EPTDavid Kim Pre-Blizzcon Interview by PlayXP - Page 10
| Forum Index > Community News and Headlines |
|
tsuxiit
1305 Posts
| ||
|
NoobSkills
United States1601 Posts
Is that because the non-pro people who play SC2 2v2's are using a good decent strategy that has no really good counter yet are having trouble with strategy X they are deciding to patch the game based on it. And that because one Korean Progammer sent then replays (against random opponents) they felt like void rays were IMBA. Did the enemy scout the void rays? Scout Protoss' army size? We'll never know. Then they cast this fail stream to follow it up. Either way the game was balanced before and it is balanced now (for the most part). Perhaps next we can balance out FFA. | ||
|
Angry_Fetus
Canada444 Posts
| ||
|
drlame
Sweden574 Posts
| ||
|
Drayne
Canada239 Posts
| ||
|
Varth
United States426 Posts
| ||
|
Ocedic
United States1808 Posts
On October 22 2010 16:06 Kachna wrote: Way to go kim way to go... You literally balanced 2vs2 at cost of TvZ 1vs1. Just awesome. Except the zealot change really didn't affect top level 1v1 play in any significant manner. Reading comprehension and logic is tough stuff? | ||
|
Asshat
593 Posts
On October 23 2010 23:19 Varth wrote: I certainly hope that VR replay was an uncounterable timing attack, although I would apprecate a replay to actually prove that this drastic of a nerf was needed. Marauders not being a strong unit was.... very offputting and kinda pisses me off, since anyone can tell him that as a 1.5 tier unit marauder is just incredibly strong and counters a very large number of units on top of just demolishing buildings There are very few units that marauders act as a "leave no doubts" hard counter, they're an excellent complementary unit because of their tankish ability, the slow and the fact that they can handle themselves vs mostly every armored unit. But both races have very good ways to deal with marauders with force fields and every zerg unit that isn't a roach. Anyway, it's pretty clear the whole "marauders aren't strong" portion is a slight mistranslation. They're obviously strong, they just aren't -too- strong. | ||
|
hagrin
United States278 Posts
On October 23 2010 02:35 awesomoecalypse wrote: I don't get why everyone is so pissed off about his quote about Zealot build time nerf being designed to help lower level players without overly effecting high level play. All these people are throwing a fit, saying "thats impossible, obviously it will effect higher level play, he's an idiot!!1!" Except....you know, he was 100% right. The Zealot nerf made it easier for low level players to react to certain cheeses and early all-ins, but it had essentially no effect on top level play, where everyone could defend against those sorts of all-ins anyway. When that build time nerf was announced, there were like fifty pages of qqing in the patch notes thread, and all these idiots saying "now stopping 6 pools is impossible! Zealots suck!"...and then once people got around to actually, you know, playing the game, it turned out it made essentially no difference whatsoever. You could still defend 6 pools. Zealots still kicked ass. 2-gate, 4-gate, 3-gate robo and all the other builds which relied on Zealots were still fully viable. So the patch did exactly what they'd designed the patch to do, make things slightly easier for lower level players without affecting it for top-level players. So why would that ever be a bad thing? Of course preserving the integrity of top-level 1v1 is priority number 1. But if you can figure out a way to help other levels of play without harming top-level play, then why wouldn't you? People act like thats impossible, but the Zealot build time nerf proves it definitely isn't. Winner. You're the first person to actually say this and while everyone else has been theorycrafting, you actually brought up ... you know, the actual in-game results of this change. Kudos. As for you who can't compartmentalize the difference between an imbalanced timing and balancing on a limited sample size, basically all I read after that is "my nerd rage is so great I cease being able to think logically". It's obvious what David Kim meant - stop raging over nothing. | ||
|
eXigent.
