|
On August 29 2015 06:39 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 06:33 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
Things I'd like to see addressed/added to LotV before it's out of beta
1. DH Econ Model
2. Ground Unit Clumping
3. Removal of Siege tank drops
4. Other "depth of micro" changes since we're focusing on micro more anyway
Sadly, Blizzard has written off DH Economy without trying it and not understanding it. Ground unit clumping seems to have been ignored. They're nerfing tank drops and have mentioned removing it as a last option if it continues to be OP and they'll never take a serious look at Lalush's comments. LotV could be so much more than it currently is but it's rapidly becoming too late Some of Lalush and the economy were adressed here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/legacy-of-the-void/488139-lotv-community-feedback-update-june-19and I'm pretty sure they said they tested bigger unit seperation but did not like it.
I would love it if unit movement/clumping was like BW. I'd also like all the smartcasting to be taken off, but then AOE and splash made better. But this is rewriting the game, so I just don't think they can do all of it without breaking the game for another year.
|
On August 29 2015 06:33 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
Things I'd like to see addressed/added to LotV before it's out of beta
1. DH Econ Model
2. Ground Unit Clumping
3. Removal of Siege tank drops
4. Other "depth of micro" changes since we're focusing on micro more anyway
Sadly, Blizzard has written off DH Economy without trying it and not understanding it. Ground unit clumping seems to have been ignored. They're nerfing tank drops and have mentioned removing it as a last option if it continues to be OP and they'll never take a serious look at Lalush's comments. LotV could be so much more than it currently is but it's rapidly becoming too late
I agree, they've just wrote off other economic approaches instead of giving them a shot. Ground unit clumping, though, seems to be more like a feature from their point of view, so in that regard I didn't have much hopes to begin with. Siege tank drops are a fundamental design flaw (completely nullifying the downside of a unit and thus disabling potential counterplay) and absolutely need to go.
I feel like their schedule to release the game by the end of the year surely doesn't help the cause.
|
On August 29 2015 06:43 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 06:27 Big J wrote:On August 29 2015 06:17 WrathSCII wrote:On August 29 2015 06:07 Big J wrote:On August 29 2015 05:45 Little-Chimp wrote:On August 29 2015 05:39 Gfire wrote:On August 29 2015 05:04 Big J wrote:
I don't understand the hate for the automatization in itself as a mechanic. Something automated is something you don't have to control in the game, it is literally the same thing as not having it to begin with controlwise.
I understand the argument about making macro hard (even though I don't support it), but I can't understand the stance that abilities must not be automated ever. That just doesn't make sense. Yeah it seems like people just find it "icky" for some reason. Really their solution seems to hit all the points they want it to. I understand if you disagree with those points, but if you agree with the goals this seems like a fine way to achieve them. I guess it's a little bit of the lazy solution as some of the reason for it is fixing the balance concerns with completely removing the boosters. I just thought they'd re-balance the game. Autocast doesn't change things up too much so everything should be closer to how it was. If you're someone who was excited about slowing down macro in general or getting rid of cheesier chrono builds or more common PFs or some other side-effect this might not have the advantages of cutting the boosters, in any case. I think people care way too much about "elegance" in game design when it doesn't even effect the way the game plays. It's only a bit of a burden for new players to learn what mules and chrono are. Other than the "complication" of their very existence, they don't really make the game clunkier or anything. Cutting them altogether would make the end product simpler but the process to balance the game around that would be much more work. An argument could also be made that a race's abilities are features in a game and it's kinda lame to cut features in an expansion. That's more from a traditional average consumer's point of view, and obviously more abilities doesn't mean more quality gameplay or anything, but it's still the what I would have expected from an expansion before I really tried much competitive play in RTS games. It's pretty much a giant dirty nasty band aid of all band aids instead of balancing the game around no macro mechanics. Some people enjoyed the macro mechanics, some people hated them. I'm pretty sure no one wanted them to just exist in the background except for some terrans last week who got nailed hard by the last patch. That issue could have been fixed a million other ways than automating old mechanics. It's a bit like the HOTS spore crawlers doing a million damage to mutas only but for macro. Yeah, it certainly is a band-aid for not rebalancing for the original change. But you could say the whole concept of macro boosters was a band-aid to begin with. The next