|
On September 15 2012 02:26 Code wrote:
The Warhound should be a mech caster unit. No attack, just spells like Lockdown and Haywire missiles that you have to manual target vs mech units. Nerf its health. Give it Irradiate so it can be used vs bio. Boom! You got a mech support unit to complement Seige Tanks.
no, need unit with micro potential and rework raven so it actually has useful spells like irradiate.
casting spells is whats ruining sc2, everything works around casting spells, least for terran but ghost is the staple of my tvp. give lockdown upgrade for ghost at battlecruiser-late tech timing.
|
|
|
warhound removed!!! thanks in no small part to orb's write-up no doubt :D
|
Let us remember on this day, September 15 2012, Justice was served today with the death of the warhound. He will not be missed or cared. Those that do, are scrub that has no idea how to play the game and only wishes to destroy the game. Let us all gather together and hope that from this day onward, we can build a better future and if one day the warhound was the return, we shall remember it not as it was, but as it will be and hopefully that it has changed for the better.
-AMEN
|
United Kingdom14464 Posts
SUCCESS! Blizzard's attitude so far in the beta seems pretty fucking amazing, this is so cool to see.
|
On September 15 2012 02:55 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2012 02:36 Falling wrote:On September 14 2012 15:13 papaz wrote:
Some of the attitude among the "pro" players is just terrible.
You seem to think that you talk for the majority while posting on Teamliquid. The average player here on Teamliquid is waaaaaay above the average SC2 player. I have a lot of friends that play SC2 from time to time and guess what, they think lazers pew pew is fun and they like everything about HoTS, even the warhound.
Because they (and me too for that matter) only play SC2 like once a week.
BW for casuals (that is the majority of Blizzards customers, you know the majority of where the cash flow comes from) was absolutely terrible. Sure it was fun to watch Flash vs JD but playing was incredibly frustrating for someone that plays games once a week.
SC2 is replayable. The definition of replayability for a lot of people here seems to be "replayable 3 hours a day at least". For me, replayable means "replayable once a week" and SC2 absolutely delivers.
So I have a hard time understanding this so call "replayability" from players that play SC2 for hours per day.
Blizzard is doing an absolute fantastic job with SC2. I gave up on BW because it was exhausting to play. With SC2 me and my friends finally have a game we can enjoy and play each other once a week without feeling we have to relearn everything.
Thank god Blizzard has changed with time and adapted to the majority (the people you guys refer to as casuals) of players. I strongly disagree with this. Why? Because when I was in university, we recruited new people all the time for BW games. Once a week LAN's. Or maybe just every 2 weeks or once a month. Everyone was super casual except for me. But people had fun just the same. Something like the all-powerful tank, smashing through protoss lines will attract casuals I agree. But adding depth to the game doesn't make it more difficult for casuals. They just don't use it. It doesn't effect them at all. If true casual has a hard time with spell-casters, they're just straight up not going to make them. Smart-casting or no smart-casting. They'll play the game without them and find other units that are fun to play. But if they do use it on occasion, and it's extremely powerful, because it's harder to use, it's AWESOME. Even for the casual because it still does lot's of damage rather than being nerfed into a mediocre spell because it's so easy for pro's to evenly distribute AoE damage. In other words, you make it too easy on the pro's, the crazy, powerful spells get nerfed and make it less interesting for casuals as well when they make the odd foray into the harder aspects of the game. Crazy awesome damage is rewarding. Other elements of depth just fly right over the heads of casuals and don't effect the game for them in the slightest. Move-shot doesn't interfere with play if you can't be bothered to learn it. You just don't use it and right click your units forward (because you don't even know how to A move units forward- or can't be bothered.) So while it may be your experience that BW is terrible for casuals, I just can't believe that based on the number of people I've taught to play the game. And will still play the game on occasion if we ever meet up online (we're all spread out now). We just have to balance out the teams to make it fun. This, this a thousand times. Great post. I've always felt that catering to casuals makes the game just as frustrating to casuals as it does to more serious players. It also underestimates the large proportion of people who enjoy overcoming challenges. I'll take the Call of Duty series as an example, given it's something of a casual staple. Each thing they added to help the new players, would become just as frustrating to them later on once they passed their initiation phase. A chief example was this ability called painkiller that would be activated upon a certain number of consistent deaths, and give you 3x the health for a short period. This would help to break spawn trappers and the like, but almost everybody in the game would be pissed off beyond belief about such an ability. Likewise, in almost every iteration there is just one, sometimes several 'noob cannons' aka weapons that have no real drawbacks. These don't help casual/new players because yeah they can pick up kills a bit easier than otherwise, but you'd be playing against 6 players on the opposing team with lots of experience using these obscenely good weapons and destroying the noobies. Don't even get me started on the gimmicky stuff that was added each franchise to give people 'cool' stuff that ended up reducing the game to a complete clusterfuck. Anyway, matchmaking should surely maintain casual interest? It's not as if they're going up against people way better than them every game, they're playing players of a similar skill level on ladder. Bad players will be able to pick up wins, good players likewise because they're ostensibly playing against players of their skill level. Despite this the 'ladder anxiety' is a big issue, and again Blizz are adding unranked matches to try and mitigate this further
Agreed for the most part.
