Great article. It's good to have new functions in a game but when you add too many functions into an RTS it only makes it harder to balance and boring to watch. So far most of the games I've watched are slightly entertaining but nothing brick shitting like SC1.

I know SC2 is still in beta but I seriously hope SC2 doesn't end up to be WoW the RTS.

milly9

Canada325 Posts

April 20 2010 21:25 GMT

#164

I don't understand this post, his last thought about FF completely contradicts everything he has just said. I'm not even talking about balance here, I have no strong feelings one way or the other if FF is OP or just too good.

luckybeni2

Germany1065 Posts

April 20 2010 21:30 GMT

#165

Well we also have to keep in mind that sc1 as we now know it also had an add on and blizzard said that they would bring out at least one for sc2 as well. I personally hope for a comeback of some experimental stuff like the difiler was. I personally think that sc2 still lacks these very special stuff that sc1 had but no other game ever dared. They have some cool units but i rarely see them beeing used as much as in sc1.

cmoreAFI

United States2 Posts

April 20 2010 21:42 GMT

#166

Haha, point made. I see a lot of topics about zerg broodlords being overpowered (especially ZvP), but you are right. You can't keep nerfing right away. I see gameplay evolve every day with new strategies and tactics. It is way too soon to clearly state if anything is OP or imbalanced.

Choo

United States126 Posts

April 20 2010 21:42 GMT

#167

Great read!

It's certainly hard to replicate, but we must avoid balancing SC2 by making everything suck equally hard.

Definitely my favorite line in there, I couldn't agree more!!

Mellotron

United States329 Posts

April 20 2010 21:54 GMT

#168

Thank you for taking the time to write the article, i think you are right about all of it.

omg.deus

Korea (South)150 Posts

April 20 2010 22:03 GMT

#169

Your BW examples require a lot more APM than anything I've seen in SC2. Sure once you're on 3 gas and survive 15 minutes with a healthy economy Lurker/Swarm can be really overpowered. It's also not the easiest move to execute, especially offensively.

snpnx

Germany454 Posts

April 20 2010 22:07 GMT

#170

I can actually understand both sides of the discussion, the ones saying stuff should be nerfed a lot and the ones saying let it stay in and see if it balances out.
As most people know, broodwar was not a balanced game at all in the beginning, and players doing the balancing themselves was a big part of broodwar becoming what it is today.
I am almost inclined to say you could throw out an unbalanced game (not broken, just unbalanced) and just let people play it, and they most likely will find some kind of way to deal with most of the balancing problems they find.
On the other hand, Blizzard is just trying to make a good game, and as someone said before, they can't wait for players to balance things out in this long process at this point anymore, since the setting in which SC2 will be released is a very different one from the one SC1 was being released in. (i.e. expectations, Korean eSports etc.)
(This btw. also counts for players whining a lot aboutu SC2 being not a good game, give it some time for players to actually FIND where to micro and macro and spend your apm's on, it might just happen to be more viable of a progaming game than you thought)

spinesheath

Germany8679 Posts

April 20 2010 22:21 GMT

#171

Why is everyone always bringing up this "roach up to 2 supply" nonsense? If the roach needs a nerf then lower its HP, attack speed, movement speed, armor, whatever. But don't increase the supply cost.
During early and midgame this might sound ok, it basically means a cost increase of 1/4th larva and 25 minerals (quite hefty already). But once the zerg hits 200/200 it would be devastating, especially in zvp.

meeple

Canada10211 Posts

April 20 2010 22:22 GMT

#172

This is definitely some refreshing thought on the new nerf trend. Thanks for thegood read!

Jonoman92

United States9105 Posts

April 20 2010 22:24 GMT

#173

I really liked this article. Nice points.

Dragz

United States3 Posts

April 20 2010 22:30 GMT

#174

I agree, you generally don't think of op units being balanced, but every race had some sort of game breaking ability so in a way it was balanced

Jackal03

Brazil7469 Posts

April 20 2010 22:31 GMT

#175

i haven't played the beta, but from what i see, because micro is easier (smart casting, multiple selection, better pathing...) most spells and abilities seems underpower

the only problem to me is that buildins seems a lot more fragile, and with this, defenses seems very weak. With this, games are resolving in massing armies and attacks, i feel the game lacks some of the strategic elements that makes starcraft 1 so good

don't know, things will probably get better after some good map making

sva

United States747 Posts

April 20 2010 22:32 GMT

#176

This was a very well thought out article, I enjoyed it and agree with you. I'm also afraid they will over balance SC2, but I feel blizzard has good intentions most of the time.

Ftrunkz

Australia2474 Posts

April 20 2010 22:44 GMT

#177

Yeah what the hell, the whole article was really good.. except for the last paragraph were you contradicted the crap out of it

YJ_

Canada36 Posts

April 20 2010 23:03 GMT

#178

Is it possible that blizz wants to have overpowered units in the game to appeal to an untapped market or boost the PvE part of the game? DB is really high on the campaign, every time a balance takes place for Multiplayer it affects his precious pve content. The guy who is lead producer for SC2 is the same guy who worked on CC with all its multi-player imbalances in exchange for cool units.

Gokain

United States49 Posts

April 20 2010 23:23 GMT

#179

i don't believe the focus should be in nerfing each unit until it the game is seemingly balanced between all different strategies and units.

the focus should rather be where each unit available is a viable option to specific strategies. As described in the article, there are plenty of abilities and units in BW that seem overpowered at first glance, but they need to be implemented effectively in order to procure optimal effects from them [i.e. proper placing of storms, backlash of spider mines, etc]. The analogy most prevalent to this is in Team Fortress 2: certain classes are very effective counters to specific strategies and maps, but no class/weapon is overwhelmingly powerful in all scenarios.

MagicARide

Canada83 Posts

April 20 2010 23:23 GMT

#180

very good article
however to add onto that, tanks can hit lurkers in darkswarm no?