stack exploit should stay, why not change something like muta size so that mutas are still useful but not so predominant. Subtle stuff that just brings a little strategic more variety early on, which has possitive impact on the possibilities for midgame. Would love for T to be able to Bio a little bit more in TvP but that's really hard considering storm and scarabs. It's complicated. Definitely want to see more ghosts in TvP, the one thing they need for sure is a stronger attack. They should be able to kill High templars in a few hits, like 3 or 4 or 5? So, give them around 25 or 30 concussive damage? Even better if they can still be somewhat useful against medium units like Hydras in hit & run or advantageous situation. Some upgrades are never used because they are too expansive + not so useful. At least make them cheaper? Like, disruption web, argus jewel, scout speed, scout sight. Overall, I think Dark archon are fine, though probably maelstrom less energy like was previously said (75?), maybe less vulnerability after mind control, or cheaper mind control research, or 125 energy. Reaver is too random.. but its hard to change without changing the damage. I would make them more reliable with a slightly smaller AoE. At least prevent them from bugging and not firing at all + even moving forward instead of attacking as happens sometimes, that's not fair. Goon stuck unresponsive bug...
Would like to see a tiny bit more guardians in Z late game (maybe some extra damage?). Ultras could lose 1 armor point. That's a crazy suggestion, but with 2 base armor and no chitnous carapace upgrade... I think it'd be nice, cause Z would be less scared to use them before the upgrade as well. Zealots should damage them just a little bit better I feel, probably marines too. Also think BCs should have a stronger base attack^^ more hp for infested terran sounds great^^ In the craziness department, I think storm energy cost to 100, reduced research cost, and halucination 75 energy would be good all around and help T bio a little in tvp too^^
I have another crazy suggestion. What if the shield upgrade increased shield regeneration rate instead of shield-armor?^^ +1 per tick. That's crazy.
A great change would be to allow groups of units to pass chokes more easily without babysitting (no change in movement mechanics, just a fix for the issue where they move around in wrong directions).
Other than that something to freshen up freaking public battle.net, that requires a functional ladder.. and if possible at all, remove the port forward requirement. Lan-latency.
On March 13 2016 08:58 Savant wrote: Integrate with Bnet 2.0 and remove the need to portforward. Given recent history, I don't trust Blizzard to touch the gameplay itself.
Oh fuck I totally forgot about the port forward issue. Usually it's pretty simple, but I had to set a static IP on my local network and for my modem it was actually really frustrating. Broke my network access several times from doing it wrong and with the tens of thousands of modems that people use there is no clear guide on how to do this.
I don't play BW anymore but a patch to allow watching older BW replays would be nice. I'm not sure if there is a workaround but I remember that if a replay uses an old BW version, then I had to downgrade to watch replay without bugs.
fix crash issues for Windows 7 (i assume the issues are present in win8 and 10 also). add native windowed mode support. integrate into bnet launcher. add an actual ladder system
On March 13 2016 02:44 Probemicro wrote: ghosts are just slow and fragile. however a speed buff will look out of place as its current speed is consistent with other (unstimmed) infantry units. so hp boost is nice
wraiths can cloak (which isnt very expensive) and are fully repairable mutas are cheap, have glaive bonus and can morph scouts are just pricey pieces of crap and their only niche is to mock a weak opponent. you even need to fork out so much just to get maximum speed! imo it should automatically have speed upgrade included and give some new ability that can be researched at fleet beacon, this keeps it line with the fighter planes of the other races
Honestly in a fight vs mass capital ships scouts are king fam, attack decent fast and do what 34? damage a hit fully upgraded and are kinda beefy.
i'd be in favor of workers spending the money upon an order being issued
e.g. have 125 minerals, order scv to build depot, scv is dumb as shit and takes forever to go to depot spot, shows up to depot spot with <100 minerals as maybe macro cycle went through, and doesn't build it.
I want that 125 minerals to immediately jump down to 25 minerals, and if the scv is stupid and can't construct the depot because some other scv next to him finishes a depot and blocks the spot at just the right time, you get back the issued-but-not-spent 100 minerals
I'm not even asking for scvs to be smart when building, just I want money spent when I issue the command
On March 13 2016 08:58 Savant wrote: Integrate with Bnet 2.0 and remove the need to portforward. Given recent history, I don't trust Blizzard to touch the gameplay itself.
this is pretty much the main thing and only thing they should do. this and making it compatible with modern OS. balance changes? oh come on, ud have to be naive to think they will touch balance.
bnet 2.0 would possibly mean matchmaking...that would be insane.
On March 13 2016 13:19 N.geNuity wrote: i'd be in favor of workers spending the money upon an order being issued
e.g. have 125 minerals, order scv to build depot, scv is dumb as shit and takes forever to go to depot spot, shows up to depot spot with <100 minerals as maybe macro cycle went through, and doesn't build it.
I want that 125 minerals to immediately jump down to 25 minerals, and if the scv is stupid and can't construct the depot because some other scv next to him finishes a depot and blocks the spot at just the right time, you get back the issued-but-not-spent 100 minerals
I'm not even asking for scvs to be smart when building, just I want money spent when I issue the command
thats like one of the things im least worried about
These threads are always scary cause it doesn't take much for a moron exec to read and start getting ideas. Instead of things I want changed I'm gonna make some predictions:
1. Replays will stop working or have bugs. Prepare to have 2 BW installed on your computer if you want to watch old ones. 2. If they touch balance the game is over 3. If they touch the resolution the game is also over. If you ever seen or messed with reshack you know how small things get. If they just release high-res textures but keep things the same size it can work though. 4. If they touch the interface (unlimited unit selection for example), the game is over
On March 13 2016 14:43 Scarbo wrote: These threads are always scary cause it doesn't take much for a moron exec to read and start getting ideas. Instead of things I want changed I'm gonna make some predictions:
1. Replays will stop working or have bugs. Prepare to have 2 BW installed on your computer if you want to watch old ones. 2. If they touch balance the game is over 3. If they touch the resolution the game is also over. If you ever seen or messed with reshack you know how small things get. If they just release high-res textures but keep the same aspect ratio it can work though. 4. If they touch the interface (unlimited unit selection for example), the game is over
After the disaster that was Legacy of the Void and the teams very clearly being separate, I don't think we have to worry about that. These patches seem to just be getting everything to work on modern operating systems.
I never even meant for this to be a balance discussion, meant more for the infinite amount of bugs the game has. If they touch anything balance or gameplay related most people would quit, and I'm sure Blizzard's classic team knows this.
You should always expect balance discussion when you bring up patches to the game. It is the natural way.
What would I like to see in a balance patch: (50% fun 50% competitive mind you) - Vulture cost up to 100 minerals - SCV hp down to 50 hp - Something that will allow protoss have viable non Bisu-build PvZ openings. - Something that will fix ZvZ and allow midgame ZvT wins other than mutas. - Something that will allow diversity in TvP compositions.
What I would like to see in a non-balance patch: - remove stuff like the need for port-forwarding - improve the sprite limit without changing the game code - support for newer platforms
-New resolutions. 640x480 is not cutting it everyone is literally playing with black bars or stretched resolution, few people use a 4:3 monitor, this one is a must in my book.
