|
On June 20 2015 04:05 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
the frequency of the patches is coming in hot and heavy.
i hope people realize how expensive it is for Blizzard to do this and that substantial resources are being dedicated to the game... it makes sense that it is full box price.
How is that expensive? and while you are taking about price, there is 10$ dlc that has more content than LotV, so the price doesn't make sense at all.
|
Interesting. I hope we see more of these posts in the future.
|
Finally ranked ladder, that might get me back into LotV.
|
On June 20 2015 04:13 Klowney wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2015 04:05 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
the frequency of the patches is coming in hot and heavy.
i hope people realize how expensive it is for Blizzard to do this and that substantial resources are being dedicated to the game... it makes sense that it is full box price. How is that expensive? and while you are taking about price, there is 10$ dlc that has more content than LotV, so the price doesn't make sense at all.
beta testing is the most expensive stage of software development.
and i'm not talking about fake beta tests that are set up to make money on video games on steam.
|
On June 20 2015 03:43 digmouse wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2015 03:35 Sapphire.lux wrote:
I'm very critical about the game but i have to say once more that the way Blizzard acts in regards to SC2 since LOTV is 100x better then ever before. If we had this kind of communication and vision since the beginning we would have had a much better game and most likely a different landscape.
I guess that no matter how good the current team is it's impossible to fix all the inherited problems. They act fast because of recent backlashes.
I doubt this is true. Maybe you didn't notice, but in the previous thread to this one, much of the community was speaking out against the negativity we have been leveling at blizzard. The community was putting itself in check for the first time I have really seen, I am impressed by it. I think if anything our taking responsibility for our "childish backlash approach" may have for the first time made more room for the open communication we all wanted.
I am 100% IMPRESSED, by this posting of David Kim's. While I don't always agree with the decisions, the explanations of what they have tried with certain issues and their reasoning for making or not making a change leaves me feeling like a mostly equal part of the conversation. As a member of the community I feel more heard and I get a deeper understanding into why they are making the decisions they are making.
For example, they are speaking to why ladder hasn't been implemented up to this point. We now have a rough idea when it will be implemented, we know they are in agreement with the community, and that the only reason it hasn't been implemented so far is because of technical difficulty.
Now there will be nobody creating a thread about this because they thought the dev team was just ignoring them and the community. They will understand why ladder isn't currently part of the beta, and there will be no reason to clammer about it on every thread and repeatedly feel as though they are ignored, while others jump on the bandwagon with them.
All of this solved by open communication.
David Kim please keep these blogs up. This was something I personally asked for and I'm very glad you're doing it. So far the tone of this thread is drastically different, take that as direct positive feedback of this open communication between community and Blizzard.
|
I would like to see some explanations and more deep insight into the economy, why they like it, what it brings to the tables.
Through videos with commentary. By blizzard.
Would also appreciate it this for other economy systems so a person that doesnt rly understand math knows reasons behind it and get a much better insight. By teamliquid and blizzard to.
|
Currently, the resourcing model that we’re testing in the beta is doing a very good job of this.
RIP SC2. I will certainly not buy lotv with this garbage economy. Hopefully many people will continue playing HotS so I don't have to quit the game.
|
Splendid to have more feedback from the folks!
I can't agree with everything they've put forth, of course (I... just really don't like the way the disruptor functions), but it's intriguing to see what direction they're intending.
|
On June 20 2015 04:26 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +
Currently, the resourcing model that we’re testing in the beta is doing a very good job of this.
RIP SC2. I will certainly not buy lotv with this garbage economy. Hopefully many people will continue playing HotS so I don't have to quit the game.
WoL is still going strong... you can find games quickly at people close to your level unless you are really low Bronze.... and this is with HotS going on sale for $10. I'm sure lots of people won't want to pay the full box price of $60 USD and HotS will keep on rolling no problems.
|
On June 20 2015 04:28 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2015 04:26 Charoisaur wrote:
Currently, the resourcing model that we’re testing in the beta is doing a very good job of this.
RIP SC2. I will certainly not buy lotv with this garbage economy. Hopefully many people will continue playing HotS so I don't have to quit the game. WoL is still going strong... you can find games quickly at people close to your level unless you are really low Bronze.... and this is with HotS going on sale for $10. I'm sure lots of people won't want to pay the full box price of $60 USD and HotS will keep on rolling no problems.
wait wait... is t confirmed that it will cost $60?? wtf?!
|
On June 20 2015 03:14 Musicus wrote:
I still hope Blizzard finds a way that a player with 66 workers on 5 bases has more income than a player with 66 workers on 3 bases!
