| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Zapdos_Smithh
Canada2620 Posts
On April 27 2010 12:14 GaMeOfFeAr wrote: No one will miss you. No drastic changes are necessary. Stop comparing the micro and macro of players like Jaedong and Flash, to your "high level players", who are really just amateurs playing an incomplete game. read the article idiot -.- | ||
|
Backpack
United States1776 Posts
Blizzard design philosophy according to LaLuSh "Let's design awesome, cool and unique units and just balance the game exactly like the prequel that came out 12 years ago. Brood War was a good game, so lets just copy the balance from that." This is the same thing I said about the "ProMod" (before i realized it was a joke.) Starcraft 2 IS NOT supposed to be BW with fancy graphics. It is a new game, but many people don't seem to understand this. SC2 would be a waste of time and money if it were to play EXACTLY the same as broodwar. Your so called "TTD syndrome" is not a failure on Browders part, it's a design they choose to implement into their *NEW* game. edit: i also thought it was funny that you said that SC2 is now about strategy more than skill(like that is supposed to be a bad thing). Is that not the whole idea for this game? Isn't the entire RT*S* genre centered around strategy? | ||
|
Storm[PT]
120 Posts
Edit: I don't think the OP is trying to compare BW and SC2. Rather it is about one of the fundamentals that make an RTS interesting. In this case it is the ability to make your units behave like you tell them to. | ||
|
mrdx
Vietnam1555 Posts
On April 27 2010 09:25 Liquid`NonY wrote: Pretty much disagree with almost everything lalush is saying. The only thing I feel partial toward is that flying units should have a true "moving shot" rather than a "gliding shot." That's a good point. But a ton of the conclusions and ideas surrounding this core idea are pretty bad. Is it a bit self contradictory to both call Lalush's idea a good point and say you disagree with "almost everything" he said? | ||
|
QueueQueue
Canada1000 Posts
 | ||
|
skYfiVe
United States382 Posts
If Blizzard employees have a look at this, they could really gain a ton of info from it and realize that things need to be done. This whole "easy to play hard to master" is impossible.. You either want esports to succeed or you don't. No game has ever succeeded in making a game both easy and hard... its contradictory.. It isn't an mmo where anyone can down a boss, but one group won't wipe 6 times. It's a RTS and this balancing technique they think works simply is terrible. | ||
|
GaMeOfFeAr
United States26 Posts
I read the article and already left my critique. He is arguing about apples and using oranges for his examples, thus making his post look like nothing but a personal rant, despite its length, and a few decent points. | ||
|
fulmetljaket
482 Posts
if not i really think you should all just wait and see what happens. wait until SC2 has 12 years of development, and then complain. seems to make a bit more sense to me | ||
|
Spork
United States35 Posts
I wouldn't have been able to point out all the things you did as far as moving shots. I agree that a lot of the units like hellions could be infinitely more fun to use with moving shots. | ||
|
mOnion
United States5660 Posts
On April 27 2010 12:16 Backpack wrote: Blizzard design philosophy according to LaLuSh "Let's design awesome, cool and unique units and just balance the game exactly like the prequel that came out 12 years ago. Brood War was a good game, so lets just copy the balance from that." This is the same thing I said about the "ProMod" (before i realized it was a joke.) Starcraft 2 IS NOT supposed to be BW with fancy graphics. It is a new game, but many people don't seem to understand this. SC2 would be a waste of time and money if it were to play EXACTLY the same as broodwar. Your so called "TTD syndrome" is not a failure on Browders part, it's a design they choose to implement into their *NEW* game. no one's saying SC2 should be a BW reincarnate but as it stands right now, the enjoyability of the micro is a hollow shell of it's former self. there's no reason not to incorporate similar mechanics into a different game. gawd i'm so tired of that fucking argument. On April 27 2010 12:19 fulmetljaket wrote: is there anyone here to played the SC / SC:BW beta? if not i really think you should all just wait and see what happens. wait until SC2 has 12 years of development, and then complain. seems to make a bit more sense to me do chemists wait until their newest drug has been on the market for 12 years before looking at whats wrong with it? we can tweak SC2 now T_T there's no need to wait until the game's been "figured out" | ||
|
StayFrosty
Canada743 Posts
| ||
|
Trezeguet
United States2656 Posts
| ||
|
Kezzer
United States1268 Posts
On April 27 2010 12:19 fulmetljaket wrote: is there anyone here to played the SC / SC:BW beta? if not i really think you should all just wait and see what happens. wait until SC2 has 12 years of development, and then complain. seems to make a bit more sense to me SC had all those years to develop to become the game it is today. Those years were a learning experience for blizzard. It would be foolish to think that SC2 requires just as long to become the game we want it to be. | ||
|
ComradeDover
Bulgaria758 Posts