-Color fix built in.
-Balance to stay the same
-ability to stream full screen without having to tweak or use and 3rd party software. ex: on OBS; ability to click game capture "starcraft: broodwar" and stream fine from there.
-Integrated hotkey changes so the "different hotkeys is cheating" can be laid to rest. Many people who want to play this game are not as young as they once were and probably would like a grid or modified layout probe=e scourge=c so on.
On March 13 2016 19:21 reps)squishy wrote: -New resolutions. 640x480 is not cutting it everyone is literally playing with black bars or stretched resolution, few people use a 4:3 monitor, this one is a must in my book.
-Color fix built in.
-Balance to stay the same
-ability to stream full screen without having to tweak or use and 3rd party software. ex: on OBS; ability to click game capture "starcraft: broodwar" and stream fine from there.
-Integrated hotkey changes so the "different hotkeys is cheating" can be laid to rest. Many people who want to play this game are not as young as they once were and probably would like a grid or modified layout probe=e scourge=c so on.
-Make hosting possible for all connections.
-Support for newer O.S.
1. I personally think we should have the option between 640x480 and 852x480 so they're both the same but you can get your black bars if for whatever reason you don't know how to add them.
2. I'd expect this, it's a DirectDraw issue.
3. I'm sure they would never touch balance.
4. This is related to how the process is executed. If I recall correctly the Battle.net menu is several layered windows and the actual game is marked as a different window, so it causes all sorts of streaming problems.
5. I consider it cheating, and Fish bans for it.
6. I sure hope so
7. That's most likely the whole point of a potential patch.
On March 13 2016 20:06 heronn wrote: - 1280x720 resolution + zoom in
- 24 unit selection
Balance:
- Mutalisk - medium size
- High Templar - increase gas cost to 175, Storm cost 100 energy also increase storm duration by 25%, KA increases energy by 100
- Reaver - fix scarab bug's
- Scout cost less minerals and speed upgrade at start
- Ghost speed-hp buff, lockdown cost 75 energy + has range 10
- Queen - spawn broodling cost 125
Balance changes should be implement firstly in balance test map.
This isn't SC2, it's not that simple. We can't just throw together a balance test map and call it a day when the game has been the same for like 15 years
*** Since zerglings are small units and pop out as 2 from 1 larva egg allow to select 24 of them instead of 12 at once (f.e. you can bind to 1 key 24 lings). It's not about infinite unit selection don't confuse or be angry, only lings because they're really small and take too much place. You ask what happens if you select 11 hydras and 2 lings? Selected units will be 13: 11 hydras+2 lings. *** Scourges also are small and pop out from 1 larva egg (read above). *** Implement HD soundtrack (My HD music patch for example) ***They should improve AI so newcomers won't suck on iCCup and fall to D- instantly. *** -Reserved-
I think they could go pretty crazy now that the pro scene is less serious. I don't care about higher res, but they could do it if they felt like it. Really the wishlist is just match making + simulated LAN latency on the public b.net servers + support the most recent versions of Mac and Windows and if there's enough market, Linux.
On March 13 2016 20:06 heronn wrote: - 1280x720 resolution + zoom in
- 24 unit selection
Balance:
- Mutalisk - medium size
- High Templar - increase gas cost to 175, Storm cost 100 energy also increase storm duration by 25%, KA increases energy by 100
- Reaver - fix scarab bug's
- Scout cost less minerals and speed upgrade at start
- Ghost speed-hp buff, lockdown cost 75 energy + has range 10
- Queen - spawn broodling cost 125
Balance changes should be implement firstly in balance test map.
24 units select, good lord. Have fun getting your barracks sniped by a pack of 23 perfectly controlled stacked mutas. You wanna just make turrets do splash damage and have 5x the health to compensate?
On March 13 2016 20:06 heronn wrote: - 1280x720 resolution + zoom in
- 24 unit selection
Balance:
- Mutalisk - medium size
- High Templar - increase gas cost to 175, Storm cost 100 energy also increase storm duration by 25%, KA increases energy by 100
- Reaver - fix scarab bug's
- Scout cost less minerals and speed upgrade at start
- Ghost speed-hp buff, lockdown cost 75 energy + has range 10
- Queen - spawn broodling cost 125
Balance changes should be implement firstly in balance test map.
24 units select, good lord. Have fun getting your barracks sniped by a pack of 23 perfectly controlled stacked mutas. You wanna just make turrets do splash damage and have 5x the health to compensate?
Some people said that before and after every balance patch (1.02, 1.04, 1.05, 1.08). Didn't work out that way. People kept playing happily, and the game got better with every balance patch.
Though yes, I'm definitely in the 'small balance changes at most' camp.
3. If they touch the resolution the game is also over. If you ever seen or messed with reshack you know how small things get. If they just release high-res textures but keep things the same size it can work though.
Wat? You definitely want hi-res. You can do it in a way that doesn't make units and buildings tiny or make you see way waaaay more of the map at any one time (though aspect ratio will very likely have to change, so you'll see 'a bit' more of the map no matter what. No one wants big honking vertical black window bars as part of their UI).
4. If they touch the interface (unlimited unit selection for example), the game is over
Probably, yeah. There's some minor things that could be made easier, but things like upping unit select from 12 units would be an unmitigated disaster.
One would have to not understand BW at all to make such a change.
On March 13 2016 20:06 heronn wrote: - 1280x720 resolution + zoom in
- 24 unit selection
Balance:
- Mutalisk - medium size
- High Templar - increase gas cost to 175, Storm cost 100 energy also increase storm duration by 25%, KA increases energy by 100
- Reaver - fix scarab bug's
- Scout cost less minerals and speed upgrade at start
- Ghost speed-hp buff, lockdown cost 75 energy + has range 10
- Queen - spawn broodling cost 125
Balance changes should be implement firstly in balance test map.
24 units select, good lord. Have fun getting your barracks sniped by a pack of 23 perfectly controlled stacked mutas. You wanna just make turrets do splash damage and have 5x the health to compensate?
My Valkyries/Corsairs wainting for them ^^ If mutas are medium Goliaths and Goons should have more chance against them.
If 24 is imba so maybe we can try 18?
Its only proposition.
Imo balance changes bring back no use units to gameplay so open doors to new strategies and gives a lot of depth in overall gameplay but its only my suggestion. BW is absolutely fine and nearly perfect game for me (always been) but can be perfect
On March 13 2016 02:01 phosphorylation wrote: Slight buffs to DAs, ghosts, queens, and scouts would indeed be a nice way to freshen things up after a decade of no changes without disrupting the metagame balance too much.
Definitely agreed.
Also wouldn't mind seeing slight changes to Medics' Heal (feels a little too 'rigged' vs Z), and ZvZ being less completely about ling-muta, with almost no chance of getting to Hive level tech.
Also never liked how tac airs' (scouts, wraiths) ground attack got so hosed in the 1.04 patch, even though there were new units (sairs, valks) explicitly designed to deal with packs of tac air.