version will still be less of a band-aid than the original macro boosters, it's a bit of a 2step forward, 1step back patch in that direction and I don't like it in comparison to the status quo of LotV. But the most important parts for me are kept, which is the whole concept of not having to care about those things as much. What really makes me mad is that they have no goal in each change. They removed macro mechanics and wanted to test the result. Even by a simple theorycrafting, you will see that Terran will be the most effected and that with how worker harassment balanced around macro mechanics will be broken after they removed them. Now they restored the macro mechanics in a nerfed version. So what did we exactly achieve in the last week? What was the point of testing when you say "Well, we will just change things again, though mostly we did not get that much of data to work on anyway". This is how we wasted 5 months of the beta without addressing: 1- Economy. 2- Pathing. 3- Macro Mechanics (Being addressed in a very very strange way). 4- Worker Harassment. 5- Protoss Gimmickness. 6-... etc. 2 - this has not been adressed in LotV, I give you that. They have said previously that they like the pathing and don't want to alter it. And I agree with them to a large degree. The only thing I would alter is remove air stacking, but otherwise I'm very much fine with the SC2 pathing, as the whole game has been designed well for it. You really like the current pathing? It creates so many problems though :/ A pathing change alone could make the game A LOT better imo. Visually alone this would make bigger engagements look way better, this is still a huge factor why people don't like protoss if you ask me.
I think the pathing could be much better, but I don't know how intelligent it should/should not be. The current pathing is relatively simple to understand for the player: units go to the closest point you order them, which will naturally clump them in higher numbers.
I think a pathing that kind of "holds formations" would be nicer, but I'm not sure to which degree this is actually implementable without the PC starting to maneuver the units in all sorts of artificial ways around corners and through chokes.
A more scattering pathing has it's beauty as well gameplaywise, but I think it also punishes you for maneuvering a lot and rewards you for micromanaging that units actually do what you want them to do, which is kind of the opposite I want.
|
On August 29 2015 06:39 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 06:33 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
Things I'd like to see addressed/added to LotV before it's out of beta
1. DH Econ Model
2. Ground Unit Clumping
3. Removal of Siege tank drops
4. Other "depth of micro" changes since we're focusing on micro more anyway
Sadly, Blizzard has written off DH Economy without trying it and not understanding it. Ground unit clumping seems to have been ignored. They're nerfing tank drops and have mentioned removing it as a last option if it continues to be OP and they'll never take a serious look at Lalush's comments. LotV could be so much more than it currently is but it's rapidly becoming too late Some of Lalush and the economy were adressed here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/legacy-of-the-void/488139-lotv-community-feedback-update-june-19and I'm pretty sure they said they tested bigger unit seperation but did not like it.
yeah i think this is accurate. Still would've liked to play with and see some of those changes for myself, maybe we'd like it
|
I enjoyed the last patch without macro mechanics.
Kind of sad about all this autocast, feels so clunky and not creative.
|
It would have taken a TON of balancing to make things even after the macro booster removal in the last patch, and it seems like they didn't want to venture down that route during the final installment of the game, which is understandable.
My first reaction to this "middle ground" of automating chrono and mules was disgust. But the more I think about it, the more it makes sense. The automatic injects so far have been exciting to me, since it means even lower level zergs can enjoy PLAYING the game the same way terran and protoss already can. The new range limit on the mule is definitely a good choice as well, and maybe that coupled with it's reduced efficacy, will allow harass to continue to be important against terran mineral lines in LOTV. The change to chrono is actually very elegant. It gets rid of all the extra clicks, and allows protoss players to once again bring individuality to their builds, while also rewarding skilled players more, as they can move it around where it's needed.
|
Blizzard plz just cut the mechanics and balance from there it just makes more sense and I really like the smaller supplys eariler on
|
On August 29 2015 06:49 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 06:43 The_Red_Viper wrote:On August 29 2015 06:27 Big J wrote:On August 29 2015 06:17 WrathSCII wrote:On August 29 2015 06:07 Big J wrote:On August 29 2015 05:45 Little-Chimp wrote:On August 29 2015 05:39 Gfire wrote:On August 29 2015 05:04 Big J wrote:
I don't understand the hate for the automatization in itself as a mechanic. Something automated is something you don't have to control in the game, it is literally the same thing as not having it to begin with controlwise.
