|
On March 27 2010 14:35 LF9 wrote:
What would the requirements be for such an expert forum? A lot of the best players (on NA server at least) are relatively unknown to the TL community, which mainly recognizes former top SC players and its own members, disregarding the large amount of pro players from other games, as well as random people, who are currently doing very well on the ladder. I would like to hear the comments of these people as well, some even more than people like smurft and those other guys that one poster mentioned.
TL being elitist is fine, but being simply "TL-ist" or "SC-ist" and discriminating not based on skill, but based on how long people have been with TL or based on what game you played before SC2 is unacceptable and will lead to a lowering in the quality of information available on the site.
Welcome new/unknown top players with open arms and value their insight and feedback. After all, the fact that they haven't been a part of your community for a long time doesn't stop them from kicking your ass at SC2 ^^.
If they truly are good players then their experience on what is powerful and what is not too useful ill be the same as one of these "sc1 players/TLers that are good at sc2", right?
And i've never heard before of for example TheLittleOne or CowGoMoo but they are good at sc2 so they are regarded here. If someone's good then he is known to be good, isn't he?
|
On March 28 2010 07:15 Dx Fx wrote:
There's one point which makes no sense for me. Why did they give High Templar and Dark Templar the armor light as additional but didn't add the armor light to the Ghost?
What would take advantage of it? Ghosts aren't particularly useful in TvT, Zerg don't have any attack bonuses vs. Light, and the only Protoss unit with a bonus vs. Light is the Phoenix. And while it might have been interesting to make Phoenixes more easily kill Ghosts, it's not like it's particularly difficult now for 4 Phoenixes to AG and assassinate a Ghost.
|
On March 28 2010 07:21 Kaniol wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2010 14:35 LF9 wrote:
What would the requirements be for such an expert forum? A lot of the best players (on NA server at least) are relatively unknown to the TL community, which mainly recognizes former top SC players and its own members, disregarding the large amount of pro players from other games, as well as random people, who are currently doing very well on the ladder. I would like to hear the comments of these people as well, some even more than people like smurft and those other guys that one poster mentioned.
TL being elitist is fine, but being simply "TL-ist" or "SC-ist" and discriminating not based on skill, but based on how long people have been with TL or based on what game you played before SC2 is unacceptable and will lead to a lowering in the quality of information available on the site.
Welcome new/unknown top players with open arms and value their insight and feedback. After all, the fact that they haven't been a part of your community for a long time doesn't stop them from kicking your ass at SC2 ^^. If they truly are good players then their experience on what is powerful and what is not too useful ill be the same as one of these "sc1 players/TLers that are good at sc2", right? And i've never heard before of for example TheLittleOne or CowGoMoo but they are good at sc2 so they are regarded here. If someone's good then he is known to be good, isn't he? Since CowGoMoo works at Blizzard it is quite expected that he will have some regards here.
|
go watch 3rd game from Team Liquid SC2 Invitational #1 between thelittleone and demuslim u will see how ridiculous are dt in pvt ...
|
On March 27 2010 16:38 Thereisnosaurus wrote:Show nested quote +Let's say 10 devs want to read such a thread. $20/hour per dev (rough average estimate), and 2 hours to read 29 pages (under-estimate, to be honest). there are, 10? key forums to sift through.
We just spent $4000. (and pushed back the work that those devs would otherwise be doing).
The more time goes on, the more i think like a producer. As a developer, i wish there was somewhere i could go where i wouldn't have to sift through 29 pages of knee-jerk reactions for the few posters who (might) have some insight into your game.
I would recommend having an experts forum where you would [perhaps] let everyone read the thread, but only allow certain posters access to post. The thought of having a place where posters like Naz, FA, Smuft, Eri etc. would debate their thoughts for my eyes to see without 29 pages of shit to find it makes me want to cream myself. I can help a bit here, I'm pretty sure this is how blizzard does it. As you say, paying developers a LOT more than $20 an hour (standard commission rates for a designer are around 30-50 an hour for senior positions, which presumably almost all of blizzard's design team occupy) to browse feedback threads is a bit idiotic .So, blizzard have what they call 'community managers'- guys like naethra and co for WoW, presumably they have similar blues for starcraft. These guys are paid at probably a far lower rate, and pretty much only browse and work with the forums. Being dedicated experts, I would guess they collate and sift the data as well as moderating, forwarding on the condensed reports to the dev teams. I would not be surprised if blizzard has a few ghosts who pretty much trawl forums like this as well, perhaps it's the same people. so the devs get all the info they need, without putting up with the walls of blah blah blah that intersperse feedback. Of course I could be totally wrong, but as a games designer in training and having managed projects myself, this is how I would do it, and there's evidence that it's how blizzard does it as well.
when you get a job at an RTS company designing the multiplayer and [presumably] it's not Blizzard, and even if you work 60 hours a week you still can't get done the 100 hours/week of work you'd like to do; you try gleaning balance feedback/arguements from your community manager.