Would like to see Greater Spire units (devourers, guardians) have a bit more of a role.
Fix obvious bugs that impact gameplay, like the valk sprite bug, dragoons getting stuck, the observer-turret bug, the very worst examples of 'derp' scarab-pathing, etc.
You really should be able to decide which side of a production building your units spawn out of. Important for wall-ins, etc.
The last balance patch was 15 years ago, the meta of the game has shifted in ways since then that no game designer could possibly foresee. So yeah, do some minor tweaks for the better, but do as little as possible while doing that. Don't 'love' BW to death.
On March 13 2016 20:06 heronn wrote: - 1280x720 resolution + zoom in
- 24 unit selection
Balance:
- Mutalisk - medium size
- High Templar - increase gas cost to 175, Storm cost 100 energy also increase storm duration by 25%, KA increases energy by 100
- Reaver - fix scarab bug's
- Scout cost less minerals and speed upgrade at start
- Ghost speed-hp buff, lockdown cost 75 energy + has range 10
- Queen - spawn broodling cost 125
Balance changes should be implement firstly in balance test map.
24 units select, good lord. Have fun getting your barracks sniped by a pack of 23 perfectly controlled stacked mutas. You wanna just make turrets do splash damage and have 5x the health to compensate?
My Valkyries/Corsairs wainting for them ^^ If mutas are medium Goliaths and Goons should have more chance against them.
If 24 is imba so maybe we can try 18?
Its only proposition.
Imo balance changes bring back no use units to gameplay so open doors to new strategies and gives a lot of depth in overall gameplay but its only my suggestion. BW is absolutely fine and nearly perfect game for me (always been) but can be perfect
These changes are insane and would never work. I hope balance isn't changed at all, actually. The game is too settled.
I agree that as long as the stack back&forth air attack exploit stays, it is a very bad idea to increase unit selection limit. I agree that increasing the unit selection limit COULD be a good thing, but it needs thorough testing and keeping the option of rolling back if it doesn't work out that well with the UI and balance. In my opinion I would like to see that exploit go because I believe it causes problems and imbalance by reducing strategic depth of the game significantly, but I believe if it ever was to be considered seriously this should not be decided without polling the existing BW community appropriately.
-auto matchmaking system -DA starting with 6(4?) energy if the respective upgrade researched -choose colour manually -some sort of optional "new graphics" — I personally love how bright and deep are colours in wc3, whereas in bw it's too gloomy, dirty, I'd say, muddy. Always seems like it's night time. But for those who love original graphics, I want this to be optional -option to swithc in-game chat off, or some sort of filters allowing only "gl" "hf" and "gg" -more chat commands — e.g I'd love to have /dnd for non-friends
I would like protoss shuttle to be a bit cheaper (150) and have a bit more hp to tank 3 scourge. It would encourage more usage in pvt and pvz which usually makes for very exciting harass oriented games.
1) auto game matching 2) the travel time of EMP(Science Vessel) 3) Latency(lag issue) 4) command action faster(Watch old FPVODs of players. Faster than #l2)
On March 13 2016 13:19 N.geNuity wrote: i'd be in favor of workers spending the money upon an order being issued
e.g. have 125 minerals, order scv to build depot, scv is dumb as shit and takes forever to go to depot spot, shows up to depot spot with <100 minerals as maybe macro cycle went through, and doesn't build it.
I want that 125 minerals to immediately jump down to 25 minerals, and if the scv is stupid and can't construct the depot because some other scv next to him finishes a depot and blocks the spot at just the right time, you get back the issued-but-not-spent 100 minerals
I'm not even asking for scvs to be smart when building, just I want money spent when I issue the command
I disagree, being able to spam build while waiting for the worker to get to the location allows you to build more structures faster.
-Make it that you at least you attack the medic in front instead of just moving around like idiots with ur zerlings. That would be cool i guess -Scarab better interacition when close to mineral field -Give spider mine a diferent death and explosition animation
Scouts cost less, Spawn Broodlings at 100 energy, Vultures only come with 1 free mine, Tanks minus 10 damage, Dragoon AI fixed, Carrier maxes out at 6 interceptors, Devourers release mini anti air flies, Guardians do splash damage, Medic gas cost plus 25
Should balance out the T favored landscape at S class levels
Vultures get 2 mines, not 3. That's the only balance change I would want.
Outside of that, I would like them to fix the port-fowarding problem on standard battle-net. I have some friends who have wanted to play with me, but when I start having to explain about downloading launchers and making accounts (like ICCup) they always just decide to do something else.
Being able to log in battle.net, and host custom games withing a few minutes is essential if they want people to start playing again.
balance wise, anything beyond buffing ghost hp would have bad consequences. queens and DA's are already great units, just that they are slightly niche in when to be applied. But there's nothing wrong with that.
Scout mostly sucks, but boosting it in pretty much any way aside from giving extra sight range, could also make some early scout cheeses (like scout into 3 gate dragoon, already a strong pvz cheese) become really powerful.
What this patch MUST fix is: port forward issue
What it ideally takes care of: colors bugging out
optional stuff: bnet server with matchmaking, fixing hacks, make replay watching better, 'HD'/widescreen support
what it must NOT involve itself in balance or interface
The only fix i want is When your macroing as zerg and your producing units 4sd5sd6sd7sd8sd for example, you had to press d several times or it wont build the units, so in reality it looks like something like this 4sddd5sdd6sddd7sddd8sddd, if u press 5sd fast it wont build.
On March 14 2016 06:24 arb wrote: I think it'd be nice to fix EMP not causing recalls to stop occasionally. thats fairly annoying to hit an emp and the recall happen anyway
LRM)Dragon wrote: this is not a bug, its a feature of recall. terran players need to stop complaining about this. recall has 2 parts, part 1 where the vortex sucks in all the protoss stuff, which you as a terran player would not see, and part 2 where the vortex spits out the protoss army on top of your shit. You only see the 2nd part of the animation after you EMPed, and therefore assume that it was a bug because the arbiter got EMPed before the 2nd part of the recall was visible to you, but not before the first part started over the protoss army. Protoss can start recall while moving over water or cliffs and finish the recall above ground to gain time.
I'm OP, can we please lock the thread now? I don't want anybody at Blizzard getting some retarded idea that we need a balance change, because we don't.
I found the German hotkeys for general rally point (f) and build science vessels (f) quite annoying in some fun maps. Then again, there's right click rally pointing now :|
On March 14 2016 09:02 GeckoXp wrote: I found the German hotkeys for general rally point (f) and build science vessels (f) quite annoying in some fun maps. Then again, there's right click rally pointing now :|
On March 14 2016 08:57 WinterViewbot420 wrote: I'm OP, can we please lock the thread now? I don't want anybody at Blizzard getting some retarded idea that we need a balance change, because we don't.
please this. half of the users don't even read the starting post or understand what the OP wants to discuss in the thread (definitely not balance.) and most others are either delirious or trolls fantasizing about features that go way beyond a mere patch and probably break the game.
I hope this thread gets locked and buried ASAP.