I understand the argument about making macro hard (even though I don't support it), but I can't understand the stance that abilities must not be automated ever. That just doesn't make sense. Yeah it seems like people just find it "icky" for some reason. Really their solution seems to hit all the points they want it to. I understand if you disagree with those points, but if you agree with the goals this seems like a fine way to achieve them. I guess it's a little bit of the lazy solution as some of the reason for it is fixing the balance concerns with completely removing the boosters. I just thought they'd re-balance the game. Autocast doesn't change things up too much so everything should be closer to how it was. If you're someone who was excited about slowing down macro in general or getting rid of cheesier chrono builds or more common PFs or some other side-effect this might not have the advantages of cutting the boosters, in any case. I think people care way too much about "elegance" in game design when it doesn't even effect the way the game plays. It's only a bit of a burden for new players to learn what mules and chrono are. Other than the "complication" of their very existence, they don't really make the game clunkier or anything. Cutting them altogether would make the end product simpler but the process to balance the game around that would be much more work. An argument could also be made that a race's abilities are features in a game and it's kinda lame to cut features in an expansion. That's more from a traditional average consumer's point of view, and obviously more abilities doesn't mean more quality gameplay or anything, but it's still the what I would have expected from an expansion before I really tried much competitive play in RTS games. It's pretty much a giant dirty nasty band aid of all band aids instead of balancing the game around no macro mechanics. Some people enjoyed the macro mechanics, some people hated them. I'm pretty sure no one wanted them to just exist in the background except for some terrans last week who got nailed hard by the last patch. That issue could have been fixed a million other ways than automating old mechanics. It's a bit like the HOTS spore crawlers doing a million damage to mutas only but for macro. Yeah, it certainly is a band-aid for not rebalancing for the original change. But you could say the whole concept of macro boosters was a band-aid to begin with. The next version will still be less of a band-aid than the original macro boosters, it's a bit of a 2step forward, 1step back patch in that direction and I don't like it in comparison to the status quo of LotV. But the most important parts for me are kept, which is the whole concept of not having to care about those things as much. What really makes me mad is that they have no goal in each change. They removed macro mechanics and wanted to test the result. Even by a simple theorycrafting, you will see that Terran will be the most effected and that with how worker harassment balanced around macro mechanics will be broken after they removed them. Now they restored the macro mechanics in a nerfed version. So what did we exactly achieve in the last week? What was the point of testing when you say "Well, we will just change things again, though mostly we did not get that much of data to work on anyway". This is how we wasted 5 months of the beta without addressing: 1- Economy. 2- Pathing. 3- Macro Mechanics (Being addressed in a very very strange way). 4- Worker Harassment. 5- Protoss Gimmickness. 6-... etc. 2 - this has not been adressed in LotV, I give you that. They have said previously that they like the pathing and don't want to alter it. And I agree with them to a large degree. The only thing I would alter is remove air stacking, but otherwise I'm very much fine with the SC2 pathing, as the whole game has been designed well for it. You really like the current pathing? It creates so many problems though :/ A pathing change alone could make the game A LOT better imo. Visually alone this would make bigger engagements look way better, this is still a huge factor why people don't like protoss if you ask me. I think the pathing could be much better, but I don't know how intelligent it should/should not be. The current pathing is relatively simple to understand for the player: units go to the closest point you order them, which will naturally clump them in higher numbers. I think a pathing that kind of "holds formations" would be nicer, but I'm not sure to which degree this is actually implementable without the PC starting to maneuver the units in all sorts of artificial ways around corners and through chokes. A more scattering pathing has it's beauty as well gameplaywise, but I think it also punishes you for maneuvering a lot and rewards you for micromanaging that units actually do what you want them to do, which is kind of the opposite I want.