On April 27 2010 12:13 Zapdos_Smithh wrote: WOW! There is a god and his name is LaLush. Thank you for finally writing an article that FULLY explains what is REALLY lacking from SC2 at the moment. I am SO TIRED of the "just wait for the game to evolve" concept! Amazing! Yeah! Down with waiting for the game to evolve! If it isn't figured out by two months into the beta, it isn't worth your time! After all, Broodwar was completely figured out way early into it's beta, right? Disgusting. On April 27 2010 12:22 BDF92 wrote: SC had all those years to develop to become the game it is today. Those years were a learning experience for blizzard. It would be foolish to think that SC2 requires just as long to become the game we want it to be. Less or more foolish than expecting everything to be done and figured out for you before the game has even launched yet? Get a grip. EDIT: And another thing, Blizzard hasn't made a balance patch for StarCraft since 2001, as the OP points out. Gameplay wasn't finalized until how many years afterwards? Is it finalized even today? Those years may have been a learning period for Blizzard, but it has been even more so for the players. Why people seem to expect that they'll be able to just pick up SC2 and instantly have it all figured out is beyond me. It seems SC2 players in general might need a few years worth of "learning experience" to grow up themselves. | ||
Spazer
Canada8036 Posts
On April 27 2010 12:16 Backpack wrote: Blizzard design philosophy according to LaLuSh "Let's design awesome, cool and unique units and just balance the game exactly like the prequel that came out 12 years ago. Brood War was a good game, so lets just copy the balance from that." This is the same thing I said about the "ProMod" (before i realized it was a joke.) Starcraft 2 IS NOT supposed to be BW with fancy graphics. It is a new game, but many people don't seem to understand this. SC2 would be a waste of time and money if it were to play EXACTLY the same as broodwar. Your so called "TTD syndrome" is not a failure on Browders part, it's a design they choose to implement into their *NEW* game. Just because it's a new game doesn't mean that it can't have some elements similar to BW beyond "you need to macro and micro". Obviously something was done right with BW - it'd be stupid to just ignore everything that could be learned from the most successful RTS in the past decade. Besides, I don't really think Lalush is arguing that the balance should be exactly the same as Broodwar's. It's arguing more for improved unit control, which, in his examples, is the moving shot. | ||
|
Scarecrow
Korea (South)9175 Posts
| ||
|
tomatriedes
New Zealand5356 Posts
On April 27 2010 10:50 StaticKinetics wrote: This. I just don't understand how it is so absolutely critical that you have to be a twitch FPS-style gamer with ultra fast reflexes to be good at a real time STRATEGY game. Microing is great and all, but the op is just far far exaggerating a small aspect of the game. This is team liquid. People here like BW a lot precisely because it was different from other RTS games. This 'small aspect of the game' was actually a huge factor in what made BW such an exciting game to play and watch. Imagine Jaedong without the muta control or Boxer without Marine-medic control. | ||
|
Ballistixz
United States1269 Posts
On April 27 2010 12:03 LaLuSh wrote: Let's check what points we actually agree with eachother on and what you've misinterpreted me saying: Scouts are not an efficient counter to mutas That's what I said in my last post. And I even gave an argument as to why. So I take it we agree? You even say "it may have had perfect moving shots", then you go on attacking me for stuff I haven't said again. Scouts could never micro against muta/scourge Well we're lucky there aren't any scourge in SC2 aren't we? But that's not what I meant to say. SPEED UPGRADED (put it in caps so you can't miss it) scouts are just as good as mutalisks when microing vs scourge/muta. Scratch that, they're even better! They're faster, have faster turning animation. The only downside is they don't have glaives bouncing off on other scourge when microing vs scourge. Now you can make another post where you say scouts were never used and that corsairs were better. But that's got nothing to do with what I'm arguing. im arguing what you said about corsairs being good because of moving shots mainly. you tried to compare corsairs to phoenixes in your post which is not a fair comparison at all. i then went on to say that a more fair comparsion would be phoenix and scout. as YOU yourself said "scouts have perfect moving shots" or something to that effect. since you said moving shots is what made corsairs good vs mutas why does moving shot not make scouts good vs mutas based on your logic? if moving shots made corsairs good vs mutas then they should also make scouts good vs mutas right? but thats not the case at all. its the splash dmg that makes corsairds good vs muta/scourge. if corsairs did not have splash they would be a epically useless unit vs muta/scourge. now this applies to sc2 as well. phoenixes have NO splash dmg at all. if they did they would be alot better vs mutas in sc2. moving shots will not make them that much more effective especially since if you gave phoenixes moving shots you would also have to consider mutas being able to do moving shots aswell. in other words, i believe you had 3 phoenixes in the sc2 demonstration and 3 corsairs in the sc1 demonstration of the Phoenix vs corsair vid. the 3 phoenixes was only firing on 3 mutas. the 3 corsairs were firing on ALL of the mutas. you ignored that fact and just went on to say that it was because of moving shot and the maneuverability of air units in sc1 that made it possible to defend that attk. it was very biased. | ||
|
Foooky
Australia205 Posts
| ||
|
Chaos
United States772 Posts
On April 27 2010 12:06 ComradeDover wrote: You missed the part about scouts dealing half damage to both mutalisks and scourge. I'd take a mutalisk to micro against scourge over a scout any day, speed upgraded or no. Then either you haven't done a massive amount of muta vs scourge micro or you haven't actually tried it with speed upgraded scouts. | ||
| ||
|
|
WardiTV Summer Champion…
Harstem vs Zoun
Harstem vs GgMaChine
GgMaChine vs Lambo
Harstem vs Lambo
GgMaChine vs Zoun
Lambo vs Zoun
OSC
Big Brain Bouts
FEL
Patches Events
AI Arena Tournament
FEL
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Replay Cast
WardiTV Weekly
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
