EPTWhy the Warhound should NOT be balanced - Page 23
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 HotS |
|
Baarn
United States2702 Posts
| ||
|
YyapSsap
New Zealand1511 Posts
When you look at the bigger picture of unit design, one of the key basic requirement that these old/newly designed unit should have are its advantages/drawbacks and its interaction with the rest of the units. But then taking a look at SC2, you do not see such pronounced advantages/drawbacks that one would notice in BW. Some units also severely overlap others roles that it becomes redundant. Take the marauder for example. What pronounced drawbacks does one have when building this unit? its simply too good at almost everything. Same goes for colossus, medivacs and the list goes on. That design philosophy seems to have gotten worse in HOTS, ala warhound.. I think Ill write up a new thread regarding how this design philosophy has led to creating the kind of games we see and where they have gone wrong. The more I read/play/see about SC2, it seems as if the fundamentals of a basic RTS (or just starcraft) has been tempered with making the game linger ever closer to being similiar to the likes of C&C/COH/DOW etc. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10848 Posts
Good upgrades improve a units strenght making it's "role" even more defined. They also shouldn't add something completly random (concussive shells)... To be fair, only the Marine and the Marauder have such upgrades in Wol, most (all?) others are pretty much "in line" with the above concept. Which makes me wonder even more why they tought they were a good idea... But well, Terran in Wol has like a million upgrades for anything anyway, they probably tought they have to put use to those techlabs  . | ||
|
1337MAC
Finland3 Posts
On September 10 2012 23:13 emythrel wrote: a week in to the beta.... a week in to the WoL beta I bet it looked like WoL was gonna be all a-moving, 5 mins games. Ofc everyone is useing the warhound right now, its SHINY AND NEW. Once it gets balanced things will change, once people get bored of messing around with it etc. It might be a broken unit, it might need to go or be changed, but a week in to the beta isn't anywhere near enough time to make any clear conclusions. Obviously none of you have ever worked in science or technology or the arts, the piece of music you hear on the radio that you love so much didn't sound anything like that when it was first written, that film you loved was 3 hours long when it was written, had plot holes galore and terrible dialogue. These things take time to become the final product that everyone loves, that is the whole point of a FUCKING BETA F*cking A! The FIRST post in this thread that is smart and reasonable, yay! And seriously folks... this game is more about adaptation than "op" or "imba". There's always a way. | ||
|
U_G_L_Y
United States516 Posts
| ||
Beyonder
Netherlands15103 Posts
On September 12 2012 22:29 1337MAC wrote: F*cking A! The FIRST post in this thread that is smart and reasonable, yay! And seriously folks... this game is more about adaptation than "op" or "imba". There's always a way. Uhm, I do not think you really get it here. It is the inherent design of the units that is at fault, which resembles Blizzards faulty design philosophy. We said this at the start of the previous BETA: "Its only the beta! It will get beter!" Yes, some problems got fixed and the games have gotten better, especially if no protoss is involved. But the game keeps getting easier, keeps getting these type of silly units and keeps being designed to attract the masses of weak players [which, ironically, as Orb rightfully points out, Blizzard still does a crappy job at]. Final product sucked last time too.. >_> | ||
|
Firenza
United States51 Posts
| ||
|
Sparkman
United States60 Posts
On September 12 2012 13:53 SheaR619 wrote: Have faith? The fact that the warhound even made it into beta is more then enough reason to lose faith in them already. Anyways, I was bored and typed "blizzard warhound" in google and this link to the bnet forum pop up. http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/6551205172?page=1 In this post, the OP was expressing his concern toward the warhound as many of us had. Surprisingly it got a blue post, quoting: "We are very aware of a variety of concerns with this very early version of our beta for Heart of the Swarm. We are going to address design and balance issues as quickly as we can. Protoss and the Warhound have been the focus of our discussions over the last few days. I expect we will patch soon to try some more stuff with the Protoss and the Warhound. This will certainly include balance changes but may also include design changes. We are not discussing removing Warp Gates or making any changes to the Sentry. Sorry." I though this was pretty huge that it finally getting addressed and the voice of the people finally wins over their arrogances. EDIT: For fail grammar and spelling Jezzs if the warhound is that much of a problem for you stop playing the beta until they fix it. Be grateful that you actually have a beta key. Unlike the rest of us who can only watch  . Just realized that some people here don't know the difference between a "beta" and a "demo". A BETA has bugs, balance issues, and problems where a few selected people get to play and test. Demo is a balanced, bug free(hopefully) short version of a the full game released to the public. Don't assume a beta is a demo where everything is balanced and bug free. | ||
