|
On September 26 2015 18:11 Pr0wler wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2015 17:05 -Archangel- wrote:On September 26 2015 06:55 -NegativeZero- wrote:On September 26 2015 06:24 -Archangel- wrote:
I wasn't expecting much but still got disappointed. And it is hilarious how he is lying about community being split even. Not it is not, not even an elitist stronghold like TL was split even so which side do you think it was skewed toward? because i definitely saw a lot of people fighting for both opinions, on here and on reddit. The polls were pretty clear. The polls... And how many people voted in the polls ? Last time I checked it was few hundreds... This hardly represents a majority.
It represents people that visit TL often which are some of the most loyal starcraft fans. TL is well known as a more hardcore community and if its poll was for removal of macro boosters you can be sure all the bronze, silver and gold players not playing sc2 anymore would love to play it without them as well.
|
On September 27 2015 00:07 -Archangel- wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2015 18:11 Pr0wler wrote:On September 26 2015 17:05 -Archangel- wrote:On September 26 2015 06:55 -NegativeZero- wrote:On September 26 2015 06:24 -Archangel- wrote:
I wasn't expecting much but still got disappointed. And it is hilarious how he is lying about community being split even. Not it is not, not even an elitist stronghold like TL was split even so which side do you think it was skewed toward? because i definitely saw a lot of people fighting for both opinions, on here and on reddit. The polls were pretty clear. The polls... And how many people voted in the polls ? Last time I checked it was few hundreds... This hardly represents a majority. It represents people that visit TL often which are some of the most loyal starcraft fans. TL is well known as a more hardcore community and if its poll was for removal of macro boosters you can be sure all the bronze, silver and gold players not playing sc2 anymore would love to play it without them as well.
At least that reasoning fits your narrative
|
On September 26 2015 22:12 weikor wrote:
Meh...
kinda glad it releases soon as its pretty obvious they won't do any more major changes. Im looking forward to completing the campaign and watching a few major.
Its just sad. I hope some great RTS from another company will release in the next years. I really like the genre
Try Act of Aggression
|
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)
Yea I noticed this as well, I don't much or any faith in what they think is good for the game these days. I'm just basing this off pasted decisions they've made, the lack of willingness to address longstanding issues, and lack of transparency about how they feel and what their really doing.
|
On September 26 2015 20:27 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2015 19:40 Hider wrote:Another problem is who are they exactly designing the game for? If you notice during the Depth of Micro discussion, their arguments were "People won't be able to notice those plays" They are focusing on the twitch viewer rather than the player who will actually play the fucking game. Viewers enjoy seeing oracles and worker harassment, but the player who is getting his workers burned like that hates it. Yeh this is exactly why I have been saying for a while how David Kim doesn't understand what his job actually is. His job isn't to create the most "fun to watch game". His job is to create a game that is fun to play. The esport-side of the equation should be viewed as marketing for the actual product (playing the game). The main priority should thus always be to make a game that is fun to play and the secondary objective is to make a game that is fun to watch. But even then, I don't think Oracles are fun at all to watch. Moving shot is a ton more exciting, but David Kim also misunderstood the depth of micro suggestions by Lalush on several levels. Since then he has at least acknowledged this by fixing the bug that made air units not have proper moving shot. what is fun to play and to watch is often the same. Things like BL/infestor, blink era, swarmhosts, oracles etc are both horrible to watch and to play while tvz bio mine vs ling bane muta is extremely fun to play and to watch. I can't think of a single thing in the game that is fun to watch but not to play.
Yeh I agree, but the issue is when David Kim uses rhetorical tricks to defend certain flawed gameplays. Like we should keep xx mechanic because it differentiates bad players from good players or that it creates awesome moments.
That's typically related to esports or at least it's not related to the fun'ness experience.
But clearly watching people inject is boring whereas it's more interesting to watch them micro units.
|
meanwhile, ive (re)discovered the insane fun of dota 2
|
On September 27 2015 01:58 xtorn wrote:
meanwhile, ive (re)discovered the insane fun of dota 2
Thats great for you, but that post is not any better than the ded gaem jokes on reddit.
|
Does anyone else feel that marketing and money is dictating the creation of this game again, rather than creating something intended to be epic? So far LotV is a good game, but it does not feel that these changes will have as much staying power as they need to.
I have serious concerns that their ear is turned to earning money and ending the Starcraft II trilogy on a "decent" note than to work with the community to create something they can continue to have a mutually beneficial relationship to. Unlike Brood War, Blizzard has maintained their control of SC2, so there is no doubt they could continue to monetize on tournaments into the future if the game were to stay strong the way BW did.
Based on size and cost of tournaments for LoL, Dota2 vs those for SC2, however, I think they may be considering this a lesser investment and letting it go. This makes me uncomfortable in supporting their decision by purchasing LotV at release - I don't want to show Blizzard that I am willing to accept a marginally better product when the next one I may get is five years out. (If they ever make a Starcraft 3, which at this point I have heard nothing.)
