Laying down the Truth about SCII and Fun

On September 26 2015 07:19 hitpoint wrote:


Strangely, I agree with every single thing here and the overall idea of your post. But only like two of your balance changes make any sense to me. For instance: You really think reapers should be nerfed? I think they're a fantastic unit that serve a purpose in every matchup, but don't break anything.

On September 26 2015 07:26 MrInocence wrote:

I smurf a bit in the lower leagues, and mass reaper/voidray/cannon rush openings are incredibly popular. You have to think from the perspective of someone who just got the game, then gets reaper rushed. They're almost like ground oracles, when someone gets more than two of them.

But what exactly is the point of a reaper? From my perspective, its more of a scouting tool than anything else. Using the same argument for the oracle, if it's primarily a scouting/utility tool, then why does it need an attack?

Another analogy. People using the MSC to scout. That's perfectly fine, but what if the MSC also 2shotted workers? Is that really necessary?

On September 26 2015 07:22 Charoisaur wrote:
I can't speak about others but I have WAY more fun with sc2 than with any other game. And that's not just since I made master league. even when I started playing as a silver scrub I had so much fun with the game that I hardly played anything else anymore. Maybe the problem is with you and not with the game.

On September 26 2015 07:28 Chaggi wrote:


So you're the worst kind of person on ladder?

On September 26 2015 07:27 KeksX wrote:



It doesn't matter. The design phase is over. It's about balancing the current state so tournaments like Dreamhack won't be an imbalanced mess.

On September 26 2015 07:30 MrInocence wrote:


You are also posting on Teamliquid, of course you must like the game to be reviewing the game's fan site. I'm not trying to be condescending, I love the game too. That's why I'm here.

But think for a moment about the casuals or even semi serious players who were turned off because of oracles, DTs, mines, banshees, etc. Obviously they are not on teamliquid. They might not have even bought the game.

The numbers don't lie. HotS has less players than WoL. WoL has less players than BW.

On September 26 2015 07:35 Yonnua wrote:
So this looks like basically a massive list of balance whine backed up by the justification that you personally don't find these things fun.

The reason that the threads that you're "calling out" are more productive is that they actually have arguments to engage with and discuss, rather than just plopping "I don't find this game fun. Discuss." into the middle of the general forum. Many people do find the game fun, and it's arrogant to assume that Blizzard; professional game designers, aren't considering whether or not their game is fun.

On September 26 2015 07:37 Phaenoman wrote:
Dude, what are u trying to achieve 1,5 months before release? Even tho u are right, u are no realist.

On September 26 2015 07:41 Chaggi wrote:


HotS has less players than WoL but I doubt it's cause of the game play. It's probably cause LoL and DoTA and CS came around and were amazing. WoL had stupid amounts of hype to it and it was the biggest esport till about 2011. I'm not sure if BW had more players than WoL either but BW was by far, a more frustrating game than WoL so you're just wrong.

This is just stupid though. The logic that if the game was easier people would play it means nothing when SC in particular has a high skill cap. If you remove all of those things, there are still going to be things for people to whine about and nothing is going to change.

On September 26 2015 07:34 CheddarToss wrote:
Here is the ultimate solution to make the game more fun:

Change your mindset.

On September 26 2015 07:26 MrInocence wrote:
[I smurf a bit in the lower leagues, and mass reaper/voidray/cannon rush openings are incredibly popular. You have to think from the perspective of someone who just got the game, then gets reaper rushed. They're almost like ground oracles, when someone gets more than two of them.

But what exactly is the point of a reaper? From my perspective, its more of a scouting tool than anything else. Using the same argument for the oracle, if it's primarily a scouting/utility tool, then why does it need an attack?

Another analogy. People using the MSC to scout. That's perfectly fine, but what if the MSC also 2shotted workers? Is that really necessary?

On September 26 2015 08:04 timchen1017 wrote:


It needs an attack because if the opposition is not required to invest in defense, you are behind in economy or tech.

Not saying the design is good, i agree this very extreme result of not having proper defense against oracle or widow mine is not so fun. But removing the attack kills their viability at the timing.

On September 26 2015 08:34 hitpoint wrote:


I guess I still don't see what's wrong with their current attack. It's really, really weak, and at least gives them some meaningful micro potential in the early game. I think you'll find that a purely scouting unit is much worse design when you think about it.

I think you're saying that low level players die to reaper cheese? I think you'll find that low level players can die to pretty much anything in the right circumstance. They are nowhere near as strong as oracles in any regard.

On September 26 2015 07:45 MrInocence wrote:


At the beginning of the beta I remember people saying "Dont worry its just the beta everything's gonna be better at release"

On September 26 2015 08:57 Phaenoman wrote:

We are not at the beginning. What kind of argument is that? U will not change anything with that request.

And this is the ultimate problem with team liquid.

"Don't like it? Too bad."

On September 26 2015 09:23 Cold Warpgates wrote:
Starcraft is always going to be frustrating. It's just inherent in the game. You could tweak individual units or abilities to make them individually less frustrating, sure. But it's still going to be a game of limited information, which is stressful - and you're going to lose to things you didn't see coming. It's always going to be a game of multi-tasking, which is stressful - and you're going to mis-allocate your attention and lose because of it. Even more fundamentally, starcraft is a game where you spend anywhere from 5 - 45 minutes making a beautiful sandcastle only to have someone come and try to kick it over.

I'm not going to pretend that the game is perfect or that there aren't changes I at least want to see tried out. But I think the ones you propose are waaaaaay too extreme and basically short-sighted.

If you remove pulsar beam, no one will make oracles. If you remove reaper attack, no one will make reapers. If you remove Banshee cloak, no one will make banshees. If you remove hellion/hellbat AOE, no one will make them.

If these units are too strong, or kill workers too fast, why not just reduce their damage? (Or even give workers more health) There's no reason to basically remove them from the game.

I'm not going to pretend that I haven't been frustrated by drops, or mutas, or dark templar. But, the game needs them. Maybe some individual units are too strong or too weak, but without these harassment units people will be forced into the turtle->deathball->one giant fight thing every game, and you can't tell me that's fun.

