| Forum Index > Legacy of the Void |
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
On June 18 2015 17:52 [F_]aths wrote: Let's assume, force fields get cut and Protoss gets rebalanced. Then other things which are disliked, get into the focus. There will be always some things which are disliked. I agree, you might get into a vicious cycle of improving the game and that would be bad. | ||
Destructicon
4713 Posts
| ||
|
[F_]aths
Germany3947 Posts
On June 18 2015 18:01 Grumbels wrote: I agree, you might get into a vicious cycle of improving the game and that would be bad. Would the game really improved if you remove / change anything solely based upon what is considered imbalanced / not fun / bad gameplay by some vocal community parts? | ||
|
pure.Wasted
Canada4701 Posts
On June 18 2015 16:21 ZigguratOfUr wrote: Let's assume that Blizzard doesn't listen to us no matter what, as you seem to think. What is your complaining for then apart from turning people away from the game? That's quite an assumption, that Blizzard doesn't listen no matter what. I think that when pro players write "IMBA IMBA IMBA" during their games, when TL pseudo-endorses articles called "ZParCraft II," and the entire community, including casters and other community leaders, bands together in saying that LOTV Beta isn't nearly as experimental as Blizzard promised it would be, Blizzard's ears work just fine, and we get a response on the pronto double posthaste! I can't remember how many times we've 'coincidentally' gotten upcoming patch notes right after a controversial article or interview came out. The sad truth is that I think it doesn't come down to the soundness of the argument, it comes down to how loud we are in making it. Blizzard doesn't get money out of multiplayer, they lose money on it. What they get is good PR. When we start ruining the PR they're getting, that's when they actually have something to lose, that's when they suddenly start to listen. I've heard David Kim's SC2 team described as bureaucratic. They're masters of not rocking the boat. The only time they make sweeping changes is when that's the way to stop the boat from being rocked by others. I don't know what to do with this information. I'm not going to galvanize any public efforts to bash Blizzard in the hopes that it will get David Kim off his ass. But hopefully the community is riled up enough as it is. | ||
|
AbouSV
Germany1278 Posts
On June 18 2015 17:48 Bannt wrote: This is a good sentiment. It would make a lot of people better gamers even outside of the context lotv design. This fact alone is indeed true. But don't forget that LotV does not have a meta yet, so there is no absolute better play style. This is what allow you to get around much more easily. When a meta will be set in (the current direction of) LotV, will you still think the same when you get in the game instant action, and get over-killed for 15 to 20 minutes, thinking you can somehow comeback because it is only 'harass', and then being crushed just the same way in one single battle, because you were expressing your game style? Also, to everyone comparing LotV to Frothen Throne and BW, don't forget that WIII and SC1 only had one extension, so adding stuff is good and all, but doing so twice will just be useless in itself. If you add to this the fundamental game twists they made back then but not for HotS nor current LotV, this is even worse. | ||
|
RoomOfMush
1296 Posts
On June 18 2015 18:28 [F_]aths wrote: Would the game really improved if you remove / change anything solely based upon what is considered imbalanced / not fun / bad gameplay by some vocal community parts? From the vocal communities point of view: yes, it probably will. Counter question: Would the game really degrade if you remove / change anything solely based upon what is considered imbalanced / not fun / bad gameplay by some vocal community parts? | ||
|
Bjarne
Germany192 Posts
On June 18 2015 06:26 Solar424 wrote: But if you compare it to other eSports is absolutely pathetic how Blizzard refuses to acknowledge the community and pro players. Take Brood Lord/Infestor: the unit composition that destroyed interest in SC2. Despite massive community and professional outcry for over 6 months, Blizzard did absolutely nothing to stop it until the damage to SC2's reputation was already done. Now, look at Dota 2. When a hero has been picked more often than it should, it is generally nerfed or changed to compensate. There will be times where a hero is picked for months on end, but it still gets nerfed in the next patch. Just look at how rarely SC2 is patched for balance compared to other games: LoL is patched every 2 weeks or so, and Dota about 3 times a year (but those patches impact nearly every hero in the game). SC2 has been patched twice in the past year, both of which only affect 3-4 units. Every time we hear from Blizzard, its some bullshit about how much they are trying to make the game amazing, even though almost the entire design team is working on the Campaign or Heroes. What's going to happen is LotV will be released, the hype will last for a few months, and SC2 will descend out of the top 5 eSports in the world, all the while Blizzard will keep feeding us the