I am not a pro, I am just diamond, so I don't speak to balance issues specifically (I know what I want to have, but that isn't objective.) But watching and listening to pro streams, I hear consensus on changes like removal of macro boosters which are nearly unanimous. The games by pros that I've watched during removal of macro boosters were some of the most interesting I've seen in the months before and after, even though they weren't top level play. I can't chalk that up to just being new units or new build orders, because since LotV started shifting economy and introducing new units, the build orders have been up in the air from time to time and the game's pace has changed several times.
I registered an account for TL today after years of lurking to say that I am boycotting LotV. As much fun as lurkers look to play, I don't want to support folding to marketing pressures over real game design efforts in a game series that I've loved since a child. I can get my fun from UMS and my depth of play from Starbow without LotV. I am simply too shaken by the inconsistent decision-making by the design team and the sudden shift of gears from a strong consensus by pros on pertinent issues to just settling down on balance testing for a release 45-odd days away.
|
On September 27 2015 02:07 [poe]minnek wrote:
Does anyone else feel that marketing and money is dictating the creation of this game again, rather than creating something intended to be epic? So far LotV is a good game, but it does not feel that these changes will have as much staying power as they need to.
I have serious concerns that their ear is turned to earning money and ending the Starcraft II trilogy on a "decent" note than to work with the community to create something they can continue to have a mutually beneficial relationship to. Unlike Brood War, Blizzard has maintained their control of SC2, so there is no doubt they could continue to monetize on tournaments into the future if the game were to stay strong the way BW did.
Based on size and cost of tournaments for LoL, Dota2 vs those for SC2, however, I think they may be considering this a lesser investment and letting it go. This makes me uncomfortable in supporting their decision by purchasing LotV at release - I don't want to show Blizzard that I am willing to accept a marginally better product when the next one I may get is five years out. (If they ever make a Starcraft 3, which at this point I have heard nothing.)
I am not a pro, I am just diamond, so I don't speak to balance issues specifically (I know what I want to have, but that isn't objective.) But watching and listening to pro streams, I hear consensus on changes like removal of macro boosters which are nearly unanimous. The games by pros that I've watched during removal of macro boosters were some of the most interesting I've seen in the months before and after, even though they weren't top level play. I can't chalk that up to just being new units or new build orders, because since LotV started shifting economy and introducing new units, the build orders have been up in the air from time to time and the game's pace has changed several times.
I registered an account for TL today after years of lurking to say that I am boycotting LotV. As much fun as lurkers look to play, I don't want to support folding to marketing pressures over real game design efforts in a game series that I've loved since a child. I can get my fun from UMS and my depth of play from Starbow without LotV. I am simply too shaken by the inconsistent decision-making by the design team and the sudden shift of gears from a strong consensus by pros on pertinent issues to just settling down on balance testing for a release 45-odd days away.
Sadly I already pre-purchased it ...
I don't really like the direction multiplayer is going but even if the game turn out to be even worse than HotS...
...at least the campaign looks good and with allied command I might persuade some friends to start to play some starcraft, especially if Blizzard decide to include allied command as the F2P (or playable if a paid player invite a friend) part of the game
So I think LotV will still worth my money.
|
I really like where Legacy beta is right now (played about 30 games since the latest patch).
From a Zerg's perspective I think Adept early game need nerfing and protoss lategame need buffing a bit. But I like where the macro mechanics are at, and the game overall is pretty solid from what I've played.
I think I'm finally ready to leave HOTS and move over to Legacy fully now, so good job blizzard in stabilising the beta.
|
On September 27 2015 01:58 xtorn wrote:
meanwhile, ive (re)discovered the insane fun of dota 2
I'm not sure what this has to do with this thread. Seems like a totally unrelated thought
|
On September 27 2015 02:01 KeksX wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2015 01:58 xtorn wrote:
meanwhile, ive (re)discovered the insane fun of dota 2 Thats great for you, but that post is not any better than the ded gaem jokes on reddit.
it's just my way of saying i expected a little more from this update
|
The hate on this thread is epic ... my goodness.
|
Armored Adepts would be completely unvaiable against marauders and stalkers.
When the upgrades for the adept are changed then this unit should be balanced.
Also I made the experiences that the high damage per second rate of stimmed Terran bio with Medivac support wins against the slow damage per second rate of adepts.
Furthermore the Adept is looking light and not armored.
And armored Adepts would overlap with Stalkers.
No protoss will ever build an armored adept when they can build instead a stalker which has more attack range, has more mobility and movement speed, deals more damage per second, can shot air units and has the ability to teleport with blinkmicro.
Please just keep the adept light armored and viable.
|
Macro Mechanics always have been a part of Starcraft 2 and should stay in the expansion Starcraft 2 Legacy of the void too!