TL;DR The game is literally always going to be frustrating. That doesn't mean it can't be improved, but it's not productive to dream about broad, sweeping changes meant to remove frustration.



I think it's more the problem with posting proposed changes to the game on a fan site that has no power to implement said changes (outside of user mods).

The culture is (probably, I might be making this up) from the brood war days, when the game wasn't being regularly patched and you literally just had to deal with it.

On September 26 2015 07:49 MrInocence wrote:


First of all... easier? Not once did I say to make Starcraft easier. I said to tone down the frustrating points. That has nothing to do with the difficulty of the game.

Brood War was a more fun game. That's why it was more popular. Believe it or not fun games become popular games.

HotS has less players than WoL precisely because of gameplay. CounterStrike had a few players, then made the gameplay better and created the gambling system and became immensely popular.

LoL was gaining players because its gameplay was being improved every patch.

On September 26 2015 07:34 CheddarToss wrote:
Here is the ultimate solution to make the game more fun:

Change your mindset.

On September 26 2015 09:58 Cele wrote:


did that, never regretted it.


true BW never was as popular as sc2 is right now. But it's still the best RTS out there right now, coz it's not a thing of the past.

On September 26 2015 10:06 Cele wrote:


don't get me wrong, your opinion if fine, but don't present it like an irrevocable fact that "Sc2 is the best RTS out there", who could make such a statement.

And rtbh there is no "Starcraft community" as such in my opinion. There's a Broodwar and a Starcraft 2 community, they overlap here and there but are two different scenes. It's like saying "the ballsports community thinks soccer is the best game out there" when football fans disagree.

On September 26 2015 09:50 Beastyqt wrote:


Here's solution to all your problems: go back to playing brood war, sc2 =/= brood war. If you dislike it as much as you do and you wan't to change it to brood war, why bother? Just go install SC1 and play?

Brood War was more popular? Are you joking?
The only place Brood War was popular was Korea, while now Starcraft II is popular in most countries and it is the best RTS there is right now.

I never understood people who wanted economy, game play or anything to be more like brood war, THIS ISN'T BROOD WAR GUYS IT'S STARCRAFT 2, play it or leave it. If I wanted to play brood war I know where to find it.

I don't wanna play a game with all the changes you brought up and anyone who loves SC2 doesn't want those changes either.

EDIT: You can't keep up with the game and you want Blizzard to make it super easy, no cloak units, any unit that is fast gets nerfed so it's in slow motion, harass units are useleses, etc. that's a shittier version of SC2. People from Blizzard aren't dumb, they understand game is becoming even harder in Legacy which is why they are introducing Archon mode, grab a friend and enjoy the game.

At the end of the day, games are supposed to be for fun, if you don't enjoy it play something more casual and don't stress about it.

I'm gonna skip the BW popularity discussion because it doesn't really matter now in 2015.

On September 26 2015 11:24 jalstar wrote:


The quick answer is SC2 1v1, outside Korea, is/was much more popular than BW 1v1.

The long answer involves a discussion of how customs made BW popular, and standalone, downloadable F2P games reduced demand for those customs. And then you'll go into Bnet 1.0 interface being better than Bnet 2.0, etc.

On September 26 2015 12:00 My_Fake_Plastic_Luv wrote:
I don't really understand why people don't want to be more inviting to beginners. Games are usually built bottom up. Here is a good example: chess. Simple, easy to understand, set rules, can be taught to a person in day, kids get interested, kids practice, kids become pro, introduce new ideas to game.

On September 26 2015 11:19 MrInocence wrote:


I'm gonna skip the BW popularity discussion because it doesn't really matter now in 2015.

But just one thing. This has nothing to do with easy or difficult. An easy game can be good or bad. A difficult game can be good or bad too. NOTHING to do with difficulty.

There are things just missing from SCII because of op flying harass. For example, land routes and controlling terrain does not really matter. Prism bypass terrain, speedvacs can run through turrets, mutalisks bypass terrain.

So instead of a game where you are controlling area and fighting across the map for good attack paths and such, you are just shift queuing drop ships all over the place. Harasscraft, legacy of the dropship.

Where is the army movement? Where are the flanks? Where is the outmaneuvering? Where is creating three different squads of units and engaging on three different fronts? Where are the siege tank lines? Instead, you have one big blob of units and maybe 1 medivac or 1 prism flying around killing workers.

Then the harass is so strong that you can't even move out-- the best bet is just sit on a big army on 3 bases and defend defend defend, and send your own little harass deathships in to kill his workers. Then you trade killing workers, and whoever kills more wins.

This has nothing to do with easy or hard, casual or hardcore. Do you want armies fighting armies? Or workers running from harass specific units? Just look at the HotS and LotV cinematic. Is the cool part of the game killing workers with oracles? Maybe they should've shown that in the cinematic, just an oracle killing workers and widow mines killing workers.

But no, they showed the giant Zerg army fighting a Terran marine tank army. They showed a zealots and high templar fighting zerglings and hydralisks.

On September 26 2015 12:13 MrInocence wrote:
@My_Fake

That's just how the starcraft community is. It's also why I try to avoid Team Liquid, that kind of attitude is accepted and encouraged here.

On September 26 2015 12:13 MrInocence wrote:
@My_Fake

That's just how the starcraft community is. It's also why I try to avoid Team Liquid, that kind of attitude is accepted and encouraged here.

On September 26 2015 14:41 RoieTRS wrote:


Can you show me the exact posts where the TL community said bringing in new people was actively a bad idea?

The problem is that you are framing your subjective opinions as capitalized 'Truth', like the truth hasn't been stated before until you came.

I agreed with some of your thoughts and making the new player experience as inviting as possible is obviously the intention of the devs. But if you are saying that units like the banshee or reaper, that I consider fun, that I find rewarding to learn to play against, are unhealthy to the game... then you and the rest of us that you think are antagonizing you ("why I try to avoid Team Liquid" like a passive-aggressive literal child) are simply not compatible on the same spectrum of fun.

