EPTOfficial State of the Game Podcast Thread - Page 154
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
DISHU
United Kingdom348 Posts
| ||
|
RogerChillingworth
Chad3074 Posts
On October 31 2010 21:37 DISHU wrote: CHILL on the next Sotg episode !! do it Jp do it now. uhhhh why? Rofl Much rather see a pro with a good personality | ||
|
Endorsed
Netherlands1221 Posts
| ||
|
Slasher
United States1095 Posts
| ||
|
AyJay
1515 Posts
Why the hell you guys are so mad that blizzard tries to balance team games, add new features such as master and grandmaster to the game? Sure you don't care you 1v1 all the time, but you need to realize there is thousand people who don't really play 1v1, maybe they enjoy 2v2 with their buddys, maybe they just hit diamond and want to see if they keep progressing while playing. Yes starcraft2 balance focus should be on 1v1 and Blizzard needs to implement Bnet functions we all want, but don't forget there are other people who Blizzard needs to cater to. | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
On October 31 2010 21:59 Endorsed wrote: By the way Incontrol, in one of the podcasts you said marauders only lose 10 health when they stim. But it's 25 HP It's 20hp. | ||
|
Hasire
United States125 Posts
On November 01 2010 00:57 AyJay wrote: Also I didn't commented last week, so I'll say now: Why the hell you guys are so mad that blizzard tries to balance team games, add new features such as master and grandmaster to the game? Sure you don't care you 1v1 all the time, but you need to realize there is thousand people who don't really play 1v1, maybe they enjoy 2v2 with their buddys, maybe they just hit diamond and want to see if they keep progressing while playing. Yes starcraft2 balance focus should be on 1v1 and Blizzard needs to implement Bnet functions we all want, but don't forget there are other people who Blizzard needs to cater to. The main reason is what happened to the reaper: In blizzards eyes the unit was too strong in 2+v2+, so instead of changing the maps in a way that would cater less to reapers they instead destroyed the entire viability of reapers in 1v1. You can't have an esport game that has its balance screwed with by a casual style of play. | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
| ||
|
Mastermind
Canada7096 Posts
On November 01 2010 01:20 Hasire wrote: The main reason is what happened to the reaper: In blizzards eyes the unit was too strong in 2+v2+, so instead of changing the maps in a way that would cater less to reapers they instead destroyed the entire viability of reapers in 1v1. You can't have an esport game that has its balance screwed with by a casual style of play. How so? You provide no justification for your claim. Just because the reapers is near useless in 1v1, doesnt hurt sc2 as an esport. The scout is useless in bw and bw is a fine esport. As long as sc2 remains fun and challenging it will remain a good esport. Blizzard has to make changes for casual levels of play because that is where most of their profit will be coming from. They have to keep the bulk of their customers happy in order to sell more copies and to keep fans buying future games. To expect anything else is naive. | ||
|
Hasire
United States125 Posts
On November 01 2010 01:36 Mastermind wrote: How so? You provide no justification for your claim. Just because the reapers is near useless in 1v1, doesnt hurt sc2 as an esport. The scout is useless in bw and bw is a fine esport. As long as sc2 remains fun and challenging it will remain a good esport. Blizzard has to make changes for casual levels of play because that is where most of their profit will be coming from. They have to keep the bulk of their customers happy in order to sell more copies and to keep fans buying future games. To expect anything else is naive. The point is: Which is a better change for the game overall: Ruin a unit that had a niche opening in 1v1 that was falling out of popularity, or change 4 maps so that the unit wasn't as abusable, but still had viability. The Scout wasn't "made bad" because it was too good in 2v2 games in BW, it just had poor designe. The reaper was specifically made bad because it was too good in team games in SC2. The units aren't comparable. | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
On November 01 2010 01:47 Hasire wrote: The point is: Which is a better change for the game overall: Ruin a unit that had a niche opening in 1v1 that was falling out of popularity, or change 4 maps so that the unit wasn't as abusable, but still had viability. First point is incorrect, reapers shut down the FE option for Zerg, which was killing them. While hellion openers were becoming more common, the threat of the reaper opening nevertheless meant Zerg could not FE. Similar to how the mere threat of cloaked banshees necessitates a robo for P in PvT, despite cloaked banshees being rare. Second point is also incorrect because maps were not the cause of reaper OPness. The Scout wasn't "made bad" because it was too good in 2v2 games in BW, it just had poor designe. The reaper was specifically made bad because it was too good in team games in SC2. The units aren't comparable. The reaper had/has a worse design than the scout ever did. It was made bad because it was too good in early game in both 1v1 and team games. The only mistake Blizzard made was not removing the stupid thing altogether. | ||