Seriously? When thinking about a Broodwar patch the first thing you guys come up with is fucking unit balance?
Chill, why would some people not want to fantasize about it at least? (yeah obviously first thing you think about a patch is balance/gameplay changes, duh). Can't understand why that should be forbidden/locked/buried/hidden/shutdown, that makes no sense. Even if you're scared that blizzard might read and make bad modifications or something.. people who like to think/talk about it can do that regardless.
Probably just going to end up ith better compatibility with newer operating systems, there is just no way it would be game-play or balance related, but strictly to increase accessibility/usability for a larger audience.
Who knows. What do we want is a good question in this context^^ making any kinds of suggestions is great, wicked or not. It's the developper's responsibility to make correct decisions!
Here is a post from a D2 developper about the Diablo II patch that came out few days ago : "It’s been a long time coming, but today we’re releasing 1.14a for Diablo II.
This update focuses on system glitches introduced by modern operating systems. In related news, you can finally retire those old Mac PowerPCs. Included with the update is a shiny new installer for OSX.
We’ve also begun working to improve our cheat-detection and hack-prevention capabilities. There’s still work to be done, but we’re making improvements every day.
There is still a large Diablo II community around the world, and we thank you for continuing to play and slay with us. This journey starts by making Diablo II run on modern platforms, but it does not end there. See you in Sanctuary, adventurers."
I'd just like to see very minor interface changes.
For example, when watching replays, it'd be nice to be able to select groups of units to see their overall health, and it'd be nice to see kill counts on reavers and carriers even when they are busy building scarabs/interceptors.
Protoss players have it too easy already, but I'd grant them a different hotkey to build probes.
Things like that.
Regarding balance, instead of changing the units in any way, I'd rather give map makers some more gimmicks to play with.
On March 14 2016 03:50 parkufarku wrote: Scouts cost less, Spawn Broodlings at 100 energy, Vultures only come with 1 free mine, Tanks minus 10 damage, Dragoon AI fixed, Carrier maxes out at 6 interceptors, Devourers release mini anti air flies, Guardians do splash damage, Medic gas cost plus 25
On March 14 2016 03:50 parkufarku wrote: Scouts cost less, Spawn Broodlings at 100 energy, Vultures only come with 1 free mine, Tanks minus 10 damage, Dragoon AI fixed, Carrier maxes out at 6 interceptors, Devourers release mini anti air flies, Guardians do splash damage, Medic gas cost plus 25
Most of that is just awful.
Most of this thread is. I regret making this. I'm so sorry.
On March 14 2016 03:50 parkufarku wrote: Scouts cost less, Spawn Broodlings at 100 energy, Vultures only come with 1 free mine, Tanks minus 10 damage, Dragoon AI fixed, Carrier maxes out at 6 interceptors, Devourers release mini anti air flies, Guardians do splash damage, Medic gas cost plus 25
Most of that is just awful.
Most of this thread is. I regret making this. I'm so sorry.
Don't be. A great many of the non-balance suggestions, and even a few of the balance ones, have been good.
The problem is that players aren't game designers, so the 'good-to-crap' ratio on balance suggestions is bound to be kinda bad.
fix ip conflict, im not sure how possible this is but it is super annoying, especially when you're trying to play with friends and they're on a good connection and you'll still have lag issues when trying to play with them.
make scout 200 mineral and same gas cost?? idk i just wanna use scouts sometimes
eliminate that stupid bug where you target an enemy with your unit (mostly goons and sometimes marines) and it freezes the attacking unit completely, i feel like im being punished for trying to micro correctly D:
remove vultures from the game :DD jk but seriously
On March 14 2016 04:19 Liquid`Drone wrote: balance wise, anything beyond buffing ghost hp would have bad consequences. queens and DA's are already great units, just that they are slightly niche in when to be applied. But there's nothing wrong with that.
Scout mostly sucks, but boosting it in pretty much any way aside from giving extra sight range, could also make some early scout cheeses (like scout into 3 gate dragoon, already a strong pvz cheese) become really powerful.
What this patch MUST fix is: port forward issue
What it ideally takes care of: colors bugging out
optional stuff: bnet server with matchmaking, fixing hacks, make replay watching better, 'HD'/widescreen support
what it must NOT involve itself in balance or interface
honestly pretty much this. because some of the server issues and crap, nothing else really should be changed.
They don't but the game is already balanced despite this. Changing it would possibly break this, and the only benefit I can think of is to please a few OCD users.
Has any BW pro in the last 15 years complained that they want better scouts? Or better DTs? Not every unit needs to be equal esp. when every race has their fair share underused or situational units and it actually balances out that way (you know, Broodwar balance - the kind of balance no RTS developer ever achieved again prior or after Broodwar, just don't touch it!)
Besides, this is still Broodwar. The game where you can utterly crush your opponent with mass scouts because the skill difference can be so high. I've seen that countless times. If you want to play scouts just search for a D/D- player and have fun.
On March 14 2016 15:31 Esp1noza wrote: 1. Network protocol. 2. Matchmaking. 3. Fix issues with new OS. 4. Widescreen support. 5. Maybe FULL HD support.
I am totes with you on #1. StarCraft's network management is pure garbage.
Like I already said in the other thread: don't think widescreen or high resolution can be done in a patch without rewriting major parts of the game, which could introduce a lot of problems (like removing beloved glitches or introducing new ones). I assume this because if Blizzard could easily patch it, it would have been already done by reverse engineering, but every attempt so far failed. Blizzard won't use a lot of resources to rewrite the game, especially if it could break it anyway. They already failed to increase the Diablo 2 stash (something mods have done).
What I think is possible: Modern OS compatability and color fix Some network improvements Semi-official support of 3rd party servers
What would be a stretch but still not out of this world: Improved hack detection official window mode In-game upscaling of 640x480 to some resolutions (= 2x/3x mode) Maybe nice optional artwork instead of black borders on non-4:3 displays
What would be probably way too much to ask for but who knows: skill based auto-matchmaking Bnet Launcher integration
On March 14 2016 15:21 shin ken wrote: Has any BW pro in the last 15 years complained that they want better scouts? Or better DTs?
No, they didn't complain about scouts, they just never ever used 'em, except once in a blue moon to troll someone.
And wtf on DTs? Most everyone agrees they're a good unit, they're often used in pro and amateur games alike.
Not every unit needs to be equal esp. when every race has their fair share underused or situational units and it actually balances out that way (you know, Broodwar balance - the kind of balance no RTS developer ever achieved again prior or after Broodwar, just don't touch it!)
Even BroodWar wasn't BroodWar when it was first released. Every balance patch improved it, until it became the BW we know and love today. If balance had stayed as it was as of BW 1.00, it would've been a disaster.
So, I don't fear change. I just want it to be competent and no more than what's necessary.
Like I already said in the other thread: don't think widescreen or high resolution can be done in a patch without rewriting major parts of the game
I would be incredibly surprised if the updated BW wasn't eventually both widescreen and HD. Sorry man, no one uses 15" standard-def CRTs anymore.
Not that they weren't kind of cool back in the day.