Maybe learn some humility and back up our points with evidence instead of offering solutions to problems that aren't real. You might rally up enough support to push for something.

On September 26 2015 14:03 skatbone wrote:



Well now you simply sound like a troll. You created this post ostensibly to engage with the TL community, yet here you suggest that you'd rather avoid this community. Were you "try[ing] to avoid Team Liquid" when you posted this? I'm not going to try and take this thread seriously anymore.

On September 26 2015 16:00 MrInocence wrote:


1. Bringing in new people? Just read beastyqt above you. It says something along the lines of "Don't like it? Don't play it. Try tug-of-war arcade game or another rts instead. Starcraft is a hard game for hardcore gamers. WoL medivacs and mutalisks are super casual and easy. If you want a casual game go play Desert Strike."

That's the attitude of a vast majority of Team Liquid. Doesn't seem very friendly to new people.

2. Subjective opinions on oracles and widow mines and larva banks and warpgate etc etc? Lots of people had subjective opinions about swarmhosts too. About colossus deathball. Maybe you thought those were fun as well. But it looks like blizzard agreed with those subjective views, that swarmhost spore forests were not fun, and that colossus deathballs were not fun. Look at what happened to those units in LotV.

3. If you want evidence that there are problems and the game is struggling, just look at sales numbers for WoL compared to HotS. Look at twitch viewership. When LotV comes out, look at LotV sales numbers. The November release date is obviously rushed before the game is ready, to meet quarterly expectations and the holiday season.

4. If anyone needs a lesson in humility, it's the elitists here that hate on "casuals".

On September 26 2015 11:19 MrInocence wrote:


I'm gonna skip the BW popularity discussion because it doesn't really matter now in 2015.

But just one thing. This has nothing to do with easy or difficult. An easy game can be good or bad. A difficult game can be good or bad too. NOTHING to do with difficulty.

There are things just missing from SCII because of op flying harass. For example, land routes and controlling terrain does not really matter. Prism bypass terrain, speedvacs can run through turrets, mutalisks bypass terrain.

So instead of a game where you are controlling area and fighting across the map for good attack paths and such, you are just shift queuing drop ships all over the place. Harasscraft, legacy of the dropship.

Where is the army movement? Where are the flanks? Where is the outmaneuvering? Where is creating three different squads of units and engaging on three different fronts? Where are the siege tank lines? Instead, you have one big blob of units and maybe 1 medivac or 1 prism flying around killing workers.

Then the harass is so strong that you can't even move out-- the best bet is just sit on a big army on 3 bases and defend defend defend, and send your own little harass deathships in to kill his workers. Then you trade killing workers, and whoever kills more wins.

This has nothing to do with easy or hard, casual or hardcore. Do you want armies fighting armies? Or workers running from harass specific units? Just look at the HotS and LotV cinematic. Is the cool part of the game killing workers with oracles? Maybe they should've shown that in the cinematic, just an oracle killing workers and widow mines killing workers.

But no, they showed the giant Zerg army fighting a Terran marine tank army. They showed a zealots and high templar fighting zerglings and hydralisks.

On September 26 2015 07:22 Charoisaur wrote:
I can't speak about others but I have WAY more fun with sc2 than with any other game. And that's not just since I made master league. even when I started playing as a silver scrub I had so much fun with the game that I hardly played anything else anymore. Maybe the problem is with you and not with the game.

On September 26 2015 19:00 rockslave wrote:
The problem with mods is that they are very inconvenient to play. You have small player bases and there's no matchmaking, it's really hard to be evenly matched.

If I could switch my SC2 version to Starbow in options, then just hit the matchmaker, I'd probably switch. In fact, if I could switch it to "Brood War with MBS", I wouldn't even think.

And yes, that's my opinion.

On September 26 2015 11:27 MrInocence wrote:


Also the thing about BW creating esports and redefining video games.

You can remove everything frustrating as you see fit but something new will always pop up and frustrate you because there can never be 2 winners in a game of Starcraft. Overcoming this frustration is what makes starcraft so amazing in the first place.

On September 26 2015 22:42 TheDwf wrote:
and will sell hundreds of thousands of copies regardless of how unplayable the game will be on the long term for most of the playerbase.

On September 26 2015 22:42 TheDwf wrote:

Yup. Which is why your mission, should you decide to accept it, is to endlessly e-riot until Blizzard concedes a decent custom games system instead of the current abomination. Because what you or the OP expect, you won't get it from the Blizzsters—who are very happy with the way LotV shapes up, and will sell hundreds of thousands of copies regardless of how unplayable the game will be on the long term for most of the playerbase.

The sure thing is that mods will be the only kind of place where you can get the kind of gameplay described in the OP, so better campaign to have a viable environment for them to develop. Plus, it's better than those endless ideological debates/flame wars on forums. I mean, was there ever someone who was convinced by arguments from the other side anyway? The proof of the pudding is in the eating

On September 26 2015 22:42 TheDwf wrote:

Yup. Which is why your mission, should you decide to accept it, is to endlessly e-riot until Blizzard concedes a decent custom games system instead of the current abomination. Because what you or the OP expect, you won't get it from the Blizzsters—who are very happy with the way LotV shapes up, and will sell hundreds of thousands of copies regardless of how unplayable the game will be on the long term for most of the playerbase.

The sure thing is that mods will be the only kind of place where you can get the kind of gameplay described in the OP, so better campaign to have a viable environment for them to develop. Plus, it's better than those endless ideological debates/flame wars on forums. I mean, was there ever someone who was convinced by arguments from the other side anyway? The proof of the pudding is in the eating

On September 27 2015 00:28 ShambhalaWar wrote:


You ever think way down the road, maybe a couple years, LOTV slowly dies out and then the community just takes the aspects of it they like and changes what they don't like (a mod like yours or starbow) at it eventually catches on and a legit scene builds around that?