My biggest wish would be that armies which move spread out more. This would be a big buff to defending armies and in general deathballs would be nerfed.
It also looks way nicer.
I think it would be ok to do that (if we wanna call it dumber pathing) considering that the multitasking for macro gets lowered so you have more opportunitiy to micro your army. A little bit of babysitting shouldn't be that bad
|
In the next patch will they add a feature where someone just automatically plays for you?
|
On August 29 2015 07:08 FLuE wrote:
In the next patch will they add a feature where someone just automatically plays for you?
Great fucking feedback. Does everyone see what I'm talking about?
|
I think people are missing the main points addressed here. Sure it sucks a little that the way we play the game has been significantly changed due to the removal of Macro Mechanics. But this was just as true last week as it is today. One of the main complaints was how slow the economy had become. Another old complaint was that the economy is too fast, which warranted the removal of Macro Mechanics in some sense; to give the player less to do.
So implementing automated Macro Mechanics is an obvious way to slightly accelerate the speed of the early and mid game. The same logic follows 2 larva to 3. If you think about it from a pacing standpoint it makes a lot more sense. I really don't know why people are so worried about losing mule and chrono (perhaps inject but different story). Sure it lowers the skill ceiling, but the skill ceiling will be harder to reach once the economy speeds up a bit more. And then there will be plenty of things for players to do without Mule, chrono, or inject.
Maybe I am being naive, but once things are tuned and Zerg have a few more things to do regarding creep spread. I really think there is something nice starting to take shape. Keep in mind LotV is going to be constantly updated even out of beta. This is very early days, and a very fresh new start.
|
Economy is the biggest issue with this game and it WILL KILL LOTV if it keeps like this, a lot of people dont like it and its for multiple reasons, yet blizzard acts like they are deaf and they dont try to fix the problem the current econ system presents. Its too fast, bases mine out at incredible rates, you are forced to expand, the comeback potential is very slim and games are way way too volatile. Its like DK just focused on making an arcade game instead of a strategy one. And what I hate most is how they are "pretending" they are doing stuff we want there to be, what about the changes proposed by the community writers? where are they? AM I the only one that thinks that they are being really false? Acting like they give a damn when they actually dont and keep doing what their "internal testing" says?
|
it looks like Mr. Kim really wants to remove the clicks used to MULE, Chrono, and Inject... and he is replacing that busy work with more fun things to do...
somewhere Bret Sperry is saying "i told you so"
|
On August 29 2015 06:56 Fig wrote:
It would have taken a TON of balancing to make things even after the macro booster removal in the last patch, and it seems like they didn't want to venture down that route during the final installment of the game, which is understandable.
My first reaction to this "middle ground" of automating chrono and mules was disgust. But the more I think about it, the more it makes sense. The automatic injects so far have been exciting to me, since it means even lower level zergs can enjoy PLAYING the game the same way terran and protoss already can. The new range limit on the mule is definitely a good choice as well, and maybe that coupled with it's reduced efficacy, will allow harass to continue to be important against terran mineral lines in LOTV. The change to chrono is actually very elegant. It gets rid of all the extra clicks, and allows protoss players to once again bring individuality to their builds, while also rewarding skilled players more, as they can move it around where it's needed.
thats exactly what I think and additionally terran cannot outmule anybody anymore with dozens of OC
Just want to add that blizzard is finally trying some risky ballance changes and trying to redesign stuff as desired for years and ppl still crying.
|
On August 29 2015 07:22 ohmylanta1003 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 07:08 FLuE wrote:
In the next patch will they add a feature where someone just automatically plays for you? Great fucking feedback. Does everyone see what I'm talking about?
