EPTquote david kim
Because of this, we believe it's important to do what's best for the game in this situation, rather than going for a change that everyone wants,
(even though we play the game)
Community Feedback Update - September 25 - Page 4
| Forum Index > Legacy of the Void |
|
adMachine
Australia54 Posts
quote david kim Because of this, we believe it's important to do what's best for the game in this situation, rather than going for a change that everyone wants, (even though we play the game) | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20282 Posts
And no, once again you are blatantly incorrect. Terran army is not more supply efficient in mega late game because the other races do the exact same thing killing their own workers in late game. I do not understand why people for some reason have the misconception it's only Terran that does that with workers. Terran does it earlier and to far greater effect. It comes into play in games that generally go late and start to touch the supply cap while protoss throwing away most of their workers is something that i have yet to run into in LOTV it hurts them a lot more and it's usually a bad idea to throw away workers and build a stronger blob instead of taking another base or trading units. | ||
|
crazedrat
272 Posts
| ||
|
TheUnderking
Canada202 Posts
| ||
|
SCST
Mexico1609 Posts
Teamliquid save us, please. | ||
|
ZAiNs
United Kingdom6525 Posts
On September 26 2015 10:04 adMachine wrote: all i will comment is this quote david kim Because of this, we believe it's important to do what's best for the game in this situation, rather than going for a change that everyone wants, (even though we play the game) You do know the sentence continues after the full stop, right? "because clearly, there's not even close to a consensus on this topic." Though when it comes to progamers there is a consensus -- that auto-injects are an abomination. | ||
|
Thouhastmail
Korea (North)876 Posts
Then, remove Macro things ALTOGETHER(including injects) lastly, increase the amount of mining about 6-7. This is my feedback. Thank you very much for listening, DK! p.s. we do not need to go bananas, cause there`s nothing we can do about the game. | ||
|
Ansibled
United Kingdom9872 Posts
On September 26 2015 09:56 ROOTFayth wrote: "Terran is only staying approximately even with the other races in economy late game, especially once bases spread out far on the map. " this is a pretty big problem if it allows terran to have 50 supply in army more than the opponent It's not if the game is balanced around this. | ||
|
duckk
United States622 Posts
Biggest joke I have ever read in my entire life. Hopefully they at least get lotv right... | ||
|
DooMDash
United States1015 Posts
Snipe and Raven change will also be nice as a bonus, but the Ravager is the only one I cared about. I don't even dislike adepts. | ||
|
shin_toss
Philippines2589 Posts
On September 26 2015 06:39 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: -Remove MULE hammer -Look at LotV economy again -Nerf Adept and Warp Prism -Fix Forcefield -Fix arcade and custom lobbies This is the things that need to happen for LotV. seriously forcefields are still problem for some people after 5 years? .. lol | ||
|
tokinho
United States785 Posts
I don't care to watch the Protoss slugfest at blizzcon. I doubt anything will actually be tested. I think the adept damage to light is too high. 2 adepts 1 shot marines/workers, resulting in losing the game to an oracle if you don't build enough marines, i thought was the consensus on the early game problem. If they don't pressure with an oracle and you commit to oracle defense, then you lose to the warp prism harass. If you push out with a reaper, its really hard to hold any pressure, and the scans are needed as mules if you take economic damage. Blizzard, have your game, I might try overwatch. | ||
|
hitpoint
United States1511 Posts
On September 26 2015 11:14 shin_toss wrote: seriously forcefields are still problem for some people after 5 years? .. lol They never stopped being the problem. They are the cause of the Protoss race....being the way it is. | ||
|
Garemie
United States248 Posts
LITERALLY WHAT There's overwhelmingly high numbers in favor of no macro boosters. What the fuck. | ||
|
NanashiStarCraft
Germany48 Posts