On September 27 2015 00:28 ShambhalaWar wrote:


You ever think way down the road, maybe a couple years, LOTV slowly dies out and then the community just takes the aspects of it they like and changes what they don't like (a mod like yours or starbow) at it eventually catches on and a legit scene builds around that?

On September 27 2015 01:18 deacon.frost wrote:

Do you realize that big part of sold copies are played just in single player? Because I will buy LotV no matter what, I want the single player and if the MP is bad then I just won't play it.

It would be nice if all people here accepted the truth - SC2 is not about MP only. In fact I dare to say it;s more about SP than MP. So yeah, the game will have good selling numbers, because campaign. Deal with it.

On September 27 2015 02:12 TheDwf wrote:

If you talk about a pro scene with tournaments and all, no. But there is no need for such thing. For instance, to my knowledge there is no SC1 or DotA 1 scene left outside of Asia, yet you can still find games quickly on BNet. No need for sponsors, streams, tournaments and all the e-fame/prestige fuss to enjoy a game. The only thing needed to maintain activity is a good custom games system so that players can find other players quickly within the client (especially for team games). Then the natural diversity of tastes will do some work and voilà.

(Also LotV's player base will shrink a lot faster than "a couple of years". In a matter of months I'm ready to bet that so many players will flee from the stressful rhythm + glaring balance issues + sheer unforgiveness + arid/frustrating gameplay combo.)


Do you realize there is no contradiction between what we said? Don't try to sound smart to state the obvious

On September 26 2015 17:21 TedBurtle wrote:
Maybe you right, but in any matchup, in any league, you can get solutions for every situation and get better.
You're bronze protoss, and reaper killing all your mineral line? dont do fast expand, boost few stalkers, get 100 energy on MSC and it's allright....
Oracle is hurting your bronze SCV/DRONE's....Stay on 1 base, get spore/turret , get marines/2-3 queens, then expand safely... when you get mechanics to expand and defend from this easy things you promote...

On September 27 2015 02:29 deacon.frost wrote:

It sounded to me that you implied that good selling number are based on MP. If I misunderstood you then accept my apology.

On September 26 2015 23:54 i_am_Nite wrote:

in other games you can lose or win too, but u get fun while playing them. In sc2 u get fun only if u win - there is no fun in game itself. It's realy frustrating.

On September 27 2015 01:43 Zealously wrote:


Are you and I watching the same game? On a professional level, this sweeping generalization of SC2 has not held true for years.

If you're talking about a casual, 'playable' level, then you must understand that it is very nearly impossible for low-level players to accomplish intense multi-pronged play. Low-level players damn sure didn't play out four battles across six bases in Brood War, either. I understand what you're frustrated about and agree to some extent, but faulty assumptions and offensive generalizations really avail you nothing.

On September 27 2015 01:43 Zealously wrote:


Are you and I watching the same game? On a professional level, this sweeping generalization of SC2 has not held true for years.

If you're talking about a casual, 'playable' level, then you must understand that it is very nearly impossible for low-level players to accomplish intense multi-pronged play. Low-level players damn sure didn't play out four battles across six bases in Brood War, either. I understand what you're frustrated about and agree to some extent, but faulty assumptions and offensive generalizations really avail you nothing.

On September 27 2015 06:20 Ansibled wrote:
Fun is subjective, the kind of game you want to make isn't Starcraft. There should be frustrating moments.

If people are too frustrated to play 1v1, removing Cloaked Banshees or Oracles isn't going to change that. There will just be new frustrations to whatever you die to instead. That's ok though, the game can be successful without the majority of the playerbase focusing on competitive 1v1 at first.

On September 27 2015 11:01 Jaedrik wrote:
No--fun isn't subjective, it's normative.
While not necessarily bound to the natural laws that arise from human nature, they are partially contingent on them, and accurate generalities can be created about what is and is not good game design, likewise what is and is not fun.

Games, properly designed, strive to create as enjoyable, deep, and least frustrating gameplay possible.
Indeed, shallow and frustrating often coincide, and enjoyable is the antithesis of frustration.

On September 26 2015 07:09 MrInocence wrote:
...
There are increasing amounts of frustrations added in WoL, HotS, and LotV.

On September 26 2015 07:09 MrInocence wrote:

1. Oracles obliterate your worker line unless you have an exact defense. This pisses off casuals and hardcores alike, and even GSL level players have a hard time.
Solution: Oracles lose pulsar beam, and become an arbiter-like support utility unit.

2. Medivac boost can straight up kill you, or neuter your economy.
Solution: Heavily nerf or remove medivac boost.

3. Widow mines murder workers. They are also cloaked when burrowed.
Solution: Widow mines copy spider mines. They no longer target workers.

4. Speed mutalisks are so strong that they prompted the design team to create the Tempest and the Liberator and the spore crawler +bio buff to combat them.
Practical Solution: Remove the speed from mutalisks.

Ideal Solution: Also rework larva mechanics so mutalisk production is streamlined rather than a burst of 30 mutalisks at once.

5. Reapers are a stupid earlygame only unit that can snowball out of control. They are terrifying in lower leagues.
Solution: Remove their attack. Do what you will with their grenade, it doesn't matter.

6. Banshees are an invisible worker murdering air-to-ground nightmare that has plagued the TvT matchup since 2010. They are stronger in LotV. They are terrifying in lower leagues.
Solution: Banshees can no longer cloak.

7. Hellions and hellbats have hard countered light units and workers since 2010.
Practical solution:
Ideal solution: Make them single target, or less overbearing, like the vulture.

8. The cannon rush.
Solution: I don't have a solution, sorry.

9. Dark templar that can be warped in anywhere, in any number.
Solution: I don't have a solution, sorry.

10. Protoss coinflips.
Solution: This will be solved if the above are implemented.

11. Zerg tech switching into units that require different, specific counters. Ultralisks v. Broodlords v. Mutalisks for example.
Solution: Larva must be linear. Hatcheries should not be able to bank massive amounts of larva.