I think attracting casuals is a matter of two things:
1) Making sure they can win games. Match-making solves that issue.
2) Making sure that they feel that the game is being fair to them in some way.
From the perspective of RTS games nowadays, many interface restrictions in SC1 seem unfair. Low unit selection limits, no rally-mining, single-building-selection, these all are "grunt-work" to them. It's the interface saying, "Yes, I know exactly what you want to do, but I'm going to make it take more time." It doesn't feel fair to these players to have to do that; it seems like an artificial restriction. Your reward for doing it "right" is simply getting what you feel you already deserve.
Siege Tank placement, by contrast, feels like a part of the game. You pick where you want it to go, and you need to say to siege up in that location. It takes time to siege and unsiege, and it takes micro to do these things. And so forth. It's hard, but it's fair about it. And best of all, you're rewarded for getting it right by having Siege Tanks do their stuff, rather than being worthless.
|
Writing a thread was a critical strike! Warhound takes 2x damage. The warhound has now been eliminated.
|
If there is a blizzard rep reading through this thread, or just on this forum in general, thanks for listening to the community, we want this game to be amazing at least as much as you do.
Thanks for removing the warhound in it's current form.
Cheers,
|
After 30 pages I think we made it.
![[image loading]](http://www.visualphotos.com/photo/2x3883191/happy_businesspeople_throwing_papers_in_the_air_dki-0065-011.jpg)
|
:D
Glad to see the hard work (not just by me but by the entire community!) wasn't in vain
|
|
|
Happy weekend, everybody. We have something to celebrate and drink to this weekend.
|
Nice job orb! I'd like to think this incredibly well thought-out and written article had something to do with helping Blizzard make the right choice.
|
I really hope this thread contributed, I can't believe they made the right decision, some faith has been restored.
|
On September 10 2012 15:51 yanot wrote:
Agree completely. I didn't really like the "easy to learn, hard to master" way of designing. Sports, piano, guitar, are all hard to learn and hard to master. And they have a lot of depth. And I never understood that "casual" is associated as "easy" in the developer mind. One can play 1 hour a day and still want challenge, difficults things to overcome in a video game.
There are no words for how unbelievably retarded and naive this viewpoint is, or moreover, how naive the OP is. If you begin to make everything a headache to do, you take the fun out of StarCraft. The OP talks about essential elements of micro like concaving and drawing back weakened units like they're non-events. That's absurd. Unless you intend to tell everyone below Diamond that they are not welcome anymore, then easy to learn, hard to master is clearly a superior philosophy to "hard to learn and harder to master."
Blizzard has a long and proud history of telling the community to go pound sand and doing what it knows is best (this is sometimes what people QQ for, and often not). For the first time ever, Blizzard is getting weak in the knees, and what we are seeing in HOTS is "design by committee." Mark my words, if it continues the expansion pack will be an unbalanced, low quality cluster fuck, and we are all going to regret our whining.
|
Blazinghand
United States25558 Posts
you don't balance pro fencing swords for noobs to use, IamTheWhiteGuy. Anyone with a basic knowledge of game design knows what's up here
|
agree with everything but they should replace with something else more fun, they are trying to make starcraft hots more dynamic and warhound is like a more stupid version of a marauder(cuz at least the marauder can slow and you can have some cute micro)
|
OMG OMG yay! Blizzard probably read this because THE WARHOUND is GONE!!!!! So happy. Didn't think blizz would actually do it...
|
On September 15 2012 07:10 IamTheWhiteGuy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2012 15:51 yanot wrote:
Agree completely. I didn't really like the "easy to learn, hard to master" way of designing. Sports, piano, guitar, are all hard to learn and hard to master. And they have a lot of depth. And I never understood that "casual" is associated as "easy" in the developer mind. One can play 1 hour a day and still want challenge, difficults things to overcome in a video game. There are no words for how unbelievably retarded and naive this viewpoint is, or moreover, how naive the OP is. If you begin to make everything a headache to do, you take the fun out of StarCraft. The OP talks about essential elements of micro like concaving and drawing back weakened units like they're non-events. That's absurd. Unless you intend to tell everyone below Diamond that they are not welcome anymore, then easy to learn, hard to master is clearly a superior philosophy to "hard to learn and harder to master." Blizzard has a long and proud history of telling the community to go pound sand and doing what it knows is best (this is sometimes what people QQ for, and often not). For the first time ever, Blizzard is getting weak in the knees, and what we are seeing in HOTS is "design by committee." Mark my words, if it continues the expansion pack will be an unbalanced, low quality cluster fuck, and we are all going to regret our whining.
Whomever wrote this clearly knows nothing about professional SC2 and is a complete FUCKTARD.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
Thank you orb, and thank you Blizzard for listening to the community, it'll restore a lot of faith in people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