On September 26 2015 07:00 Spyridon wrote: If DK was going to do what is best for the game, then why the hell are you choosing the option for macro mechanics that with his own words said was an inferior design?? And if 79% of the community that was unhappy with the last patch is not a consensus... I don't know what is... Just more PR bullshit, instead of the truth: It has nothing to do with what is "best" for the game, and everything to do with the release date being in 1.5 months and not even enough time to rebalance the current units let alone a new macro economy... + Show Spoiler + It is skewed in many ways, and these last few updates put an exclamation point on it. Went from a few updates back "we are happy with the direction of removal of the macro mechanics" to "release date in under 2 months", to all of a sudden "We are split between the direction of the macro"... then Then... We went from new design direction they were pleased with, to a release date very soon, to all of a sudden unhappiness with their direction, using the COMMUNITY PERCEPTION as the reason for changes, rather than any balance or design decisions... Now they are acting like they chose the current method because it is "best for the game"? That quote for Zerg Spawn Larva, and the quote before it, shows this to be a lie. It shows they chose a decision that they KNOW is not an improvement, and blame it on the community. But if you look at polls, only 25% of the community actually wanted it like this. The majority of the community wanted macro mechanics REMOVED! What did they say about that?? Again, they blame the COMMUNITY, even though the situation they describe was far from the truth. The community ENJOYED the changes, and the only complaints were that the races (esp terran) needed to be rebalanced. So let's get this straight... They decide to re-implement manual macro mechanics because of the 25% of the community that wanted manual mechanics and had a "negative perception"... Yet when the 60%+ that want no macro mechanics are unhappy, they stick to their guns??? They contradict themselves. They "listen to the complaints" and "care about the negative perception" when it is ~25% of the community, but 60%+ of the community who has a negative perception gets ignored? Or how about the 79% that disapproved of their most recent patch, their negative perception don't matter? What gives? What is the common denominator here? Answer: All of their choices result in the least amount of balance work before release. That's the damn truth. Plain and simple. Everything they say in these community updates is just PR bullshit, and based off "facts" that are not even true. From the reason for their direction of beta suddenly changing, to bending to the will of a small portion of the community while ignoring the majority of the community, to ignoring the feedback of the tests, to the decisions to put perceptions ahead of good game design. It's all PR bullshit... I had high hopes about SC2 with LotV, and now they have shown a glaring example of why SC2 will not thrive again. They don't give a shit about giving us the best design possible. They remind everyone exactly why people do not like DK. They lie to us. And unlike the Blizzard of old, they rather release a game early to grab money ASAP, rather than delay until the game is ready (which used to be their motto)... This post! So much passion, so much truth, sadly. Still thanks for writing it down. | ||
|
AgamemnonSC2
Canada254 Posts
On September 26 2015 07:00 Spyridon wrote: If DK was going to do what is best for the game, then why the hell are you choosing the option for macro mechanics that with his own words said was an inferior design?? And if 79% of the community that was unhappy with the last patch is not a consensus... I don't know what is... Just more PR bullshit, instead of the truth: It has nothing to do with what is "best" for the game, and everything to do with the release date being in 1.5 months and not even enough time to rebalance the current units let alone a new macro economy... + Show Spoiler + It is skewed in many ways, and these last few updates put an exclamation point on it. Went from a few updates back "we are happy with the direction of removal of the macro mechanics" to "release date in under 2 months", to all of a sudden "We are split between the direction of the macro"... then Then... We went from new design direction they were pleased with, to a release date very soon, to all of a sudden unhappiness with their direction, using the COMMUNITY PERCEPTION as the reason for changes, rather than any balance or design decisions... Now they are acting like they chose the current method because it is "best for the game"? That quote for Zerg Spawn Larva, and the quote before it, shows this to be a lie. It shows they chose a decision that they KNOW is not an improvement, and blame it on the community. But if you look at polls, only 25% of the community actually wanted it like this. The majority of the community wanted macro mechanics REMOVED! What did they say about that?? Again, they blame the COMMUNITY, even though the situation they describe was far from the truth. The community ENJOYED the changes, and the only complaints were that the races (esp terran) needed to be rebalanced. So let's get this straight... They decide to re-implement manual macro mechanics because of the 25% of the community that wanted manual mechanics and had a "negative perception"... Yet when the 60%+ that want no macro