They can tell you things like 'hey, everyone bitches about roaches', or 'when are you gonna fix EMP, it's overpowered, everyone says so!'. They can't tell you the reasons BEHIND why people say what the say because they don't understand why people say what they say.
When i see balance feedback on Company of Heroes or Starcraft, i can gernally discern "oh yes, that makes sense. or "oh yes, yes, of course, cause you're limited to options A, B, and C, in situation X, therefore unit Q needs an obvious nerf because of the timing window found in the 12:45-13:15 minute range". etc. etc. Community Managers can't understand those arguements because they're not hired to understand Strategy games. They're hired to interact with the community, do good PR, give consensus opinion, etc.
From what i know, Blizzard's community managers (at least a few of them) are decent players (more so than found at other companies), but they're certainly not going to be experts on RTS game design. They would be useful to point out certain threads or posts, to be like "hey, my.designer, read that thread, i think there might be some gems in it", but again, that's the best you can do.
Hell, i've been designing multiplayer games for 4 years, and when i read a good thread on balance, i can't even repeat the arguments there to my own balancers. It's not because i can't articulate myself or don't have good communication skills, but rather because every time words pass through someones interpretation, something is lost (or unfortunately added).
Blizzard devs need to interact and communicate with top players (they'll be shooting themselves in the foot if they don't. i hope they make the right decision in this). So let's give them a place for them do so. (and by communicate i don't necessarily mean direct interaction, but view the acute debates/interactions of top players).
|
you little guppies need not worry about the entry requirements to the experts forum.
teamliquid is good at these things and will be sure to invite anyone who is able to contribute.
honestly, teamliquid is a force to be reckoned with already, but i can't wait to see the power of TL in 10 years time.
Hell, i can envision TL becoming an externally hired balance/design critique for any game put on the market.
|
i really expected a lot better changes, what a disappointment
|
There were so many good things that blizzard did with this patch, I don't see why so many seem upset over it.
They weakened the ridiculous Terran cheeses that involved mass SCVs. This was probably the most crucial thing needed and they nailed it. Also, why did SCVs even need to have 60 hp instead of something closer to the other races? I think it was because in SC1 scvs were super vulnerable while constructing buildings, and it would be too easy to just pick off building SCVs. In SC2 it seems harder to pick them off while they are working anyway (could be wrong, it just looks that way)
They gave terran lategame a slight buff to help with the difficulties against protoss. these changes probably won't affect tvz that much since ghosts and mech units aren't quite as prevalent in that matchup.
So yeah, they probably didn't get it all right, but at least lets acknowledge that they did some good things with the patch as well.
|
Ban Mora plz, he just uses big words to make him self sound smart... He doesn't know what they actually mean.
|
@petered
People aren't upset about the things they fixed, but it's the way that they fixed those things.
For example, they could have changed the AI so it wouldn't auto-target workers, but instead they did the hp-nerf wich has implications on other parts of the game.
|
32 page threads suck. i read the first 2 pages and the last 2 ^^
|
tbh, i'd rather have them just put back the observatory and make obs 25/75 again. the nerf to obs price is kinda dumb. 50/100 is the same price as a sentry -.-
and i can kinda understand why DTs needed to be nerfed due to the corresponding SCV hp nerf, but now DTs are gonna go from underused to unused.
|
On March 26 2010 10:24 hifriend wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 10:22 BC.KoRn wrote:On March 26 2010 10:03 NET wrote:
Just an idea, maybe blizzard should also release a statement along side the patch notes in order for the starcraft community to have a better understanding of what is going through their heads. This will keep everyone from playing guessing games and auto complaining about everything.
On a side note, why kill DT's even more T_T... Very unlikely, that would only cause problems for Blizzard. Why would it cause problems? I thought it was a good suggestion actually.
Because if Blizzard tells you why they made a certain change or basically says why they do anything (game balance specifically) people on forums can use that against them in the future. If Blizzard goes back on something they said or thought people can be like "Oh hey but you said this before blah blah blah."
It all has to do with professionalism and having a good public image...they are not being paid to tell you what they think.
The game is for us to figure out on our own 
|
On March 28 2010 14:33 FictionJV wrote:
@petered
People aren't upset about the things they fixed, but it's the way that they fixed those things.
