|
On May 21 2010 19:59 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2010 19:08 Piy wrote:
Why they actually gave terran a buff and didn't give zerg a counter to mech perplexes me.... People need to realize that patches take a LONG time to be put together, tested, approved, localized etc. 2 weeks ago everyone thought void rays were fucking bullshit and terran couldn't win... so Blizzard nerfs them. Of course it turns out they weren't quite as unbeatable as previously thought, but at the time the patch was put together, they couldn't know that.
By that logic then by the end of beta phase 1 then Terran will be nerfed into oblivion. Unfortunately though I think most players will have already switched to Terran 
|
Now P has exactly no chance vs a good T
Does anyone know why they boosted Marines? Marines are actually better than people think they are. And now the MMM army gets completed with stimpack a lot earlier.
Good job Blizzard! Really! lol.
|
On May 21 2010 19:56 Necrosjef wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2010 19:52 snpnx wrote:On May 21 2010 18:43 okrane wrote:
More importantly: if you are a 1000 rating silver league player, rocking a whopping 45APM, please abstain yourself from your retarded "this is OP/UP" forum posts, and suggestions about the game. If this is all we provide to blizzard as feedback, then we shouldnt be surprised about the way the game is advancing. One thing is clear, if a game-designer is listening to fans, the game is going down-hill: look at WoW.
That is wrong. A lot of people here tend to forget that it's the aim of Blizzard (and a logical aim at that one) to make the game balanced at all skill levels. While this is most certainly almost impossible, Blizzard needs feedback as much from low-level players as they need it from High-Level players. I also do not think that the guys at Blizz are stupid enough to see a post where someone playing in Silver League says "OMG, Colossi to be destroyed by AA is totally unfair, REMOVE!" and they will head this direction. But surely, if a lot of Silver League Players complain about a certain strategy/unit/whatever being WAY to OP in their skill level, that is something Blizz will want to do something about. And I know that competetive thinking players tend to forget the lower skill levels, since I myself have the problem, but you need to remember that overall playability has to be given first, otherwise a lot of new players won't like the game, and it will lead to less popularity and maybe less talent since there are less people playing. I also think that a lot of people seeing the Patch-Notes and instantly writing OMG BAAAAAAD or OMG OP! don't realize that things need to be put to test before you can say anything. SC2 has way too many dependencies as that you can decide after 5 mins of reading a patch note that it is good or bad. The guys doing the patches know full well that certain things might not work out the way they intended, so they will just patch again. This instant whining or praising is always a little funny to me. Just stop talking. I don't want to be mean but if its balanced in Plat then its balanced in all other skill levels too. There is no 2 tier balance.
This is not true, Platinum Players might be capable of doing way more precise timings, better micro and macro and faster adaption to a situation compared to a lower level player. And there will always be some strategies which are easier to execute than to stop, which doesn't make them overpowered per se (since for example if you can stop them, you might be at a huge advantage) but it'll make a difference if you're in a silver league match with one player executing the strat and one player trying to defend or in a platinum league match. If the strategy forgives more errors by the executing player than by the defending one, in platinum play-levels, this will not be so much of a big deal, as players in general will make a lot less errors, but in silverleague, this strategy can be maybe too hard to stop for the defending player.
I don't know if I did well enough with the example, but I think you can get the gist of what I'm trying to say.
|
Where is the in game example of blizzard balancing for noobs, anyway? Void Rays? Blizzard stated all skill levels were having problems against Void Rays ..
|
i dont think the people advocating lower-level players getting their balance see the ramifications this has on top-tier players...
nerfing voidrays makes it a less viable option in top-tier therefore making every game the same.. rush fast collosus instead of mixing it up... every startegy you take away from the protoss means less excitement and functionality..... if protoss can't have voidrays i say cloak banshees should go too.. now that we're at it we should jsut have a mass ground game (no air) and u can just go mass tank marauder every game.. yeah.. very low-tier balanced .. yay and fun right?
|
On May 21 2010 20:08 snpnx wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2010 19:56 Necrosjef wrote:On May 21 2010 19:52 snpnx wrote:On May 21 2010 18:43 okrane wrote:
More importantly: if you are a 1000 rating silver league player, rocking a whopping 45APM, please abstain yourself from your retarded "this is OP/UP" forum posts, and suggestions about the game. If this is all we provide to blizzard as feedback, then we shouldnt be surprised about the way the game is advancing. One thing is clear, if a game-designer is listening to fans, the game is going down-hill: look at WoW.