same empty comments they have for the past five years. Blizzard has everything in its power to make LotV amazing, but I'm not getting my hopes up. exactly Though i dont think LotV is worse than HotS, blizzard should listen to the community und react faster. Compared to valve and riot they do poor. And PLEASE dont create such wierd units like the oracle or the liberator. These are no units of any military system, they are just crazy ideas of game designers (Toss needs harrassment, so here is your harrassment unit.) Better create units according to usual military concepts. - Terran needs something between Viking and BC, something like a corvette or a gunboat. They also need a groundbased anti-air. Thor is a joke anti-air and marine is not anti-air-specialist. - Toss would be nice to have some more "dark"-units, like a dark archon again or some kind of a dark-stalker, dark-phoenix - Zerg would be nice to have "broodlords" like an upgrade for overseers/overlords, that slowly produce Lings/Roaches/Hydras for free. This "Swarm"-concept would be much better than swarmhost-like units. | ||
|
Ingvar
Russian Federation421 Posts
On June 18 2015 11:42 Plexa wrote: The frustration in the community is not without merit. Look at any other competitive game and you see the developers making moves that please the community. Be it Riot with their super-active communication with the community or Valve launching a (functional) custom game system. Instead we get statements like this. I've channeled a lot of my life into BW and now SC2 but now whenever I think about LotV I just feel dejected. I swear sometimes it feels that I play different DotA then everybody. Icefrog releases new set of OP heroes every patch, some changes have to be toned after a couple of weeks because of major imbalance as if there is no internal playtesting, no communication with players about balance whatsoever. Moreover, Valve fucks up tournaments regularly and it takes them years to deliver their promises and port the last heroes (probably because they have no idea what to do after that). I still think that Icefrog's approach to balance is okay because I understand how hard it is to support the game. But this "Dota has 100x better developers that SC" is ridiculous. I don't play LoL but it is common knowledge that lots of heroes are unviable in competitive. I guess that tells about level of development. But I guess the grass is always greener on the other side. | ||
|
knOxStarcraft
Canada422 Posts
On June 18 2015 06:31 -Kyo- wrote: Here's a suggestion, fix protoss. @_@;; It's so frustrating to play. No one plays LotV because the gameplay is just... not fun/entertaining @_@;; Speak for yourself, I think the game is great but there's no ladder so no one fucking plays it | ||
|
jinjin5000
United States1400 Posts
On June 18 2015 18:42 Bjarne wrote: exactly Though i dont think LotV is worse than HotS, blizzard should listen to the community und react faster. Compared to valve and riot they do poor. And PLEASE dont create such wierd units like the oracle or the liberator. These are no units of any military system, they are just crazy ideas of game designers (Toss needs harrassment, so here is your harrassment unit.) Better create units according to usual military concepts. - Terran needs something between Viking and BC, something like a corvette or a gunboat. They also need a groundbased anti-air. Thor is a joke anti-air and marine is not anti-air-specialist. - Toss would be nice to have some more "dark"-units, like a dark archon again or some kind of a dark-stalker, dark-phoenix - Zerg would be nice to have "broodlords" like an upgrade for overseers/overlords, that slowly produce Lings/Roaches/Hydras for free. This "Swarm"-concept would be much better than swarmhost-like units. no more free units just tone down the supply of the zerg armies overall and nerf them accordingly. Make them bit cheaper too whiel you are at it. Zerg army is waaay too supply heavy. Roach and Hydra are 2 sups each opposed to BW's core versatile Hydra which was 1 supply and had great dps. Sc2 is squishy expensive, supply heavy "meh" unit | ||
|
virpi
Germany3598 Posts
- Zerg would be nice to have "broodlords" like an upgrade for overseers/overlords, that slowly produce Lings/Roaches/Hydras for free. This "Swarm"-concept would be much better than swarmhost-like units. This would be utterly terrible. Free units are very problematic when it comes to the general economic flow of a game. Once a map is split up, free units are by far the most cost-efficient way of endless army trading. The only thing that counters free units is energy, because it doesn't cost money and gets automatically replenished over time. (which is why SH vs. Raven-Mech was so terrible) While I agree on the fact that zerg doesn't feel as swarmish as it did in BW, there must be other ways to achieve that goal. Basically, you would have to redesign the core units (hydra, roach) in terms of supply, HP and dps. As this would mean a very fundamental change, I highly doubt that it might ever happen. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9362 Posts