12. Terran ultra harassment.
Solution: This will be solved if the above are implemented.

These are the main issues. There are many more that I have not included.
As you can see, some problematic recurring themes are such:
- invisibility
- untouchable air units that shoot down
- requires specific counters too early in the game
-----------
How to make the game more fun
I am running out of time, so I'll make this brief. In order of importance.

1. Make Zerg the swarm again.

2. Air units should be relegated to a supporting role. Definitely not a strong air-to-ground role.

3. Terrain should matter again. Fighting over terrain, over paths of terrain, etc. Like in BW. This is partially achieved with weaker air units.

4. Armor should not be a weakness. Anti armored units should be toned down. Marauder/Immortal/Roach trifecta since WoL beta.

5. Units should be more core. Less moba style abilities. This way terrain and fighting will be more traditional. Adept shade is the definition of gimmicky. Make its model bigger, and make it function similar to a dragoon.

etc. All I have time for right now. Discuss.

On September 27 2015 14:11 BronzeKnee wrote:


You should have stopped here, because you hit the nail on the head and your suggestions afterwards just distract from it.

HOTS and LOTV are very poor games when it comes to game design. The Widow is a terribly thought out unit that has a psychological impact on the other player that forces a style of safe play that is bad for an action game ("there may be Widow Mines and they do so much damage that I cannot advance until I can see them"). The number of units they hit do is also unpredictable. The result is players win or lose games based on interactions that cannot be reliably repeated.

And that is awful.

As other games have moved to clarify interactions and remove unpredictability so true skill can show, SC2 has moved in the opposite direction, muddying the waters and increasingly adding unpredictable elements to the game.

The frustrations that come from units like the Widow Mine, and the slew of hard counters (like the Viper and Immortal) and poorly balanced units (like the Adept) really make the game a mess. If you read and study game design SC2 breaks so many rules, just like C&C did, and that should surprise no one since Browder was at the helm, and David Kim has no idea what he is doing.

A good place to start learning about game design, for those interested, is the design blogs from the Riot, such as this one: http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=293417

Using some of the concepts illustrated there, you'll see that the Widow Mine and many of the recent SC2 changes in general creates a strong feeling of anti-fun and are unreliable, which has resulted in a big net loss of players (including me) while LoL has done the opposite. And the number of false choices in SC2 is laughable. The game is a mess.

It is actually quite a ridiculous game now, where Blizzard has replaced early game pushes from armies with early game harassment. They are similar in that they can both end the game. They differ in the fact that the former is actually battle between two armies, while the other is a ridiculous micro scenario that doesn't resemble a battle, but feels a lot like an Aiur Chef match.

And that is very sad, because I loved SC2 more than any other game.

On September 27 2015 16:05 Nimrod.519 wrote:
If you will all bear with me for a few moments, I'd like to give an example of my own experience in trying to enjoy SC2. I've played SC2 since the beginning, playing zerg for most of WOL and HOTS.

Back in the day, I used to grind for hours on the ladder, trying to improve my game, figure out what to do vs terran hellion harrass and protoss colosus deathballs. I would watch pro games, youtube videos, you name it, absorbing information and clawing my way up the ladder WOL. All that time, whenever all my drones were roasted because I wasn't paying attention for one second as hellions drove by my army, or when my 12 minute roach max couldn't contend with the colosus sentry stalker deathball, I would tell myself, if only I played better, I would have won that game. If I had just hit that one extra inject, or maybe engaged that army at another angle, make the correct units at the right time, that game would have been mine.

When I finally reached masters league after countless hours of play, I realized that what I had been trying to do was not play a game of strategy, but play a game of rock, paper, scissors. Every action I took was a reaction to an opponent's play where the consequence of a non-perfect response cost me the game. SC2 became not a game of strategy where I could use my creativity and playstyle to defeat an opponent, but a game where I just responded right or wrong and I won or lost my game accordingly. There was so little room for deviation that I could no longer express myself in my play. I think this lack of self expression was what cost me the fun in the end, and this all relates back to the game-ending (disproportionate consequence of action-reaction) nature of the unit designs in the game.

On a related note, as a person who likes to think of himself as being methodical and precise, I tried playing the game a different way in an attempt to find the fun again. I had just starting playing again after a few months absence, and I picked up playing terran, but with a twist --> I relearned all my hotkeys using the core to optimize my macro in the hopes of overwhelming my opponents with more units, and thereby (in my mind) completely bypassing the strategic aspect of the game (or lack thereof, see above).

I did this for a few months, with what I would consider to be great success since I had never really played terran except in the campaigns before this. I made so much more stuff than my opponents that I managed to reach high diamond/ low masters in HOTS in less than 6 months, starting in bronze league! In the end though, my enjoyment faded just like before when I realized that making more stuff and crashing it into my opponent still wasn't fun for me (can't say I didn't try though!). There was little to no decision making on my part, just pressing buttons with more precision and focus than the other guy.

tldr: Played zerg in wol and hots, couldn't find strategic self expression because of rock, paper, scissors unit design and quit. Came back as terran, played with a completely different mindset by primarily relying on optimized macro to win, still could not express self in game. Fail.

On September 27 2015 16:42 PinheadXXXXXX wrote:

This is the kind of attitude that I don't understand and probably never will. I think it comes from watching too much professional play and assuming that you need to play the same, and then basing your decisions off those of pros.

Starcraft is what you make of it. If you want to play a style where you need to memorize a bunch of specific responses and then execute them, then you can do that. If you don't want to play like that, then don't play like that. Consider that there are only a few optimal responses, but there are many, many viable and decent ways to play the game, which emphasize different aspects of your play. It sounds like you were trying to play reactive zerg, and didnt' like it. Then you tried to play macro terran, and didn't like it. There are many perfectly reasonable things you can do that are not those 2. Sure, they may not be best for improving, but if you play the game for fun, why do you really care?

This game is not inherently rock-paper-scissors, in any way. There are few builds and plays (DT, oracle, and that's about it) that are actually fundamentally binary. Everything else relies mostly on mechanics and decision making. Lower-leaguers (which you aren't) often watch pro-level starcraft and assume that the game works in terms of counters and responses and counters to the counters, but they are really just deluding themselves, because that's not how the game works. Starcraft is fundamentally a strategy game and if you lack strategy in your games it's because you aren't recognizing it or are ignoring it.