Not every unit needs to be equal esp. when every race has their fair share underused or situational units and it actually balances out that way (you know, Broodwar balance - the kind of balance no RTS developer ever achieved again prior or after Broodwar, just don't touch it!)
Even BroodWar wasn't BroodWar when it was first released. Every balance patch improved it, until it became the BW we know and love today. If balance had stayed as it was as of BW 1.00, it would've been a disaster.
So, I don't fear change. I just want it to be competent and no more than what's necessary.
If the goal is to make every unit useful then removing all the useless ones is a better solution since it is guaranteed to achieve the objective. Some units are just there for flavor, accept it and move on, not to mention how many custom maps would break if a unit was to be changed.
On March 14 2016 15:21 shin ken wrote: Has any BW pro in the last 15 years complained that they want better scouts? Or better DTs?
No, they didn't complain about scouts, they just never ever used 'em, except once in a blue moon to troll someone.
And wtf on DTs? Most everyone agrees they're a good unit, they're often used in pro and amateur games alike.
Not every unit needs to be equal esp. when every race has their fair share underused or situational units and it actually balances out that way (you know, Broodwar balance - the kind of balance no RTS developer ever achieved again prior or after Broodwar, just don't touch it!)
Even BroodWar wasn't BroodWar when it was first released. Every balance patch improved it, until it became the BW we know and love today. If balance had stayed as it was as of BW 1.00, it would've been a disaster.
So, I don't fear change. I just want it to be competent and no more than what's necessary.
If the goal is to make every unit useful then removing all the useless ones is a better solution since it is guaranteed to achieve the objective.
That's pretty extreme. That's like saying, back in SC 1.00, "Zerg are overpowered, let's just remove that race, make it a 2-race game."
Blizzard didn't do that. They fixed Zerg instead, and the other two races relative to Zerg.
Can't imagine why one would think removing useless/seldom-used units altogether would be preferable to giving them minor buffs, unless one is just terrified of absolutely any change at all, no matter how small.
On March 14 2016 15:21 shin ken wrote: Has any BW pro in the last 15 years complained that they want better scouts? Or better DTs?
No, they didn't complain about scouts, they just never ever used 'em, except once in a blue moon to troll someone.
so what?
Even BroodWar wasn't BroodWar when it was first released. Every balance patch improved it, until it became the BW we know and love today. If balance had stayed as it was as of BW 1.00, it would've been a disaster.
Yes, and the last balance patch was from 2001. That's quasi post-release. The entirety of televised Broodwar and then some has been played with the same balance and there have been no problems that couldn't be fixed with new maps. Why change it now?
I would be incredibly surprised if the updated BW wasn't both widescreen and HD.
Sorry man, no one uses 15" standard-def CRTs anymore.
Be prepared to be very disappointed then. Just a hint: The latest Diablo 2 patch from last week doesn't include HD and widescreen either. What everybody uses is not relevant. If that's the only thing that matters, Nintendo should also patch Smash Brothers Melee to work on modern HD-TVs.
On March 14 2016 15:21 shin ken wrote: Has any BW pro in the last 15 years complained that they want better scouts? Or better DTs?
No, they didn't complain about scouts, they just never ever used 'em, except once in a blue moon to troll someone.
And wtf on DTs? Most everyone agrees they're a good unit, they're often used in pro and amateur games alike.
Not every unit needs to be equal esp. when every race has their fair share underused or situational units and it actually balances out that way (you know, Broodwar balance - the kind of balance no RTS developer ever achieved again prior or after Broodwar, just don't touch it!)
Even BroodWar wasn't BroodWar when it was first released. Every balance patch improved it, until it became the BW we know and love today. If balance had stayed as it was as of BW 1.00, it would've been a disaster.
So, I don't fear change. I just want it to be competent and no more than what's necessary.
If the goal is to make every unit useful then removing all the useless ones is a better solution since it is guaranteed to achieve the objective.
That's pretty extreme. That's like saying, back in SC 1.00, "Zerg are overpowered, let's just remove that race, make it a 2-race game."
Blizzard didn't do that. They fixed Zerg instead, and the other two races relative to Zerg.
Can't imagine why one would think removing useless/seldom-used units altogether would be preferable to giving them minor buffs, unless one is just terrified of absolutely any change at all, no matter how small.
What I'm saying is that the assumption that every unit needs to be useful in 1v1 competitive, which is where a lot of the arguments in here come from, is bollocks. There's nothing wrong with having things for flavor. Imagine if Valve decided to balance every weapon in CSGO to be useful at pro level? Game would stop being CS and become something else. People running around with shotguns and LMGs.
I don't think breaking a lot of custom maps and possibly messing up the balance of 1v1 is worth the risk of changing anything. Is it possible? Sure. Odds of any player or Blizz dev to get it right? I'd say winning the lottery is more likely.
On March 14 2016 15:21 shin ken wrote: No, they didn't complain about scouts, they just never ever used 'em, except once in a blue moon to troll someone.
so what?
So, what if you actually want to use scouts in a competitive game, and have them actually do something? What if you like to have more strategic options in your gameplay? What if you just plain think scouts are frikin' cool?
Even BroodWar wasn't BroodWar when it was first released. Every balance patch improved it, until it became the BW we know and love today. If balance had stayed as it was as of BW 1.00, it would've been a disaster.
Yes, and the last balance patch was from 2001. That's quasi post-release. The entirety of televised Broodwar and then some has been played with the same balance and there have been no problems that couldn't be fixed with new maps. Why change it now?
Why not, if you can improve upon it a bit? The meta has changed a lot since 1.08 got released, and in ways that the designers couldn't possibly foresee back then.
I would be incredibly surprised if the updated BW wasn't both widescreen and HD.
Sorry man, no one uses 15" standard-def CRTs anymore.
Be prepared to be very disappointed then. Just a hint: The latest Diablo 2 patch from last week doesn't include HD and widescreen either.
Yup, but Bliz has left the door open for further improvements to Diablo 2:
...Blizzard says it's working on improvements to the game's "cheat-detection and hack-prevention capabilities" and hints at more improvements to come.
"There is still a large Diablo II community around the world, and we thank you for continuing to play and slay with us," Blizzard writes. "This journey starts by making Diablo II run on modern platforms, but it does not end there. See you in Sanctuary, adventurers."
On March 14 2016 15:21 shin ken wrote: Has any BW pro in the last 15 years complained that they want better scouts? Or better DTs?
No, they didn't complain about scouts, they just never ever used 'em, except once in a blue moon to troll someone.
And wtf on DTs? Most everyone agrees they're a good unit, they're often used in pro and amateur games alike.
Not every unit needs to be equal esp. when every race has their fair share underused or situational units and it actually balances out that way (you know, Broodwar balance - the kind of balance no RTS developer ever achieved again prior or after Broodwar, just don't touch it!)
Even BroodWar wasn't BroodWar when it was first released. Every balance patch improved it, until it became the BW we know and love today. If balance had stayed as it was as of BW 1.00, it would've been a disaster.
So, I don't fear change. I just want it to be competent and no more than what's necessary.