I agree 100%. A player should be rewarded for having five bases over the other players 3. That is what I like about the DH model.
Right now aggressive expansion is NOT an option, but turtling is. Wouldn't the game be more expansive with both as an option?
Blizzard please consider using the DH model with the current LOTV economy model. I would really like to see that tested. Maybe make bases mine out slightly slower and have DH to encourage expansion. Maybe there would be less of a gun to the head feel.
In her show match against Ruff, Scarlett even said she thought DH combined with the LOTV model might be a viable option.
Maybe there is another way to achieve this effect than DH. But DH I believe does do this.
|
On June 20 2015 04:26 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +
Currently, the resourcing model that we’re testing in the beta is doing a very good job of this.
RIP SC2. I will certainly not buy lotv with this garbage economy. Hopefully many people will continue playing HotS so I don't have to quit the game.
Dude... seriously...  Every thread, no matter what they say, same negativity from you.
Hold on one sec, let me grab a crib... There we go, how's that better? HEY, can someone get me a warm bottle of milk and a bedtime story I can read.
Don't worry, I got you dog... <3
|
On June 20 2015 04:35 Topin wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2015 04:28 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On June 20 2015 04:26 Charoisaur wrote:
Currently, the resourcing model that we’re testing in the beta is doing a very good job of this.
RIP SC2. I will certainly not buy lotv with this garbage economy. Hopefully many people will continue playing HotS so I don't have to quit the game. WoL is still going strong... you can find games quickly at people close to your level unless you are really low Bronze.... and this is with HotS going on sale for $10. I'm sure lots of people won't want to pay the full box price of $60 USD and HotS will keep on rolling no problems. wait wait... is t confirmed that it will cost $60?? wtf?!
this is not an expansion pack. you do not need WoL or HotS to purchase the game.
THe game will be the same boxed priced for all consumers.
For North Americans that means $60 USD.
Canadians should expect it to be either $70 Cdn or $75.
i have 1 response to this.
Blizzard: Take My Money.
|
Can we still push for Lalush depth of micro or is it too late? I want this more than anything announced in LoTV
|
it would be nice if DK said why he likes the lotv economy so much.
Multiple people have analyzed the huge downsides it has e.g. removing defensive playstyles, removing cheeses, making comebacks harder, restricting map design even more; but all he answers is: we like it so it will be implemented.
I know they don't have to implement everything the community wants but at least a more detailed analysis why he thinks their changes are good would be nice.
|
On June 20 2015 04:43 caznitch wrote:
Can we still push for Lalush depth of micro or is it too late? I want this more than anything announced in LoTV
LaLuSh made 7 suggestions in that post
1. Fix separation Radius
Approved
2. Set damage point of all air units to 0
Rejected, though DKim implies some (but not all) air units might be changed.
3. Weapons stop bug
No response from Blizz so far
4. Turret Tracking
Approved
5. Turn Rate
No response
6. Lateral Acceleration
No Response
7. Hovering units
No response
Since DKim is going to do more updates, and the things he responded to are the first suggestions, I expect some form on comment on Turn Rate, Lateral Acceleration, and Hovering Units in the next update (If I had to guess: approve, approve, reject, respectively)
|
Germany108 Posts
While I disagree on some points, this post at least feels like something got actually communicated compared to the last post. I can also agree with the general direction this is going.
Now if only we could touch the topic of a more severe Protoss redesign... Forcefields being in the game is still giving me headaches 
Bringing more counterplay vs FFs (Ravager, Adept, Disruptor) is just putting more bandaids on top of a bandaid.
My current stance is: buy LotV for the campaign and switch to Starbow for multiplayer
|
Really like this changes. There is hope.
|
On June 20 2015 04:26 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +
Currently, the resourcing model that we’re testing in the beta is doing a very good job of this.
RIP SC2. I will certainly not buy lotv with this garbage economy. Hopefully many people will continue playing HotS so I don't have to quit the game.
If this is a garbage economy then I'm wondering what the think HOTS is, which is, secure 3 bases quickly, take your 4th depending on how mid game progresses, only expand when one base mines out, move deathball two inches to the upper left to secure both bases.
LOTV economy is way better, I recognize your name, you cry in every single thread.
|
Finally! YES! This is what you had to do all along Blizzard. News updates, detailed information on what is going on. You need to do this like every week since beta is in rough shape atm. Also, you need to address the issue with heavy server lag on the beta client. A lot of people get network spikes... Even the guy making the adept micro video had lag... like.... cmon now
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