On September 27 2015 15:34 Draddition wrote:


I think this is more a difference in design style, rather than simply poor design choices.

Riot builds their game around design choices similar to say, a slot machine. They focus on big, perceptive aspects, rather than subtle balance aspects. They would much rather have a player FEEL rewarded for something simple, than actually reward the player in the end. The result is a shallow, but addicting game.

SC2, and the team behind it, focus more on the end result of game. They focus on punishing small misplays. They never GIVE the player a reward, but rather allow the player to set their own goals and rewards. The result is a much more complex game, with much larger achievements for the actual player- but one that requires much more commitment.

Isn't fun and frustration goes hand in hand (to a certain degree).

On September 28 2015 01:12 HellHound wrote:

Could you please elaborate on what "strategy" and "strategic self expression" means?
I can't understand what you are looking for in a game and just feel like we haven't played the same game called SC2.

On September 27 2015 17:35 Cascade wrote:
Ummm, you write as if TL community as this unified mob of people, everyone heartily agreeing with each other, while you are the single rebel able to see the light. I feel that you are asking for hostility, which will confirm your view of TL. TL, while heavily biased towards higher skill level compared to the average sc2-owner, is very heterogeneous and there are a bunch of people that regularly push of thinking of the lower level players, and like you complains that people don't take the lower leagues into account enough. Indeed, you notice that many posters (presumably part of the "TL community") agree with what you are saying. You wouldn't know of course, as you don't hang around here much. But feel free to make up assumptions about what everyone TL thinks anyway. And yes, whether you want it or not, you are very much part of the TL community. Even more so now with this post, and you are contributing with your part of the heterogeneity.

Anyway, just saying that the hostility you get is mainly due to your own tone in how you enter this discussion. You could have said the same thing perfectly well without bashing this "TL community" that isn't really represented by any single person, but is the sum of all the different types of posters. Which probably would have given you

That said, I agree with your general direction, that it is incredibly important that the game is fun to play for the newbs. (I've argued similar points in other threads in fact.) It is important that there is a good top-level game-play as well for the e-sports, which will help bring in new players. But it should be possible to get both.

I don't really agree with your approach of removing frustrating things. Or well, I'm not convinced it'll work. What is frustrating on the receiving end is often great fun for the other. Performing oracle harass is great fun, as is mass reapers at lower levels, as is medivac drops, etc. If we remove everything that can feel frustrating to defend, I fear we risk removing a lot of the things that are fun too.

On September 27 2015 16:05 Nimrod.519 wrote:
When I finally reached masters league after countless hours of play, I realized that what I had been trying to do was not play a game of strategy, but play a game of rock, paper, scissors. Every action I took was a reaction to an opponent's play where the consequence of a non-perfect response cost me the game. SC2 became not a game of strategy where I could use my creativity and playstyle to defeat an opponent, but a game where I just responded right or wrong and I won or lost my game accordingly. There was so little room for deviation that I could no longer express myself in my play. I think this lack of self expression was what cost me the fun in the end, and this all relates back to the game-ending (disproportionate consequence of action-reaction) nature of the unit designs in the game.

On September 28 2015 23:53 Ansibled wrote:

MULEing isn't analogous to injecting. The races are different, and arguments like this really just ignore that and try and equate them. For example, I could equally say Zerg has it easier than Terran because they don't have to build production as heavily or because they don't have to go back to build supply depots.

On September 28 2015 23:53 Ansibled wrote:

MULEing isn't analogous to injecting. The races are different, and arguments like this really just ignore that and try and equate them. For example, I could equally say Zerg has it easier than Terran because they don't have to build production as heavily or because they don't have to go back to build supply depots.

On September 29 2015 00:31 TheDwf wrote:

That's not the point. What he says can be summed up as:

(1) The game is too fast
(2) The game doesn't allow you enough to allocate your attention the way you want
(3) The game is too unforgiving

With the silly campaigns for more automation everywhere, I always savour the fact that SC2 is much more newbie-unfriendly than his predecessor despite the fact that you had so much more to do by yourself in SC1. The difference is:

(1) You had more time to play (economy was not booming as fast, battles happened on a smaller scale and were not as brutal).
(2) The margin of error was larger since (a) on average, less was at stake and (b) you could fall back on stronger defensive positions (attacking and immediately exploiting a lead was much harder). Your position in the game didn't degrade as fast as in SC2, where you can lose in a matter of seconds to various things.
(3) The fact that you were required everywhere made it so that players could play their strengths and choose what part of the game they wanted to focus on. Mr. Macro could spend all his time in his base (and barely bother to watch fights! something absolutely unimaginable in SC2 for certain compositions), Mr. Harass could allocate his attention to his raids, Mr. Lategame could slowly develop towards his high tech composition, etc. In SC2 the game decides too much for you how you will play, which results in a repetitive and arid gameplay where players are limited and cannot play their true style/are pidgeon-holed into certain openings and patterns, etc.

Many things in SC2 should be conceived as little bonus which add up rather than absolute requirements that make you lose if you fail to perform them at level X or Y. Same for macro boosters, all it takes is a 50-60% nerf in efficiency and voilà... All their negative effects are suddenly gone and high(er) level players can still use them while low level players can focus on base management or unit control if they want. Instead of that, people who barely reach one effective action per second are immediately rushed into the action, with said action being more violent than ever... Nonsense.

On September 29 2015 00:04 Kranyum wrote:
Lets all relax here and realize the truth.
This game is done. Its over. Dead. Kaput.

It doesnt take a prophet to realize that almost nobody will be playing it in about 2 years time, so lets just all learn the hard lesson that in order to make a successful game it mustnt be an esport or a watcher friendly game, or a high skill requiring game, it just has to be fun enough to a beginner so that he will want to invest time into it.