If the goal is to make every unit useful then removing all the useless ones is a better solution since it is guaranteed to achieve the objective.
That's pretty extreme. That's like saying, back in SC 1.00, "Zerg are overpowered, let's just remove that race, make it a 2-race game."
Blizzard didn't do that. They fixed Zerg instead, and the other two races relative to Zerg.
Can't imagine why one would think removing useless/seldom-used units altogether would be preferable to giving them minor buffs, unless one is just terrified of absolutely any change at all, no matter how small.
What I'm saying is that the assumption that every unit needs to be useful in 1v1 competitive, which is where a lot of the arguments in here come from, is bollocks. There's nothing wrong with having things for flavor. Imagine if Valve decided to balance every weapon in CSGO to be useful at pro level? Game would stop being CS and become something else. People running around with shotguns and LMGs.
I don't think breaking a lot of custom maps and possibly messing up the balance of 1v1 is worth the risk of changing anything. Is it possible? Sure. Odds of any player or Blizz dev to get it right? I'd say winning the lottery is more likely.
When I think of a game having units 'just for flavor', I think of something like Total Annihilation, which eventually had hundreds of units, many of which did the same thing, more or less, or were just minor variations on a theme.
I don't think Blizzard did that with SC, everything was supposed to have a purpose. Which is why it's such a deep and rich game, even though there's only 13-14 units per race, even after the expansion. No BS units just for the sake of having units, nothing frivolous or unnecessary, no fat. I think that was the intent, though it hasn't been fully realized (yet?).
Also, if you look at BW balance patches over time, the overwhelming majority of the changes were GOOD ones. There were close to 100 balance changes total over the four balance patches, and I can think of only a couple or three that were probably mistakes. The BW balance change track record is really good, actually.
My worry would be that they wouldn't consult with any of the folks that were responsible for BW, but rather trusted it entirely to the SC2 designer guys.
I really don't think the people responsible for BW actually understand high level Brood War the way it is today. That's ultimately the dilemma with those kind of balance changes.
On March 14 2016 18:21 [[Starlight]] wrote: So, what if you actually want to use scouts in a competitive game, and have them actually do something? What if you like to have more strategic options in your gameplay? What if you just plain think scouts are frikin' cool?
Broodwar already has very strategically deep gameplay. What's the point in adding one more option with the potential of breaking the precious game balance now 18 years after its release? After all this time isn't that something you would do in a sequel? If you really think scouts are so cool, you can still build them. It's not like you loose the game instantly as soon as you build a scout.
Why not, if you can improve upon it a bit? The meta has changed a lot since 1.08 got released, and in ways that the designers couldn't possibly foresee back then.
Yes the meta has changed entirely and Starcraft is being played in ways never intended by the developers BUT THE BALANCE STILL HOLDS (which is incredible and somewhat a miracle). Why in gods name would you starting messing with it NOW in 2016 and "fix" something that is not broken?
Yup, but Bliz has left the door open for further improvements to Diablo 2:
...Blizzard says it's working on improvements to the game's "cheat-detection and hack-prevention capabilities" and hints at more improvements to come.
"There is still a large Diablo II community around the world, and we thank you for continuing to play and slay with us," Blizzard writes. "This journey starts by making Diablo II run on modern platforms, but it does not end there. See you in Sanctuary, adventurers."
I can ensure that nothing like HD and widescreen support other than maybe upscaling will EVER happen. I would bet my house and lifetime savings on it. Blizzard now has a small legacy support team doing patches for Diablo 2, Warcraft 3 and hopefully Broodwar. If you think you can just sit down for a few hours and hack in HD support in a game like Broodwar you are very wrong and probably have no clue what it's like to change legacy code as messy as Broodwars.
Broodwar is based on the WC2 engine which is originally from a DOS game from 1995. It is said that Starcraft (and Broodwar) have horrible spaghetti code from hell (as indicated by ex-programmers). Nobody who came up with that code is working at Blizzard anymore (for decades). Broodwar is not a 3D game where changing resolutions can be relativly straight forward. Broodwar is also not programmed in a way that allows to easily change the resolution unlike C&C Tiberium Sun or Red Alert 2.
If you want to do something extensive as adding HD resolutions which would probably break the game logic in more ways than you can possibly imagine, you need to rewrite of half of the game which is completely out of scope for the current team and possibly game-changing as many beloved engine quirks would change or fall away while new glitches would be added. Plus it's very questionable in terms of return value especially if you would expand the team.
Also, if you look at BW balance patches over time, the overwhelming majority of the changes were GOOD ones. There were close to 100 balance changes total over the four balance patches, and I can think of only a couple or three that were probably mistakes. The BW balance change track record is really good, actually.
Almost nobody who did these changes is working at blizzard anymore and even then they would be very rusty. And to be honest, I think they hit that perfect balance to some degree by accident. There's no way you could plan for such a good balance especially over time and with all the crazy stuff that came from the korean pro scene. You just have to look at every other RTS game including the ones Blizzard did after Broodwar for proof.
On March 14 2016 18:21 [[Starlight]] wrote: So, what if you actually want to use scouts in a competitive game, and have them actually do something? What if you like to have more strategic options in your gameplay? What if you just plain think scouts are frikin' cool?
Broodwar already has very strategically deep gameplay. What's the point in adding one more option with the potential of breaking the precious game balance now 18 years after its release? After all this time isn't that something you would do in a sequel? If you really think scouts are so cool, you can still build them. It's not like you loose the game instantly as soon as you build a scout.
BW has very strategically deep gameplay BECAUSE they did balance patches... if it had stayed at BW 1.00, everyone would just play Zerg and make a lot of mutas. Boring.
Why not make the gameplay even deeper, by doing minor changes such as small buffs to units that see very little use? Why do you think this would auto-magically immediately destroy the game like a heatseeking missile locked onto a 747?
And y'know, the ppl who've been playing BW for years and years over hundreds or thousands of games might actually welcome and ENJOY some new wrinkles, as they've already seen most of the common strats, at least for whatever level they play at.
Far as scouts go, you can only really build 'em if you've already won... they're just too expensive for what they do otherwise, if the game is still in doubt.
Why not, if you can improve upon it a bit? The meta has changed a lot since 1.08 got released, and in ways that the designers couldn't possibly foresee back then.
Yes the meta has changed entirely and Starcraft is being played in ways never intended by the developers BUT THE BALANCE STILL HOLDS (which is incredible and somewhat a miracle). Why in gods name would you starting messing with it NOW in 2016 and "fix" something that is not broken?
Again, the BALANCE STILL HOLDS *because* they bothered to do balance patches that changed the original horrible balance to something quite good.
Why do you hate balance patches so very much, considering that BW owes so much to them? Including its continued relevance in 2016, 18 years after release.
Why do you think it's absolutely impossible to do a small, incremental balance patch that doesn't mess things up, even though Blizzard has done some quite massive balance patches to BW (1.04, 1.08) that actually improved the game quite a lot?
Yup, but Bliz has left the door open for further improvements to Diablo 2:
...Blizzard says it's working on improvements to the game's "cheat-detection and hack-prevention capabilities" and hints at more improvements to come.