|
MinimalistSC2
United States121 Posts
It might be a broken unit, it might need to go or be changed, but a week in to the beta isn't anywhere near enough time to make any clear conclusions. Obviously none of you have ever worked in science or technology or the arts, the piece of music you hear on the radio that you love so much didn't sound anything like that when it was first written, that film you loved was 3 hours long when it was written, had plot holes galore and terrible dialogue. These things take time to become the final product that everyone loves, that is the whole point of a FUCKING BETA wrong. the POINT of a beta is to gain feedback from the people INVITED to the BETA, and as a spectator community, people WATCHING the BETA. This is what the OP(and most of this thread) is, a response to exactly that. Its OUR revisions of the second/third draft of HotS multiplayer. What im hearing from you is "Too soon to judge" What i hear from the OP and responding posts is "Here's what i don't like and why, and how i would fix it." what do you think Blizzard is more interested in hearing after releasing a beta to Pro gamers and Casters? When they should go about making changes to the Game. Or what are peoples first reactions to watching and playing the Game? derrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrp Tl;DR Its a Beta | ||
|
Sapphire.lux
Romania2620 Posts
"We are very aware of a variety of concerns with this very early version of our beta for Heart of the Swarm. We are going to address design and balance issues as quickly as we can. Protoss and the Warhound have been the focus of our discussions over the last few days. I expect we will patch soon to try some more stuff with the Protoss and the Warhound. This will certainly include balance changes but may also include design changes. We are not discussing removing Warp Gates or making any changes to the Sentry. Sorry." Maybe there is hope after all. | ||
|
winthrop
Hong Kong956 Posts
| ||
|
Patate
Canada441 Posts
On September 13 2012 01:14 winthrop wrote: should colossus be redesigned? The Colossus is a MUCH weaker reaver, but with a movement buff to help him follow the deathball, which is the mistake I think. Robo units should rely on warp prisms to get on the battlefield. I'd make the immortal even stronger, but less mobile.. same with Colossus. Blizzard will not change the Colossus, unless of course they totally change the design of the game, and put in units that are made to be dreadfully OP vs the deathball in order to break it, but I can see how this could just break the game. SC2 is actually playable and fun, but it is NOWHERE like BW (only people who haven't played BW try to refute this claim). Adding a lurker, a reaver, and a stronger siege tank could spell the death of the deathball, but it is to use with caution, because the game could fall into the unplayable. | ||
|
Headnoob
Australia2108 Posts
I have extremely little hope for the future of starcraft. | ||
|
niteReloaded
Croatia5282 Posts
/rethorical Fuck blizzard, let's make our own game, open source it. TL alone has the people to do it. | ||
|
Patate
Canada441 Posts
On September 13 2012 01:26 Headnoob wrote: Blizzard ruined diablo and indeed seem to turn everything they touch into shit these days. I have extremely little hope for the future of starcraft. Blizzard is only a name (that has been more or less bought). The people who made the awesome games of the past are gone, and the ones in control have no idea how to make a great successor to those games. I'm 99% sure Dustin Browder or David Kim haven't touched Starcraft seriously until they were given the control of SC2's developpement. No one who followed the scene for a few years would make such a bad sequel. The essence of BW is simply absent from this game. I'm sorry, that's just my view of the whole thing, and I mention this because I actually care about this game. If it were some EA title, or some "real" Activision one, I wouldn't expect much from it, nor have the dedication to even spend money on it, but I want this game to succeed and I want to play BW2, not WC3 and Warhammer 20k's bastard child. Edit: The events of the last week or so have led me to believe that there is hope.. Hope for the community and this game, because we have raised our deception and voices high enough that the developpers have understood our critics. Don't stop, we'll have the game we have waited for since 2001  | ||
|
niteReloaded
Croatia5282 Posts