|
NoobSkills
United States1600 Posts
On November 01 2010 01:53 Yaotzin wrote: First point is incorrect, reapers shut down the FE option for Zerg, which was killing them. While hellion openers were becoming more common, the threat of the reaper opening nevertheless meant Zerg could not FE. Similar to how the mere threat of cloaked banshees necessitates a robo for P in PvT, despite cloaked banshees being rare. Second point is also incorrect because maps were not the cause of reaper OPness. The reaper had/has a worse design than the scout ever did. It was made bad because it was too good in early game in both 1v1 and team games. The only mistake Blizzard made was not removing the stupid thing altogether. Lol even before they FIRST patched the reaper people were stopping using them on some maps because zergs had learned to defend against them with ease. Then after that still before the first patch zergs found out that an extra queen would almost 100% negate reapers. Doing anything for a 2v2 affects 1v1 if you change something about that unit. Instead Blizzard should have realized that everyone who plays 2v2 all the time is trash and realized that they didn't know the proper counters to ling/reaper. I play protoss with no problems at HIGH diamond 2v2. I only play 2v2 for an amusing time and I've never had problems with reaper ling rushes. | ||
|
AyJay
1515 Posts
On November 01 2010 01:20 Hasire wrote: The main reason is what happened to the reaper: In blizzards eyes the unit was too strong in 2+v2+, so instead of changing the maps in a way that would cater less to reapers they instead destroyed the entire viability of reapers in 1v1. You can't have an esport game that has its balance screwed with by a casual style of play. SO how about make 1v1 maps that make reapers strong? Your logic is stupid. Blizzard stated time by time they want game to be fairly balanced at all levels, maps and game modes. Edit: to respond post above me: Blizzard said that almost every game in team games were speedling/reaper combination and they were trashing everyone and had big win rate. That's the same as if Blizzard would make reaper build time 30 seconds roach range back to 3 and tell zerg players "learn to counter this strategy". Top players might barely counter but people below pro would get trashed and ruin their gaming experience. | ||
|
OutlaW-
Czech Republic5053 Posts
Same with the scout, or a valkyrie.. Useful in some situations. Blizzard already said that as long as a unit will be used in 1/100 games, it's fine. | ||
|
AyJay
1515 Posts
Or my favorite example when day9 did macro oriented PvT daily. He was trashed and flamed, people said that protoss needs colossus early game. Now in GSL/Blizzcon we can see pros doing something like 1 gate into expo that was thought to be impossible a month ago. | ||
|
KevinIX
United States2472 Posts
On November 01 2010 07:49 AyJay wrote: And I also want people to shut with their "X unit" or "Y strategy" is useless. I remember day9 daily around mid July where he was asked "how to make reapers useful" he replied "I think people will start using it as a low cost-high training time unit". Week later Mass reaper strategy is seen at day9 sc2 launch party. Few weeks later Reaper trash ladder and Morrow using that strategy to win IEM. Or my favorite example when day9 did macro oriented PvT daily. He was trashed and flamed, people said that protoss needs colossus early game. Now in GSL/Blizzcon we can see pros doing something like 1 gate into expo that was thought to be impossible a month ago. Hmm...you're right. The moral of the story: Day9 is a time-traveler. | ||
|
SmoKim
Denmark10305 Posts
On October 31 2010 21:40 RogerChillingworth wrote: uhhhh why? Rofl Much rather see a pro with a good personality Chill > Pro's im with DISHU, if Kennight can be on(without mic) so can CHILL <3 | ||
|
Scodia
United Kingdom588 Posts
 | ||
|
Mellotron
United States329 Posts
On October 31 2010 21:40 RogerChillingworth wrote: uhhhh why? Rofl Much rather see a pro with a good personality What? No way, Chill is the best of the best. I dont think ive ever heard him say anything that wasnt intelligent and or funny. I dont get why people hate him sometimes. | ||
|
AyJay
1515 Posts
1) Chill thinks warpgate cooldowns on all units are same 2) Chill believes carrier doesn't start with 4 interceptors 3) Chill thinks that baneling is a light unit 4) Chill didn't knew you could emp orbital command 5) Chill fell for fake patch 1.1 notes ... and so on. | ||
| ||