mechanics are unhappy, they stick to their guns??? They contradict themselves. They "listen to the complaints" and "care about the negative perception" when it is ~25% of the community, but 60%+ of the community who has a negative perception gets ignored? Or how about the 79% that disapproved of their most recent patch, their negative perception don't matter? What gives? What is the common denominator here? Answer: All of their choices result in the least amount of balance work before release. That's the damn truth. Plain and simple. Everything they say in these community updates is just PR bullshit, and based off "facts" that are not even true. From the reason for their direction of beta suddenly changing, to bending to the will of a small portion of the community while ignoring the majority of the community, to ignoring the feedback of the tests, to the decisions to put perceptions ahead of good game design. It's all PR bullshit... I had high hopes about SC2 with LotV, and now they have shown a glaring example of why SC2 will not thrive again. They don't give a shit about giving us the best design possible. They remind everyone exactly why people do not like DK. They lie to us. And unlike the Blizzard of old, they rather release a game early to grab money ASAP, rather than delay until the game is ready (which used to be their motto)... Well said man. I made the poll that DK is referencing, and I would like to isolate this quote: First of all, we would like to point out that we saw the poll and posts relating to macro mechanics this week, and we'd like to thank you for the discussions. We don't agree with the idea that macro mechanics should be completely removed. When we tried this, and many of you pointed this out, each of the three races lost a bit of their identity and uniqueness. I will try to write this without all caps...... I don't ever remember the community complaining that each of the races lost a bit of identity. That is total crap. The most I remember from that patch is that terran players really needed a buff or a tweak. ok, I need caps now: BUT WE DID NOT EVEN GET A SINGLE BALANCE PATCH AFTER THE MACRO REMOVAL!!!!!!! HOW THE HELL CAN WE KNOW IF IT IS GOOD OR BAD????? And I am sick and tired of hearing that it is the community that wanted certain changes when it is OBVIOUS that the community is the complete opposite. AND DON'T TELL ME WE ARE 50/50 ON THE ISSUE! Ok, sorry. I just hate being told: "We heard what you wanted, thank you for your feedback. Here is the Peach that you have requested." Meanwhile, we have been screaming: "GIVE ME A F'N ORANGE PLEASE!!!!' | ||
|
DooMDash
United States1015 Posts
| ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20282 Posts
On September 26 2015 11:59 DooMDash wrote: I don't think the polls are an accurate representation though since most people who are happy with the direction probably aren't posting about it. We have polls showing a bunch of people on both sides - people wanting no macro mechanics vs people wanting full mechanics, people are clearly unhappy on both sides - we still have the polls showing only 20% wanted the game as it is with semi-auto mechanics. | ||
|
bObA
France300 Posts
For me that's clear Adepts are way too strong. And seriously maybe that's secondary for you, but that's also the death of the zealot. Progamers use everytime the adepts and they show us he is really imba. Regarding ravagers upgrade I guess that would be better to adjust with lurker range too and that won't allow to counter to well mech. As Macro Mechanics I would have prefered nothing changes between HOTS and LOTV. The mass drop mules at the end of the game, is not a big issue imo, in all progamers games we could see in GSL, SSl or WCS, that's doesn't let the terran win everytime, that's just a strategic advantage at a particular moment. As protoss can warp in a lot of units everywhere to kill secondary bases, without any micro for doing it with zealots or dts, when zergs can switch completely their tec from ground to air and also glings runby could be devastating, especially in addition with a few banelings. Terran has always to micro the helions and bio. And need to scan all the time to check if zerg change from Broodlords to ultras, or from mass roaches to mutas, to continue to kill obs and dts warp ins and to locate where zerg and protoss armies are and if they take new bases. And notice in lategame mass mules only provide a mineral boost, which is not as important as that is supposed to be since in lategame the main problem is the gaz especially if the terran plays mech, not the mineral who just allows to make marines and helions. And with all the pro games I followed during all these years, I never ever seen that gave a substantial advantage to the terran to win every single game. Sometimes that helps a bit, but that s never decisive. | ||
|
vicml21
Canada165 Posts
| ||
| ||