That is wrong. A lot of people here tend to forget that it's the aim of Blizzard (and a logical aim at that one) to make the game balanced at all skill levels. While this is most certainly almost impossible, Blizzard needs feedback as much from low-level players as they need it from High-Level players. I also do not think that the guys at Blizz are stupid enough to see a post where someone playing in Silver League says "OMG, Colossi to be destroyed by AA is totally unfair, REMOVE!" and they will head this direction. But surely, if a lot of Silver League Players complain about a certain strategy/unit/whatever being WAY to OP in their skill level, that is something Blizz will want to do something about. And I know that competetive thinking players tend to forget the lower skill levels, since I myself have the problem, but you need to remember that overall playability has to be given first, otherwise a lot of new players won't like the game, and it will lead to less popularity and maybe less talent since there are less people playing. I also think that a lot of people seeing the Patch-Notes and instantly writing OMG BAAAAAAD or OMG OP! don't realize that things need to be put to test before you can say anything. SC2 has way too many dependencies as that you can decide after 5 mins of reading a patch note that it is good or bad. The guys doing the patches know full well that certain things might not work out the way they intended, so they will just patch again. This instant whining or praising is always a little funny to me. Just stop talking. I don't want to be mean but if its balanced in Plat then its balanced in all other skill levels too. There is no 2 tier balance. This is not true, Platinum Players might be capable of doing way more precise timings, better micro and macro and faster adaption to a situation compared to a lower level player. And there will always be some strategies which are easier to execute than to stop, which doesn't make them overpowered per se (since for example if you can stop them, you might be at a huge advantage) but it'll make a difference if you're in a silver league match with one player executing the strat and one player trying to defend or in a platinum league match. If the strategy forgives more errors by the executing player than by the defending one, in platinum play-levels, this will not be so much of a big deal, as players in general will make a lot less errors, but in silverleague, this strategy can be maybe too hard to stop for the defending player. I don't know if I did well enough with the example, but I think you can get the gist of what I'm trying to say.
well then you have to practice at defending.
theyre not going to cater to terrible players because its silly to. clearly rushing to dark templar is easier than getting proper engineering bay timing while expanding at the same time. but you either deal with it or get out.
you have to pick one. either practice enough to deal with stuff or dont.
|
Where is the in game example of blizzard balancing for noobs, anyway? Void Rays? Blizzard stated all skill levels were having problems against Void Rays ..
And In the Last "State of the Game"-podcast Cauthon Luck ranted pretty strongly about his Problems with Void Rays. Just to throw in a Pro Name 
|
would you rather have a game where its 50% win ratios for every matchup that exists for 10 million silver players and at the same time have 40% terran 50% zerg and 10% protoss at the pro scene or the other way around?
how would it feel to know that your favourite race is completely balanced on the bottom but know that if u want to go pro you'll never make it? lol
|
On May 21 2010 19:59 mOnion wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2010 19:54 TeWy wrote:On May 21 2010 19:46 mOnion wrote:
im really digging the "im terrible but i deserve a vote" argument thats popping up because its HILARIOUSLY stupid.
you should balance the game from the top down. if you balance it at the stronger level, then that balance will trickle down. both bad players wont be able to do their respective strats/whatever.
as opposed to making it balanced competitively but ALSO noob friendly which is just too much to try and tackle, its asking too much and is nearly impossible I think. just silly to think about.
if you wanna be good then get good, otherwise dont expect to get the most out of the game with no effort But the most terrible players are also the most sincere, while the best players are among the most biased. Of course the high level balance should be a priority, but it's not by asking the pro zerg and pro terran what they think of the ZvT MU that you will find who is ahead in this MU. You need neutral players and observers, and with a few exceptions these people can only be Blizzard employees. uh what? the most terrible players are the ones posting the "omg imba qq halp" threads that have been closed over and over while the best players have been posting the well thought out and hyper discussed threads with actual content.
Idk if you read the most recent Programers interviews, but for instance pro Zergs say that Terran is on good hands unbeatable and that the the roach's supply change make it almost impossible for Zerg to beat Terran mech, while on the other hands Terrans believe that muta harass transitionning into mass expands and zerglings/banelings is an unbeatable strat and that banelings should be nerfed.