"There is still a large Diablo II community around the world, and we thank you for continuing to play and slay with us," Blizzard writes. "This journey starts by making Diablo II run on modern platforms, but it does not end there. See you in Sanctuary, adventurers."
I can ensure that nothing like HD and widescreen support other than maybe upscaling will EVER happen.
I'm aware that there are difficulties. But y'know, it's 2016. It's really hard to imagine that there isn't a lot of pressure to change from a standard-def, 4:3 aspect ratio presentation to something reasonably modern.
Perhaps it'll only be something cutesy like upscaling and/or 'dressed up with graphics' window bars, but we'll take whatever we can get. 640x480 and 4:3 nowadays is just plain ghetto.
Also, if you look at BW balance patches over time, the overwhelming majority of the changes were GOOD ones. There were close to 100 balance changes total over the four balance patches, and I can think of only a couple or three that were probably mistakes. The BW balance change track record is really good, actually.
Almost nobody who did these changes is working at blizzard anymore and even then they would be very rusty. And to be honest, I think they hit that perfect balance to some degree by accident. There's no way you could plan for such a good balance especially over time and with all the crazy stuff that came from the korean pro scene. You just have to look at every other RTS game including the ones Blizzard did after Broodwar for proof.
With respect, we don't know their personnel situation. A lot of game companies promote from within, QA testers become test leads become assistant producers become producers or game designers. So, some of the old team could still be around in higher positions. And of course, you can always hire back ex-employees as contractors/consultants, just for the term of a project. Game industry employment is hardly stable, as I can tell you from personal experience... plenty of veterans of it are sometimes looking for their next gig, due to companies folding or changes of regime in upper management/execs.
And I don't think BW's balance was hit upon by accident. They released it, saw the initial balance was poor, and then MADE THE DECISION that they were going to keep working on it until it was a lot better.
And they did. Which is why we're even bothering to talk about this game now, 18 years after it's initial release.
I don't think you can break the game by for example upping the maximum mana of queens by 50 or changing spawn broodlings to 125 mana. Similarly, maybe removing ocular implants and having it included by default for ghosts wouldn't break the game either.
You have to only change a few units and do so marginally, just to try to make them slightly more useful in certain situations. This latter aspect is the most important in my opinion, you want to look at the original role of the unit and try to make it only more useful in this aspect.
For example, when I see scouts, I see a unit that can be quite strong to deal with capital ships. Now try to come up with a way to make them more effective at their purpose, it could be something as simple as making them cost 2 supply or changing their mineral costs to 225. (I don't know honestly, I'm new to this game, but there must be people here that know the faults and purpose of the scout much better).
On March 14 2016 21:23 B-royal wrote: I don't think you can break the game by for example upping the maximum mana of queens by 50 or changing spawn broodlings to 125 mana. Similarly, maybe removing ocular implants and having it included by default for ghosts wouldn't break the game either.
You have to only change a few units and do so marginally, just to try to make them slightly more useful in certain situations.
This latter aspect is the most important in my opinion, you want to look at the original role of the unit and try to make it only more useful in this aspect.
For example, when I see scouts, I see a unit that can be quite strong to deal with capital ships. Now try to come up with a way to make them more effective at their purpose, it could be something as simple as making them cost 2 supply or changing their mineral costs to 225. (I don't know honestly, I'm new to this game, but there must be people here that know the faults and purpose of the scout much better).
Thank you... that's all I've been saying, more or less.
It's definitely an interesting discussion to have, and to make suggestions, even better with explanations on how and why. It's ok if not everyone is a game designer and there are bad suggestions, since it is the responsibility of the game designers at Blizzard to make correct decisions. Besides, some of us do have experience in game design (doesn't guarantee making good suggestions), and of course who doesn't can make good suggestions too!
I think broodling 125 mana actually would break the game. Being able to broodling ~35 seconds earlier than what is currently possible would fuck up terran hard - actually it'd probably be so good that queen/hydra became a staple zvp build. That's how fine tuned high-level brood war is. Decreasing scout cost or increasing scout speed could also have big consequences.
Obviously stuff like ghost sight range or medics starting with restoration wouldn't make too big of an impact, but those changes don't matter because there's pretty much no point to them.
The earlier balance patches fixed glaring imbalances, stuff that broke the game. No such thing exists anymore, because the game has become so strategically deep and figured out over the course of ~a billion games of player evolution that all the stuff that seemed like glaring imbalances just.. aren't, anymore.
I would like to see a siege tank nerf. Both z and p are unable to win late-game ground fights vs 3-3 tanks, even with superior unit count. Maybe the attack upgrade could give less attack?
Literally every late game tvz i see on streams is terran rolling zerg with tank/vulture, while zerg struggles for survival. if zerg somehow manages to win, it's drops, sudden muta switch or something like that. its SO rare for zerg to win front vs front, 200/200 tanks sieged around the map just melt everything
In my opinion, the siege tank is super pivotal in the balance so changing it is a very very big change. I actually like how strong it is, even if it's veeeeery strong, my dream change for it would only be to make it 3 supply! But it's a really big change. The kind of change that probably can't be done by itself. In my mind, Muta=>Medium, Tank=>3supply, HTStorm=>100 energy, this might be stuff that go well together. But that's huge and crazy, I write it like this and maybe upon further reflexion or testing it would not be so good.
On March 14 2016 22:12 Liquid`Drone wrote: I think broodling 125 mana actually would break the game. Being able to broodling ~35 seconds earlier than what is currently possible would fuck up terran hard - actually it'd probably be so good that queen/hydra became a staple zvp build. That's how fine tuned high-level brood war is. Decreasing scout cost or increasing scout speed could also have big consequences.
Obviously stuff like ghost sight range or medics starting with restoration wouldn't make too big of an impact, but those changes don't matter because there's pretty much no point to them.
The earlier balance patches fixed glaring imbalances, stuff that broke the game. No such thing exists anymore, because the game has become so strategically deep and figured out over the course of ~a billion games of player evolution that all the stuff that seemed like glaring imbalances just.. aren't, anymore.
I think you might be underestimating the robustness and adaptability of other players a little bit. Queens still need to sit idle for 2.5 minutes (3min 45sec from thereon) before they can cast their first broodling. Maybe terrans will start being aware more of when the queens are produced and then try to get some wraiths out and actively hunt the queens.
But you are right that reducing the energy cost of spawn broodling is a much more drastic change since it changes not only the timing of the first usage, but it shaves off 37.5 seconds of every consecutive spawn broodling as well.
As for protoss, keeping overlords alive isn't an easy thing vs corsairs. I doubt keeping queens alive will be easy either. They could also experiment with dark archons since feedback (which will instantly kill a queen that plans on using spawn broodling) only costs 50 energy and has 10 range compared to spawn broodling that only has 9 range.
@Tank changes: I agree on a certain level. I feel like the attack upgrades for mech give too much extra damage (+4 for goliath GtA and +5 for siege tank in siege mode per level). In the end you're looking at a goliath with 20+12 GtA attack and a siege tank with 70+15 GtG attack.