Do not change a running system!
But the beta macro mechanics are also nice
|
On September 27 2015 08:00 Powerfusion wrote:
Armored Adepts would be completely unvaiable against marauders and stalkers.
When the upgrades for the adept are changed then this unit should be balanced.
Also I made the experiences that the high damage per second rate of stimmed Terran bio with Medivac support wins against the slow damage per second rate of adepts.
Furthermore the Adept is looking light and not armored.
And armored Adepts would overlap with Stalkers.
No protoss will ever build an armored adept when they can build instead a stalker which has more attack range, has more mobility and movement speed, deals more damage per second, can shot air units and has the ability to teleport with blinkmicro.
Please just keep the adept light armored and viable.
The adept needs changing, the upgrades will not do it. The problem is early game, once T has stim and Medivacs then the Adepts are a little too weak, but in the early game they are god awfully strong.
Blizz needs to nerd their early strength, e.g. armoured or less HP, but buff their later game.
LotV is slowly getting into an OK state, but it is slow and I think they have focused too much on the error in trial and error.
|
i love how advocates on both sides of the macro-mechanics debate are claiming that in reality everyone wants macro-boosters altered according to their side's viewpoints.
On September 26 2015 06:21 [PkF] Wire wrote:
1) A balance patch before Blizzcon doesn't seem needed at all. HotS is overall a fine game.
2) New chrono is retarded and not at all an improvement over HotS. Revert back to HotS.
3) At least you're aware adepts are a problem. But I think warp prism play will have to be toned down too. Did you think about, I don't know, splitting warp-in and energy power and getting back to 5 sec warp-ins ?
4) Agree on the ravager upgrade diagnosis.
5) Ghost and ravens minor buffs : why not.
Overall a pretty underwhelming patch though. Release is coming so fast and now I feel we're bound to get an unfinished game.
to provide some perspective..
when u factor inflation SC1 was double the price of LotV.
the Academy was $200.
i think marine range was 200/200.
zergling rushes were unstoppable by terran because larva production was too fast
the bugs in SC1 upon release were so bad .. i'd say it was infested ... 
http://www.codeofhonor.com/blog/tough-times-on-the-road-to-starcraft
it was bad man.. bad.
the company didn't call itself Chaos and then switch to Blizzard fer nuttin.
|
Man, this doesn't feel like Blizzard releasing an expansion for their game. It feels like EA releasing a new version of Madden. The SC2 team just approached both the HotS and LotV expansion betas in a cowardly manner, clearly way too afraid of making any big changes. They just wanted to introduce new units while creating the least amount of work possible to rebalance the game.
And this feels like the first ever Blizzard game where they prioritized a release date over the gameplay to this degree. There were clearly some people in the dev team with grand ideas on how to improve the game but got overruled by the lazy ones.
|
On September 27 2015 12:03 andrewlt wrote:
Man, this doesn't feel like Blizzard releasing an expansion for their game. It feels like EA releasing a new version of Madden. The SC2 team just approached both the HotS and LotV expansion betas in a cowardly manner, clearly way too afraid of making any big changes. They just wanted to introduce new units while creating the least amount of work possible to rebalance the game.
And this feels like the first ever Blizzard game where they prioritized a release date over the gameplay to this degree. There were clearly some people in the dev team with grand ideas on how to improve the game but got overruled by the lazy ones.
That's a BIG stretch man. While I wish they were more bold with changes, madden is its own thing when it comes to that.
While I'm not happy with some things, I think LOTV is shaping up to be better than HOTS.
If I personally seem bitchy its cause removing the MM felt like a really positive change they only gave a little time to test and then yanked. I personally was having fun before and after they removed the MM. After the revert I'm just not enjoying the game as much.
I'm still keeping my preorder, I still think LOTV will be a great game and better than HOTS. I just wish the campaign story was on BW level. Really enjoyed the WOL story, HOTS was meh... I think this will be better than hots, but if its epic that would make me really happy. Nice and dark like BW
|
I still believe the best thing for the game, the best thing for the vast majority of players that are not the top pros, is the automatization of the macro mechanics. That entry barrier that involves repetitive boring steps helps no one and only artificially makes the game hard.
Keep the mechanics so you do not have to rebalance the game, and just make it automatic, Auto-mules, auto-inject, auto-chrono, higher level play will get better with more focus free for strategy, engagements and harrass. And normal level, the level most people play the game, will be easer and more rewarding.
Please return the automatic mechanics or just remove them. A perception problem on thinking zerg is "too easy" is not a real game problem, protoss has always been easy and the game still kept on going. And latter when the game gets better on the micro and strategy aspects that perception will be gone.
Game macro is difficult enough with keeping constant production, worker spread and avoiding supply block that not even top pros do all that perfectly. These serve as enough macro differentiation between lower and top level players.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