Both camps will use their wide knowledge of the game to complexify their opinions and make it seems like the most plausible one, but in the end, these players are only complaining about strats that they want to beat more easily.
On the other hand truely bad players will lose to some ridiculous stuffs but wouldn't say it is imba because they know how they suck. Sure a couple of arrogant noobs might try to express their opinions but statistically the casual players are the least likely to care about the balance of the game. The irony of the story is thar the vast majority of the players who do care about the balance wants it to be on their side, no one really gives a **** about perfect balance except neutral spectators/people.
|
blizzard is clearly reading these forums WAAAY TOO MUCH
my thoughts from the official patch thread:
the only problem with the blizzards patching method that i see is that they listen to the community TOO MUCH. they dont let the game grow and develop cause they patch stuff the moment some noob cries imbalance cause he lost due to his shitty skills and now wants some way to help mend his ego.
|
On May 21 2010 19:49 jtype wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2010 19:47 IdrA wrote: it seems incredibly stupid to me to be hung up on winning and at the same time demand that blizzard make the game easier for you. I think that pretty much sums it up really. You can't have it both ways. @Bane_ - It's not elitism; it's game development logic.
I just question the assertion that all players beyond a certain ratings threshold will have a valid contribution to make in terms of deciding what is and isn't balanced. Does every 'top' platinum player have a complete grasp of the game, an ability to see past their own race and their own limits as a player to assess whether a unit/strategy is imbalanced? I'm not convinced. Equally so, someone could be mired down in the silver or bronze divisions and be a mechanically dreadful player, yet due to watching endless replays and tournament level matches they might have a far more complete understanding of the game than those in the higher divisions.
Blizzard are perfectly capable of filtering through everyone's feedback and making the changes they deem best for the game, it may not always be exactly in line what the esports community want, but perhaps the community are not always best placed to assess what impacts any changes will have (2 supply roaches being labelled an 'overnerf' for example...Artosis's doom and gloom article and talk of pros jumping ship to other races in a nice knee jerk reaction, yet when it comes down to it the zerg are still enjoying a huge presence in the final stages of recent tournaments).
"Low Level Balance Issues AREN'T balance issues. They are skill/experience/knowledge issues."
You could say that the exact same problem affects high level balance issues also. All through the beta people have seemed to think they are much further along in their understanding of the game than they really are, turning their intellect towards trying to find ways to change 'the' game as opposed to doing their utmost to change 'their' game to try and surmount the challenges they face.
|
On May 21 2010 20:15 Paramore wrote:
would you rather have a game where its 50% win ratios for every matchup that exists for 10 million silver players and at the same time have 40% terran 50% zerg and 10% protoss at the pro scene or the other way around?
how would it feel to know that your favourite race is completely balanced on the bottom but know that if u want to go pro you'll never make it? lol
I would like for the player who plays better to win regardless of which race they pick.
I'm pretty sure that's what blizzard wants too
|
It's worth remembering that SC2 1v1s on the ladder are competitive. You need to do whatever you can to win. If you feel that the game isn't fun/balanced at low levels, you need to find a way to deal with it. This is the nature of competition.
Being a good player isn't just about having less skill (multi-tasking, apm, reactions, micro, macro), it's also about your attitude, emotional strength, experience, knowledge too. What a low-level player perceives as an imbalance may not be. Losing to a DT rush, a low-level player might think, "man, how do I deal with these DTs in my base, they just kill everything and can avoid my scans by splitting up/running away?". That player may never learn to counter them effectively, always thinking them imbalanced. How could Blizzard possibly balance a game for that mentality? A higher-level player would instead think, "how can I tell when DTs are coming? How can I prepare for them? What can I do to prevent the toss from getting them in the first place?"