There still could be good arguments in favour of it, even though I am not liking them. It could be that force fields provide the uncertainty required to keep matches tense even if a player is on the losing side, maybe he can get back with some very good force fields or maybe the other player can lose his lead if he builds sentries but places forcefield badly. Uncertainty is good, but find a fun way to implement it into the game. | ||
|
CptMarvel
France236 Posts
On June 18 2015 19:06 virpi wrote: This would be utterly terrible. Free units are very problematic when it comes to the general economic flow of a game. Once a map is split up, free units are by far the most cost-efficient way of endless army trading. The only thing that counters free units is energy, because it doesn't cost money and gets automatically replenished over time. (which is why SH vs. Raven-Mech was so terrible) While I agree on the fact that zerg doesn't feel as swarmish as it did in BW, there must be other ways to achieve that goal. Basically, you would have to redesign the core units (hydra, roach) in terms of supply, HP and dps. As this would mean a very fundamental change, I highly doubt that it might ever happen. +1 Free units are complete stupidity in an economy-based game. Swarm Host is by a distance the most poorly designed unit I've ever seen in an RTS. | ||
|
RoomOfMush
1296 Posts
| ||
|
ShambhalaWar
United States930 Posts
On June 18 2015 17:18 HomeWorld wrote: Wait , what? Pointing out something that really doesn't make any sense at all, is now an insult? The think he means calling the dev team stupid and leveling sarcasm at them. I would agree that the response from blizzard in this thread is a positive response and really something that the community wants (more open clear communication between all parties), and I find it kind of disgusting that many people respond with the same negative rhetoric that has plagued every balance thread as of late.Thank goodness people are speaking out against it and in support of Blizzard. As a community we really do need to check ourselves, especially in the general attitude toward the game and updates. I've had my share of trolling, and probably some bm, but the shit that's been going on is over the top. * It does NOTHING to help make LOTV a better game. If anything it discourages communication and becomes a droning mantra of tantrum. We are entitled to NOTHING. If you really want someone to listen to you, speak with some reasoning and calm. Constructive criticism and conversation are much more effective. I get the argument that we have to yell so they will hear us, we have to make them listen, etc... It just hasn't been working, so maybe we should try a different approach. The best diplomatic approach I have seen so far was TL's articles on DH model, and submitting those to Blizzard. All the effort and dedication to explaining that idea to blizzard on behalf of TL I applaud. I had really hoped they would consider that model more, and even run a test of it in the beta. I think that model did plenty! Watching a zerg play against a turtle mech, the zerg gained quite the advantage from over expanding during the turtle period, which then puts a timer on turtle play (which is great in my opinion, there should be a down side to it, it forces expansion from both players and rewards it at the same time. The current model just forces expansion if I understand it correctly). The second best suggestion I have seen is my own submission to blizzard for different model of the Liberator. This model does away with the current clunky design, and I think most will agree it brings out the true spirit of the unit. + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/bpLYdip.jpg) | ||
|
Cascade
Australia5405 Posts
On June 18 2015 10:00 ZigguratOfUr wrote: I'm surprised that Blizzard even bothered to reply considering the fact that so much of the criticism comes from toxic chronic whingers who won't be happy not matter what Blizzard says or does. I was about to type something like this. If they are truly think they communicate enough, then let the communication talk for itself, and don't bother with the vocal whiners. If they don't think they communicate enough, then do some more proper communication instead of communicating about how much they communicate. >_> I can't see any scenario where trying to argue with the whiners will lead to anywhere good. I've seen this more and more recently, how Blizzard is taking conversation with the whiners, rather than focusing on the game. I mean... I don't see what they are trying to achieve with a post like this. Where do they hope it will lead? On June 18 2015 08:02 [PkF] Wire wrote: To both previous comments : do you really think what SC2 needs atm is yes men telling Blizzard how LotV is going awesomely and how excited we are to play it ? It's precisely because the game has been "fucking amazing" and delivered awesome moments for five years that some of us worry about the direction taken and the blatant stagnation of the state of the beta ever since release. And to be frank, that message from DK deserved shit and anger. At first I thought the OP was trolling. Yes, of course the best thing for lotv is an enthusiastic community... A lot of people here seem to agree that sc2 is the best RTS at the moment (bw possible exception), but the community still comes of as a bunch of whiners, which I think is putting new people off. Yeah, things can be done better, but I think we can deliver that feedback in a way that doesn't scare of newcomers as much. We should put more emphasis on the fucking amazing moments, and less on the intellectual proficiency of the SC2 developers. | ||