Canada2419 Posts
"A. A Korean progamer, who played a Protoss although his main race isn't Protoss, sent us a replay showing a weakness of opponents in a certain specific period of time when a Protoss is using a Void Ray. Through the replay, we gave Void Ray the change that it received." and then later goes on to say this. A. We can't do balancing patch around just 1 game or 10 games. While Zerg won the Season 1, recent patch buffed Zerg and nerfed Terrans. As you can see, what race won is not important, but the match content themselves are more important. We check tournament replays, and watch replay files sent in by progamers. In other words, finals don't really mean much in terms of balancing. I dont get it. they nerfed voidrays based off 1 replay of a korean offracing, but then state they dont balance around 1 or even 10 games.......confusing stuff. | ||
|
sl0w
United States447 Posts
| ||
|
Cloak
United States816 Posts
WTB Banshee and Marauder secret korean programer offrace replays. | ||
|
Ghad
Norway2551 Posts
| ||
|
allyourbase
United States243 Posts
| ||
|
Rarak
Australia631 Posts
On October 23 2010 03:59 brain_ wrote: Terran mech is still really strong. It never really got nerfed. People just figured out that bio is even stronger. Yes it did. Tanks were nerfed multiple times. | ||
|
Noxie
United States2227 Posts
| ||
|
hunter3
United States155 Posts
"First, I play at pro-level, and mostly receive feedback from top players." I love this; he doesn't take shit from anyone who's not top 100 or a Korean progamer. Which makes the rest of us irrelevant to him. "if you look at the top of the 2:2 team ranks, almost half of them are Terran+Zerg, and they all use Reaperling" Say what you want about 2v2 3v3 or 4v4, some minority of us occasionally play them, and when every top team uses Zerg/Terran and the same unstoppable build, it gets lame fast. "Through the replay, we gave Void Ray the change that it received" I really want to see that replay. Apparently some timing was so unstoppable that David Kim himself decided to nerf Void Ray after only one replay. | ||
|
Prime`Rib
United States613 Posts
On October 24 2010 03:06 eXigent. wrote: "A. A Korean progamer, who played a Protoss although his main race isn't Protoss, sent us a replay showing a weakness of opponents in a certain specific period of time when a Protoss is using a Void Ray. Through the replay, we gave Void Ray the change that it received." and then later goes on to say this. A. We can't do balancing patch around just 1 game or 10 games. While Zerg won the Season 1, recent patch buffed Zerg and nerfed Terrans. As you can see, what race won is not important, but the match content themselves are more important. We check tournament replays, and watch replay files sent in by progamers. In other words, finals don't really mean much in terms of balancing. I dont get it. they nerfed voidrays based off 1 replay of a korean offracing, but then state they dont balance around 1 or even 10 games.......confusing stuff. I am not so sure why people are confused about this. David Kim made it crystal clear about his balance team decision. David Kim said if you can actually pinpoint a problem, the balance team will look at it extensively before they consider any possibilities for changes. However, if you just took 10 replays of Protoss winning-games and tell them to balance the game, they will not even bother. So obviously, the replay indeed showed the problem, their team did enough tests to implement VR nerf. | ||
|
WhuazGoodJaggah
Lesotho777 Posts
On October 23 2010 10:11 NoobSkills wrote: So, what we get from this Q+A session. Is that because the non-pro people who play SC2 2v2's are using a good decent strategy that has no really good counter yet are having trouble with strategy X they are deciding to patch the game based on it. And that because one Korean Progammer sent then replays (against random opponents) they felt like void rays were IMBA. Did the enemy scout the void rays? Scout Protoss' army size? We'll never know. Then they cast this fail stream to follow it up. Either way the game was balanced before and it is balanced now (for the most part). Perhaps next we can balance out FFA. So what we get from your answer is that you are dumb and shouldnt be posting at all? That interview showed very good reasoning behind their actions. Saying stuff like balancing FFA is just increasing your dumbness level, because FFA lives from imbalances, but im sure you never even played teamgames or FFA so that you would be able to judge it or their decisions on it. | ||
|
FoxSpirit
Austria160 Posts
On October 24 2010 17:32 hunter3 wrote: "Through the replay, we gave Void Ray the change that it received" I really want to see that replay. Apparently some timing was so unstoppable that David Kim himself decided to nerf Void Ray after only one replay. I think it was translated poorly: "A Korean progamer, who played a Protoss although his main race isn't Protoss, sent us a replay showing a weakness of opponents in a certain specific period of time when a Protoss is using a Void Ray." Replay is singular but opponents is plural. I'm leaning to the side of David Kim getting a replay pack which was so brutal that he made the balance changes. | ||
| ||