So you can see how what people perceive as imbalance is just a lack of knowledge, experience or the wrong mentality.
|
On May 21 2010 20:20 TeWy wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2010 19:59 mOnion wrote:On May 21 2010 19:54 TeWy wrote:On May 21 2010 19:46 mOnion wrote:
im really digging the "im terrible but i deserve a vote" argument thats popping up because its HILARIOUSLY stupid.
you should balance the game from the top down. if you balance it at the stronger level, then that balance will trickle down. both bad players wont be able to do their respective strats/whatever.
as opposed to making it balanced competitively but ALSO noob friendly which is just too much to try and tackle, its asking too much and is nearly impossible I think. just silly to think about.
if you wanna be good then get good, otherwise dont expect to get the most out of the game with no effort But the most terrible players are also the most sincere, while the best players are among the most biased. Of course the high level balance should be a priority, but it's not by asking the pro zerg and pro terran what they think of the ZvT MU that you will find who is ahead in this MU. You need neutral players and observers, and with a few exceptions these people can only be Blizzard employees. uh what? the most terrible players are the ones posting the "omg imba qq halp" threads that have been closed over and over while the best players have been posting the well thought out and hyper discussed threads with actual content. Idk if you read the most recent Programers interviews, but for instance pro Zergs say that Terran is on good hands unbeatable and that the the roach's supply change make it almost impossible for Zerg to beat Terran mech, while on the other hands Terrans believe that muta harass transitionning into mass expands and zerglings/banelings is an unbeatable strat and that banelings should be nerfed. Both camps will use their wide knowledge of the game to complexify their opinions and make it seems like the most plausible one, but in the end, these players are only complaining about strats that they want to beat more easily. On the other hand truely bad players will lose to some ridiculous stuffs but wouldn't say it is imba because they know how they suck. Sure a couple of arrogant noobs might try to express their opinions but statistically the casual players are the least likely to care about the balance of the game. The irony of the story is thar the vast majority of the players who do care about the balance wants it to be on their side, no one really gives a **** about perfect balance except neutral spectators/people.
your one example really cant compare to the, literally, hundreds that i have.
and your assumption that people only care about their race is also pretty farfetch'd, as if there arent random players or people who actually care.
|
haha the amount of QQ after every patch is unbelievable. You guys should just chill, if u're right about the balance it will get fixed eventually, if u're wrong then we're on the right path aren't we :D. I, for one will open a new bottle of champagne to never have to dedicate 100% of my efforts in tvp to counter those damn lazers. Protosses will have to starts proxying gateways 100% of the time now, as opposed to the standard 33/33/33 cannon gateway voidray rush they were doing before :D will make it alot easier to prepare against!
|
On May 21 2010 20:15 Doppelganger wrote:Show nested quote +Where is the in game example of blizzard balancing for noobs, anyway? Void Rays? Blizzard stated all skill levels were having problems against Void Rays .. And In the Last "State of the Game"-podcast Cauthon Luck ranted pretty strongly about his Problems with Void Rays. Just to throw in a Pro Name
maka in his interview also said that VR's are broken
|
If they truly read the forums and care about the fans, then they would implement chat channels.
Chat channels is a must!!!!!!
|
Clearly blizzard is doing it wrong...
Democracy is not always the best solution, listening to random threads and imbalance whining, nerf petitions isn't going to get the game better but the opposite.
Protoss is getting too weak, because patch after patch every unit is being nerfed.
Terran is overly strong already but is being buffed more and more.
Now zerg gained some new abilities, but the effect of them will most likely result in Z>P imbalance but won't address directly ZvT issues.
So at the end of the day T>Z>P, period.
|
On May 21 2010 20:20 Bane_ wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2010 19:49 jtype wrote:On May 21 2010 19:47 IdrA wrote: it seems incredibly stupid to me to be hung up on winning and at the same time demand that blizzard make the game easier for you. I think that pretty much sums it up really. You can't have it both ways. @Bane_ - It's not elitism; it's game development logic. I just question the assertion that all players beyond a certain ratings threshold will have a valid contribution to make in terms of deciding what is and isn't balanced. Does every 'top' platinum player have a complete grasp of the game, an ability to see past their own race and their own limits as a player to assess whether a unit/strategy is imbalanced? I'm not convinced.
No, they don't necessarily have more valid opinions on the subject. But, as I said earlier, top level players are the ones who are the most capable of exploiting imbalances in the game and therefore should be the most catered for when considering such balance.
Also, do you honestly think that if you took a sample of copper league players and plat league players, you would find more accurate knowledge and more experience about the game in the copper league? Quite the opposite. The amount of games that the top level players have to play to maintain their skill and rank have to count for something.
|
I think, what blizz did with terran was great! The only problem is, that the other races (P and Z, lol) need to be on that power level too.
Terran is the most fun race to play imho, so maybe making Z and P stronger (and zerg still more diverse) in the right way would have the same effect...
Don't nerf T, buff Z and P!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