This game is not such a thing. It s a soulcrushing chain of sad experiences until you reach the mechanical skills in order for the strategy and your decisions in game to actually matter. All while being taxing on your eyes,hands and mental health.

If we learned anything from the massively successful games of past years Dota and Lol we realise that the sole recipe of success is that these games are a fucking blast, ESPECIALLY for the noobs. Its not about balamce or about the needed skill cap in order to play a class, its simply about the fact that on avarage a game is a very positive experience that leaves you wanting for more.

And here is where sc2 has utterly failed. The baggage of broodwar has charged this game with preconceived heavy requirements of needed skill, tight balance as well as esports viablility. Encumbring burdens for such inexperienced game designers which made them totally forget that above all you just need to make the game fun for your average or nooby player.

As this game will continue its inevitable demise towards its death 2 years from now, lets all take a moment to leave aside our elitism and just recognise that this game never had that magical appeal that great games truly have. Having achieved this personally, moving on to greener pastures has never been easier.

Thanks for reading.

On September 29 2015 00:04 Kranyum wrote:
Lets all relax here and realize the truth.
This game is done. Its over. Dead. Kaput.

It doesnt take a prophet to realize that almost nobody will be playing it in about 2 years time, so lets just all learn the hard lesson that in order to make a successful game it mustnt be an esport or a watcher friendly game, or a high skill requiring game, it just has to be fun enough to a beginner so that he will want to invest time into it.

This game is not such a thing. It s a soulcrushing chain of sad experiences until you reach the mechanical skills in order for the strategy and your decisions in game to actually matter. All while being taxing on your eyes,hands and mental health.

If we learned anything from the massively successful games of past years Dota and Lol we realise that the sole recipe of success is that these games are a fucking blast, ESPECIALLY for the noobs. Its not about balamce or about the needed skill cap in order to play a class, its simply about the fact that on avarage a game is a very positive experience that leaves you wanting for more.

And here is where sc2 has utterly failed. The baggage of broodwar has charged this game with preconceived heavy requirements of needed skill, tight balance as well as esports viablility. Encumbring burdens for such inexperienced game designers which made them totally forget that above all you just need to make the game fun for your average or nooby player.

As this game will continue its inevitable demise towards its death 2 years from now, lets all take a moment to leave aside our elitism and just recognise that this game never had that magical appeal that great games truly have. Having achieved this personally, moving on to greener pastures has never been easier.

Thanks for reading.

On September 29 2015 02:00 bjornkavist wrote:
There's only so much hand holding you can to do grab lower players, and I am actually happy with that. If lower skilled people can't first get into Starcraft cause it is too hard, that is fine by me they can learn to love it by watching it instead. Though widow mines are not very noob friendly, they can be very entertaining to watch and might inspire a lower level player to start playing and learn the game.

Following a Riot design blog and dummifying the game to increase the beginner player base and pool is not something that will make Starcraft 2 a better Esport

On September 29 2015 00:04 Kranyum wrote:
Lets all relax here and realize the truth.
This game is done. Its over. Dead. Kaput.

It doesnt take a prophet to realize that almost nobody will be playing it in about 2 years time, so lets just all learn the hard lesson that in order to make a successful game it mustnt be an esport or a watcher friendly game, or a high skill requiring game, it just has to be fun enough to a beginner so that he will want to invest time into it.

This game is not such a thing. It s a soulcrushing chain of sad experiences until you reach the mechanical skills in order for the strategy and your decisions in game to actually matter. All while being taxing on your eyes,hands and mental health.

If we learned anything from the massively successful games of past years Dota and Lol we realise that the sole recipe of success is that these games are a fucking blast, ESPECIALLY for the noobs. Its not about balamce or about the needed skill cap in order to play a class, its simply about the fact that on avarage a game is a very positive experience that leaves you wanting for more.

And here is where sc2 has utterly failed. The baggage of broodwar has charged this game with preconceived heavy requirements of needed skill, tight balance as well as esports viablility. Encumbring burdens for such inexperienced game designers which made them totally forget that above all you just need to make the game fun for your average or nooby player.

As this game will continue its inevitable demise towards its death 2 years from now, lets all take a moment to leave aside our elitism and just recognise that this game never had that magical appeal that great games truly have. Having achieved this personally, moving on to greener pastures has never been easier.

Thanks for reading.

On September 26 2015 07:51 MrInocence wrote:


And this is the ultimate problem with team liquid.

"Don't like it? Too bad."

On September 26 2015 07:34 CheddarToss wrote:
Here is the ultimate solution to make the game more fun:

Change your mindset.

On September 29 2015 04:59 Zealously wrote:


Please don't confuse your lack of enjoyment for the non-existence of it.

On September 29 2015 10:09 Captain Peabody wrote:
Starcraft is a certain type of game. Some people are going to enjoy playing it, others are not. I think that's wonderful. Brood War was twice as hard and twice as unforgiving, and the Western esports community was basically nonexistent, but I still had loads of fun watching Korean-language broadcasts at ungodly hours with a few dozen people on Teamliquid, and then playing against the computer over and over again. Even if SC2 gets every bit as small as that, and even if it gets every bit as hard and frustrating as BW was (which is basically impossible), I'll still be having fun with it.

If other people prefer to play other games, more power to them. I have no need whatsoever for the game I play and watch to be the most popular game or the most popular Esport.

But the simple fact is, I have had fun with Starcraft for a long time, and just because you don't have fun with it doesn't mean you have the right to change the core of what it is just to make yourself feel better.

If you don't find Starcraft fun, then play other games. Don't screw with mine.

On September 29 2015 10:39 Tiaraju9 wrote:


The TL users should ask themselves if the game they are "designing" would have articles such as this (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-strategy/495027-the-fresh-prince-of-jin-air) written about it.

The funniest part of all this is that the same people complaining here are the ones cheering and excited in LR threads. Go figure.

On September 28 2015 16:32 Dracover wrote:


Um...if you are reacting to your opponents play are you not playing strategically? Scissors paper rock is a game where you make decisions without knowing your opponents decision. You do know and you are making decisions based on what your opponent is doing.