For example, they could have changed the AI so it wouldn't auto-target workers, but instead they did the hp-nerf wich has implications on other parts of the game.
?
Your proposed modification wouldn't have changed anything. Zealots not auto-targetting SCVs would not enable them to magically jump over said SCVs to get to the marines. Right clicking on the marines with your Zealots would have the very same effect, yet that's not getting us very far now is it?
I'm pretty sure Blizzard knows that whatever change has drastic repercussions on the rest of the balance. Most people in this thread don't though, they only see things at face value and like to suggest proper "fixes" without really thinking it through, just like you 
You can never please everyone.
|
Although most things in the patch make sense, I really, REALLY, don't get the baneling buff. Specialy with the increased reactor/rine time. Let's see how well this goes in TvZ.
|
On March 28 2010 14:25 BC.KoRn wrote:
Ban Mora plz, he just uses big words to make him self sound smart... He doesn't know what they actually mean.
I should think we should at least try the idea out. Mora is a dev for CoH btw.
On March 28 2010 14:35 CowGoMoo wrote:
32 page threads suck. i read the first 2 pages and the last 2 ^^
I guess this means you agree with Mora's idea.
Overall, if you think something is imbalanced, I think the best way to tell Blizz is use it to your advantage during the beta and at the same time tell people about it. Then people will start to notice if something really is overpowered/underpowered. This is what the beta is for, no?
|
On March 28 2010 15:58 BC.KoRn wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 10:24 hifriend wrote:On March 26 2010 10:22 BC.KoRn wrote:On March 26 2010 10:03 NET wrote:
Just an idea, maybe blizzard should also release a statement along side the patch notes in order for the starcraft community to have a better understanding of what is going through their heads. This will keep everyone from playing guessing games and auto complaining about everything.
On a side note, why kill DT's even more T_T... Very unlikely, that would only cause problems for Blizzard. Why would it cause problems? I thought it was a good suggestion actually. Because if Blizzard tells you why they made a certain change or basically says why they do anything (game balance specifically) people on forums can use that against them in the future. If Blizzard goes back on something they said or thought people can be like "Oh hey but you said this before blah blah blah." It all has to do with professionalism and having a good public image...they are not being paid to tell you what they think. The game is for us to figure out on our own
What? I believe they should be held accountable for the changes they make to a game people pay for. It might piss me off but at least I would know WHY they did what they did.
This was the primary problem I had with WoW and balance. They never ever told you why they did what they did generally because that way they can hide a lot of their shall we say...secrets? Going by the comments that some of the WoW balancing team made they barely even played the game.
Now while I don't think it's the same with SC2 they really should explain to you just why they do what they do.
|
On March 28 2010 18:03 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2010 15:58 BC.KoRn wrote:On March 26 2010 10:24 hifriend wrote:On March 26 2010 10:22 BC.KoRn wrote:On March 26 2010 10:03 NET wrote:
Just an idea, maybe blizzard should also release a statement along side the patch notes in order for the starcraft community to have a better understanding of what is going through their heads. This will keep everyone from playing guessing games and auto complaining about everything.
On a side note, why kill DT's even more T_T... Very unlikely, that would only cause problems for Blizzard. Why would it cause problems? I thought it was a good suggestion actually. Because if Blizzard tells you why they made a certain change or basically says why they do anything (game balance specifically) people on forums can use that against them in the future. If Blizzard goes back on something they said or thought people can be like "Oh hey but you said this before blah blah blah." It all has to do with professionalism and having a good public image...they are not being paid to tell you what they think. The game is for us to figure out on our own What? I believe they should be held accountable for the changes they make to a game people pay for. It might piss me off but at least I would know WHY they did what they did. This was the primary problem I had with WoW and balance. They never ever told you why they did what they did generally because that way they can hide a lot of their shall we say...secrets? Going by the comments that some of the WoW balancing team made they barely even played the game. Now while I don't think it's the same with SC2 they really should explain to you just why they do what they do.
The end of the second paragraph is just stupid. While I agree that the communcation between community and devs have always been lacking, saying that the BALANCING team barely play WoW is just stupid.
Regardless, I'd be very interested in hearing why they make certain changes aswell - even more so during the beta just to see what they actually get to see that the majority obviously doesnt.
|
hm wtf
has anyone else noticed the new scv glitch from patch 6? it happens to me like every game that my scv walks really far away to build
so weird shit xd
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
On March 28 2010 14:35 CowGoMoo wrote:
32 page threads suck. i read the first 2 pages and the last 2 ^^
You didn't miss anything .
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/4135/glitchyk.png)