On September 13 2012 01:33 Patate wrote: Blizzard is only a name (that has been more or less bought). The people who made the awesome games of the past are gone, and the ones in control have no idea how to make a great successor to those games. I'm 99% sure Dustin Browder or David Kim haven't touched Starcraft seriously until they were given the control of SC2's developpement. No one who followed the scene for a few years would make such a bad sequel. The essence of BW is simply absent from this game. I'm sorry, that's just my view of the whole thing, and I mention this because I actually care about this game. If it were some EA title, or some "real" Activision one, I wouldn't expect much from it, nor have the dedication to even spend money on it, but I want this game to succeed and I want to play BW2, not WC3 and Warhammer 20k's bastard child. <3 totally agree BW2!! Tired of hiding, I want BW2 too! | ||
EsportsJohn
United States4883 Posts
On September 13 2012 01:18 Patate wrote: The Colossus is a MUCH weaker reaver, but with a movement buff to help him follow the deathball, which is the mistake I think. Robo units should rely on warp prisms to get on the battlefield. I'd make the immortal even stronger, but less mobile.. same with Colossus. Blizzard will not change the Colossus, unless of course they totally change the design of the game, and put in units that are made to be dreadfully OP vs the deathball in order to break it, but I can see how this could just break the game. SC2 is actually playable and fun, but it is NOWHERE like BW (only people who haven't played BW try to refute this claim). Adding a lurker, a reaver, and a stronger siege tank could spell the death of the deathball, but it is to use with caution, because the game could fall into the unplayable. The problem with colossus is the fact that it is entirely useless on it's own. 10 lings > colossus if there's nothing to buffer the distance between them. At least reavers would STILL kill the shit out of a group of units. Anywayz, to add to the discussion, I think I'm okay with the idea of a multi-purpose all-around unit, which is what the warhound is. Much like the marine or marauder, it's a generally swift, microable, solid unit. However, the downside is that terran really doesn't need any more multipurpose all-around units as marine/marauder fill this space already. If anyone needs another or at least a better all-around unit, it's protoss. Protoss units have been built with so much specificity in mind, and every unit is like a specific counter to certain things, with the exception of the stalker. However, we all know that as good as blink stalkers are, they still can't be used to a strong degree in a straight up fight against something like MMM or ling/infestor. So...I'm actually okay with the design concept, but I wish it were given to protoss, not terran. I feel like a thor nerf (aka goliaths) would have ended up being a better option. But we'll see how it all plays out. I honestly feel like SC2 has grown immensely in the past 2 years, and this expansion isn't going to kill it...in the end, Blizzard will listen to us if something needs to be removed or reworked. | ||
Ragnarork
France9034 Posts
On September 12 2012 23:55 Beyonder wrote: Uhm, I do not think you really get it here. It is the inherent design of the units that is at fault, which resembles Blizzards faulty design philosophy. We said this at the start of the previous BETA: "Its only the beta! It will get beter!" Yes, some problems got fixed and the games have gotten better, especially if no protoss is involved. But the game keeps getting epasier, keeps getting these type of silly units and keeps being designed to attract the masses of weak players [which, ironically, as Orb rightfully points out, Blizzard still does a crappy job at]. Final product sucked last time too.. >_> I really don't like how this sounds elitist ("the mass of weak players"... Not saying it was intentionnal, it just "sounds"...) I think making the game more "accessible" is somewhat important, especially regarding competition. I truly believe competitioncomes partly from the number of people playing the game. By making it more accessible, you'll make it easier to newcomer to get into. Being elitist and putting barriers to the entrance doesn't help to grow imo... What is wrong I believe then is not accessibility but rather the lowering of the skill level necessary to master the game... (which seem to be he case here with the warhound...) | ||
|
IPA
United States3206 Posts
I just wanted to add a positive voice: I love HotS. So do countless professional players. The future is fine, the sky isn't falling. Blizz will iron out mistakes, and all of you who are now bitching will play HotS. And enjoy it. I understand the "design" argument some of you are making but I feel like that is just your desire for an updated BW, which SC2 ain't. It's a new beast -- and a fun one at that. I look forward to seeing Blizzard's implementations, if for no other reason than so that we can remove all of the ridiculously hostile energy towards a beta that has been around for one week. -_- | ||
|
ragz_gt
9172 Posts
| ||
| ||