They removed macro mechanics, people complained, they listened to the people.
As always, the people have no idea what they're doing.
|
On August 29 2015 07:49 Steelghost wrote:
Economy is the biggest issue with this game and it WILL KILL LOTV if it keeps like this, a lot of people dont like it and its for multiple reasons, yet blizzard acts like they are deaf and they dont try to fix the problem the current econ system presents. Its too fast, bases mine out at incredible rates, you are forced to expand, the comeback potential is very slim and games are way way too volatile. Its like DK just focused on making an arcade game instead of a strategy one. And what I hate most is how they are "pretending" they are doing stuff we want there to be, what about the changes proposed by the community writers? where are they? AM I the only one that thinks that they are being really false? Acting like they give a damn when they actually dont and keep doing what their "internal testing" says?
I have been thinking for a while now that while not ideal, the new economy is actually decent and it's not that big a problem that the community ideas have been dismissed (with ridiculous reasons, though). However, my doubts are rising and sadly I have to agree that it may be the very downfall of LotV.
The worst thing is you have less mining overall, and that, paired with the lack of macro boosters and increased harass potential, especially worker harass, results in game-ending damage being done very easily, with little comeback potential, as you say.
I'm not actually sure if Blizzard realizes that all three of the main points of their LotV "campaign" (more harass, new economy, reduced macro boosters) point toward irrecoverable, terrible, terrible damage, even if the goal is actually the opposite.
I'm not saying the game will turn out to be unplayable. Pros will always find a way to make it work, but it may become less enjoyable, more unstable and annoying, which does not help a game with a relatively small player and fanbase to begin with. At this point I'm almost sure that if the direction of the development remains the same, LotV will be a worse game overall than HotS, because they are focusing on creating a very different game flow, and to be honest, HotS, to me at least, seemed really balanced and interesting; something that is hard to topple. I hope, though, that time will prove me wrong and LotV will indeed become a great game.
|
China6330 Posts
Am I the only one who actually like the macro mechanics change?
|
On August 29 2015 03:32 Tenks wrote:
I wish they'd add chrono boost range as well to help with those pesky proxy oracles
-edit-
Actually thinking about it this someone does help. Now that CB is always active it will be easy to see they don't have the CB in their base instead of implying based upon an absence of CB on the nexus and adding up the nexus energy.
This is fun. Now we'll have mind games where the toss player moves CB back to their base while a scout is around, and then back to the proxy after they chase it away!
I look forward to watching all these changes. I was hoping mule and CB would come back in a nerfed form. Glad they are meeting the pro Korean goal of fewer clicks on the macro end while bringing back some of the choices involved (which building to crono, where to drop mules). I wonder how big the mule range will be.
On August 29 2015 08:18 digmouse wrote:
Am I the only one who actually like the macro mechanics change?
I like it too!
|
On August 29 2015 08:18 digmouse wrote:
Am I the only one who actually like the macro mechanics change?
Its decent.
They fixed the MULE
Stopped some BS from Protoss
Made Zerg easier and more forgiving, while giving them the creep play, like Morrow said, a Zerg will abuse the 5 sec creep bulding time that takes to be made, and spread creep even more during that time.
Pros will have 2x times better creep then any other Zerg out there now.
And when you have time to spread creep you will see creep hiting the enemy bases in mid game if they dont remove it and stay on removing it.
Finally, creep will matter to the enemy player a bit more.
What i dont like is that they are forgeting to buff units like Ghost, Infestor, Tempest, Swarm Host
This 3 units suck alot...
Also Overlord drop at lair will kill all the cool drops cuz its to slow at that point to drop and Nydus or Muta is way better cuz its a safe bet that does damage unlike losing and overlord drop.
|
On August 29 2015 08:18 digmouse wrote:
Am I the only one who actually like the macro mechanics change?
I like it more than just removing them.
But I do not think that they have addressed a very significant worry of the community - namely that worker harass is game ending now because recovery is not possible. This affects Terran more than Protoss, and Protoss more than Zerg.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