When goliaths are 0-0 and mutas are 0-0 it is somewhat of an even fight. However, at 3-3 goliaths just absolutely wreck 3-3 mutalisks.
Since goliaths go from doing 10 damage per shot to 13 damage per shot while mutas stay doing 8 damage and their bounce damage becomes effectively void because of goliath's armor upgrades.
the point is that balance is extremely fragile. There are many examples from each race that looks overpowered in a vacuum. The way mech upgrades scale is one such thing, the lurker+dark swarm combination is another, psionic storm vs zerg is a third. But with how the game has evolved (a meching terran will always be cost efficient, but he will also always be at a similar income disadvantage. lurker+swarm is mad overpowered vs m&m, but once tanks, vessels and mines are in play, it's control-dependent. protoss is at a numerical disadvantage and thus requires storm vs zerg), all of these in-vacuum-imbalances actually work out.
Aside from changes that are so small that they are insignificant, any change would threaten the equilibrium. For example say you make goliaths go from getting +4 to +2 vs air from upgrades - this looks good for tvz where mutas become obsolete- but how about the effect it has against carriers? (where a +3 attack goliath would suddenly only deal 12 instead of 18 damage against a +3 armor carrier?)
Reducing tank upgrades, sure once again, that's okay in tvz, but how about the influence it can have on pvt? (Where protoss already has a slight advantage?)
On March 14 2016 23:29 Liquid`Drone wrote: the point is that balance is extremely fragile. There are many examples from each race that looks overpowered in a vacuum. The way mech upgrades scale is one such thing, the lurker+dark swarm combination is another, psionic storm vs zerg is a third. But with how the game has evolved (a meching terran will always be cost efficient, but he will also always be at a similar income disadvantage. lurker+swarm is mad overpowered vs m&m, but once tanks, vessels and mines are in play, it's control-dependent. protoss is at a numerical disadvantage and thus requires storm vs zerg), all of these in-vacuum-imbalances actually work out.
Aside from changes that are so small that they are insignificant, any change would threaten the equilibrium. For example say you make goliaths go from getting +4 to +2 vs air from upgrades - this looks good for tvz where mutas become obsolete- but how about the effect it has against carriers? (where a +3 attack goliath would suddenly only deal 12 instead of 18 damage against a +3 armor carrier?)
Reducing tank upgrades, sure once again, that's okay in tvz, but how about the influence it can have on pvt? (Where protoss already has a slight advantage?)
You are right of course, I wasn't considering any other match ups than ZvT.
On March 14 2016 23:29 Liquid`Drone wrote: Aside from changes that are so small that they are insignificant, any change would threaten the equilibrium.
I'm sure there must be some middle ground between 'insignificant' and 'threatening the equilibrium'.
Besides, when Bliz did 65 balance changes in the 1.04 patch, and 26 balance changes in the 1.08 patch, did they not 'threaten the equilibrium' then?
Yet, the world did not come to an end. Just the opposite, the game improved (a LOT, in the case of 1.04, but still considerably with 1.08).
I agree with your earlier comment that the earlier patches fixed glaring imbalances (like pre-1.04 larvae spawn rate ), and that what's left to be fixed or improved is definitely smaller in scope.
I thought the Diablo 2 patch was merely a superficial makeover on some things and just a reworking to make sure that D2 is playable on newer operating systems? There's no new content, right?
I'd like the same for BW... The guarantee that it'll work just fine on new OSes.
On March 14 2016 23:29 Liquid`Drone wrote: Aside from changes that are so small that they are insignificant, any change would threaten the equilibrium.
I'm sure there must be some middle ground between 'insignificant' and 'threatening the equilibrium'.
Besides, when Bliz did 65 balance changes in the 1.04 patch, and 26 balance changes in the 1.08 patch, did they not 'threaten the equilibrium' then?
Yet, the world did not come to an end. Just the opposite, the game improved (a LOT, in the case of 1.04).
Okay.. Firstly: The game was somewhat broken before either of those two patches, and virtually everyone at the top level agreed with this. Essentially, before 1.08, terran vs zerg was considered quite balanced (although there was a slight problem with early m&m attacks being too powerful), but zerg had a big advantage vs protoss and protoss had a big advantage vs terran. The sunken change reflects this; going from 400 hp with 0 armor to 300 hp with 2 armor meant that they were now better against marines than before, but worse against zealots. The other changes also reflect this, zerg is changed in a way that made them slightly worse vs protoss, protoss changed in a way that makes them slightly worse vs terran but not worse vs zerg. Secondly: 1.04 came together with Brood War. Obviously you had to make big changes to the rest of the game when you introduce 7 new units.
Basically, the equilibrium that would now be threatened by any small change did not exist back then. And frankly, it didn't exist right after those patches either. The game was still considered imbalanced for a couple years after 1.08 - it became balanced through the evolution of strategies and maps. Hell, pvz continued being imbalanced until Bisu came around. Back then, there was a need to improve balance, so they did. Now, there is no need to improve balance, there's only a desire to make previously unused units more frequently used. I'm saying that this is going to be virtually impossible to accomplish without there being some sort of blowback - I simply can't picture making design choices that make ghosts rather than vessels viable arbiter defense or that make scouts rather than corsairs viable air units or that make DAs or queens better (both of these are already amazing in the correct scenarios) without it adversely influencing something.
I wish we would see nukes more often. I just ran the numbers and they're really expensive and too easy to nullify.
You need coverts ops (50/50) + cloaking (100/100) + ocular implants (100/100) + nuclear silo (100/100) + nuclear missile (200/200) + a ghost (25/75): 575 minerals and 625 gas and it's perfectly possible that your nuke gets spotted and canceled! Lol
Blizzard could always create a test-map for the pro's to test out changes before releasing them as an official patch.
Agreed with test map imo maybe They or Someone could create UMS Fighting Spirit map for all players to test and try this "balance"? We will see what happens, if changes will be bad this subject will be closed for good.
My propossitions: - Mutalisk - medium size - Scout mineral cost 200-225 - Ghost speed-hp buff, lockdown cost 75 energy + has range 10 - Queen - spawn broodling cost 125 energy
+ maybe: - High Templar - Storm cost 100 energy also increase storm duration by 25% (1hit kill Lurker/Tank), KA increases energy by 100 // - HT gas cost increase to 175-200
On March 15 2016 05:16 Ty2 wrote: This is turning into that hypothetical balance patch thread that was made awhile ago.
"Turning into" is putting it nicely. I need to start forcing myself to not look into this thread for my own sanity. Something the OP has hopefully done since page 6.
EPT
That's a crazy suggestion, but with 2 base armor and no chitnous carapace upgrade... I think it'd be nice, cause Z would be less scared to use them before the upgrade as well. Zealots should damage them just a little bit better I feel, probably marines too. Also think BCs should have a stronger base attack^^ more hp for infested terran sounds great^^ In the craziness department, I think storm energy cost to 100, reduced research cost, and halucination 75 energy would be good all around and help T bio a little in tvp too^^