Do you mean that there's no variation from the standard? That there is a correct response to everything you see and therefore there's nothing to choose? You feel like you don't have a choice because you see and you respond? Hate to tell you but that is basically every competitive sport out there. You made masters league. The top players in the world.

In a competitive environment this will always be the case. Pick any sport, do you see teams throw new game changing ideas every week? No you don't. The rules for basketball doesn't say you have to have your 5 players positioned in a certain way, it has been worked out over the years that this is the best way to have your team set up. Baseball doesn't dictate how you should lay out your field. Even MOBAs at the competitive level, you have certain line ups and roles that are required to make a team and the higher your rank, the less new strategies and ideas you will see.

On September 29 2015 04:59 Zealously wrote:


Please don't confuse your lack of enjoyment for the non-existence of it.

On September 29 2015 00:04 Kranyum wrote:
If we learned anything from the massively successful games of past years Dota and Lol we realise that the sole recipe of success is that these games are a fucking blast, ESPECIALLY for the noobs. Its not about balamce or about the needed skill cap in order to play a class, its simply about the fact that on avarage a game is a very positive experience that leaves you wanting for more.

On September 29 2015 14:25 insitelol wrote:

I'll just let you know that nothing is more boring than a 50+ min LoL game when your team is slowly losing and you can't do shit about that and can't quit. 1 fucking hour literally thrown out of my life and it happens ~30% of games. That's from a noob perspective. During these times i wish my mineral lines were oblitirated with wms. I dream of it.

On September 29 2015 16:41 Kranyum wrote:
However the growth of one game shows that newbies tend to stick around to playing it while the demise of the other show that people are more likely to quit.

On September 29 2015 17:10 insitelol wrote:


That only proves a fact that people tend to like different things. The growth of the game (or any other thing: music genre, movie, social activity w/e) shows that it appeals to MOST people. Every1 loves soccer, only few play chess. Why on earth would you call it a problem?

On September 29 2015 17:10 insitelol wrote:


That only proves a fact that people tend to like different things. The growth of the game (or any other thing: music genre, movie, social activity w/e) shows that it appeals to MOST people. Every1 loves soccer, only few play chess. Why on earth would you call it a problem?

On September 29 2015 23:23 Kranyum wrote:
Im not saying its a problem to be a niche game. Chess is a stable game in terms of players and a good niche at that. The problem is that Sc2 player numbers will not remain stable, it will decline because the game is not fun. And decline leads to death.

On September 30 2015 12:41 Thieving Magpie wrote:
More people like pop music than other music, does that make pop music better than other music, or does it make pop music just different than other music.

On September 30 2015 18:13 SCHRECKEN111 wrote:
please add easy way to remove a unit from a control group - it happens all the time that my probe is mixed with army and I have to create control groups again - sometimes in the middle of the battle ! don`t understand why it wasn`t solved earlier.
That`s all. gg

On September 30 2015 16:52 loft wrote:
War3 was fun, but had the demanding task of micro between 3 heroes, your army, items, etc.

The difficulty that RTS style brought caused a lot of people to quit.

Then DOTA came out and you could control 1 hero. This was so easy for many people. Now you could finally play War3, but with the ease of only micromanaging 1 hero instead of 3 + army.

The fact is that SC2 is very laborious and people will leave because of that.

All of the points made by OP require fast mechanical responses. So, just like War3 most will leave RTS for something easier. To relax while they play games with their friends.

As a mapmaker I can tell you that warp-in ruins a lot of concepts~

Apart from that it obviously has numerous negative effects on actual gameplay.
Would be happy if it was lategame tech or only worked at Warp-Prisms and the normal/early game production would be from normal Gateways.

On October 04 2015 02:39 deadmau wrote:
17 year blizzard veteran. Protoss-only player. Masters League.

How to fix the game from Master League, Protoss-only veteran.

- Remove warpgate
- Rebalance gateway units

This will fix balance to SC2, and this will allow party games to be more fun. Remember BGH from BW? You can't play that in SC2 because of warpgates.

Former mapmaker on WarpGates, old thread well worth the read, as you can see I've known about this issue since many years ago...and it still hasn't been addressed.
www.teamliquid.net



I understand this game very well from a 1v1 perspective while also the old fun party matches of BW, and I thought SC2 could recreate all that under the new engine, but warpgates ruined big map distances. I can defend almost any early attack with a single pylon as a protoss partner.

- That's just not fair in a game like SC2, it ruins map making possibility AND game balance
- Is it worth it to keep this in the game for the sake of ruining balance and handicapping map-making balance?

Highly suggest this thread from 2012 for a perspective on why Removing Warpgates would fix the balance of the game, shoutout to SuzyQuark!.


I hear a lot of suggestions from Diamond and below players, I wish you guys understood the game better, this is really the issue here. Please get the word out to blizzard.

On October 04 2015 10:40 MrBarryObama wrote:
Starcraft is not about fun. It's about being as difficult and intricate as possible so that when I say, "I play Starcraft," people think I'm smarter than them. It's certainly not about esports, because the most popular sports are simpler and enjoyed by all. Starcraft is a contest to master in lieu of enjoyment and real productivity.

On October 04 2015 12:53 ( bush wrote:
I still can't understand how an unit such as the oracle is in the game.
Your op rushes an oracle, you didnt rush a turret? GG.
I mean, you should be able to micro your way out of bad situations, like a skilled CS GO player can win a round in a 3vs1 scenario. But against oracles, there's no microing against an oracle rush. You just straight up die. A meaningless win for one and a frustrating loss for the other. And that's just one out of many examples.

On October 04 2015 10:40 MrBarryObama wrote:
Starcraft is not about fun. It's about being as difficult and intricate as possible so that when I say, "I play Starcraft," people think I'm smarter than them. It's certainly not about esports, because the most popular sports are simpler and enjoyed by all. Starcraft is a contest to master in lieu of enjoyment and real productivity.

On October 04 2015 13:27 The_Red_Viper wrote:


I am not quite sure if you are serious or not