|
CptMarvel
France236 Posts
Do they make videogames for the sake of it? They stopped doing that when they became a successful company. Of course we're entitled to something, to everything in fact. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
On June 18 2015 19:25 CptMarvel wrote: "We are entitled to NOTHING", yeah right. We don't pay for the game, we don't make Blizzard's reputation, we're not the target audience that needs to be pleased. Do they make videogames for the sake of it? They stopped doing that when they became a successful company. Of course we're entitled to something, to everything in fact. The thing that annoys me is that people sign away their rights. They tell us to expect nothing and that we are entitled to nothing, without realizing that unless you demand something you won't get it. There are clear parallels with politics and lobbying and so on. Don't act against your self-interest. | ||
|
Cascade
Australia5405 Posts
On June 18 2015 19:17 ShambhalaWar wrote: The think he means calling the dev team stupid and leveling sarcasm at them. I would agree that the response from blizzard in this thread is a positive response and really something that the community wants (more open clear communication between all parties), and I find it kind of disgusting that many people respond with the same negative rhetoric that has plagued every balance thread as of late.Thank goodness people are speaking out against it and in support of Blizzard. As a community we really do need to check ourselves, especially in the general attitude toward the game and updates. I've had my share of trolling, and probably some bm, but the shit that's been going on is over the top. * It does NOTHING to help make LOTV a better game. If anything it discourages communication and becomes a droning mantra of tantrum. We are entitled to NOTHING. If you really want someone to listen to you, speak with some reasoning and calm. Constructive criticism and conversation are much more effective. I get the argument that we have to yell so they will hear us, we have to make them listen, etc... It just hasn't been working, so maybe we should try a different approach. The best diplomatic approach I have seen so far was TL's articles on DH model, and submitting those to Blizzard. All the effort and dedication to explaining that idea to blizzard on behalf of TL I applaud. I had really hoped they would consider that model more, and even run a test of it in the beta. I think that model did plenty! Watching a zerg play against a turtle mech, the zerg gained quite the advantage from over expanding during the turtle period, which then puts a timer on turtle play (which is great in my opinion, there should be a down side to it, it forces expansion from both players and rewards it at the same time. The current model just forces expansion if I understand it correctly). The second best suggestion I have seen is my own submission to blizzard for different model of the Liberator. This model does away with the current clunky design, and I think most will agree it brings out the true spirit of the unit. + Show Spoiler + I know you are joking, but I think it points to a big part of the problem, which is that everyone think they have great ideas that will instantly solve sc2, making it the BEST. GAME. EVER. Blizzard doesn't take up on any of those ideas (or very few), so everyone agrees that Blizzard is stupid and doesn't listen to the community, while the only thing the community actually agree on are things that don't work, very rarely what should actually be done. The few constructive suggestions that do get backed by a large fraction of the community are in general considered by Blizzard I think. They definitely thought about double harvest for example, and I don't think we can ask for more than that. And maybe we should give a bit more credit to the professional game developers that work full time on this, than to a bunch of posters that read a suggestion during 10 minutes and make up their mind about how great and flawless this idea is. Ten thousand ants can't be wrong right? So the ideas that get backed by the community are mostly ideas that sound good at a first glance, or ideas that are just presented well, or even presented by popular community entities, not necessarily the more subtle ideas that will actually work out in practice. | ||
|
gkts
Germany56 Posts
On June 18 2015 17:18 HomeWorld wrote: Wait , what? Pointing out something that really doesn't make any sense at all, is now an insult? You can say that without insults, you know? Manners and such? It's also somewhere written on this site that you are supposed to act politely. | ||
| ||
|
|
Road to EWC
Replay Cast
SC Evo League
Road to EWC
Afreeca Starleague
BeSt vs Soulkey
Road to EWC
Wardi Open
SOOP
NightMare vs Wayne
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
