|
On April 06 2011 15:33 dcemuser wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2011 15:09 eviltomahawk wrote:On April 06 2011 15:00 Bosu wrote:On April 06 2011 14:50 1800STFU wrote:
Idra had alot of really good points....
I dont think the game is broken at all, but was really hoping you'd explore that further. I do think zerg is by far the hardest to play though. Some 30 apm champion toss can 4 gate you and you have to scramble to scout it and make every larva count to put together the proper defense.
I do think zerg is played a bit improperly though....too drone heavy and predictable alot of times. Zerg can reproduce an army pretty much out of nowhere and I think surprises like that need to be explored more. July does this quite a bit and that more aggressive style is something Zerg NEEDS to do more often to prevent 2base turtle deathballs.
Uhh.. 2 base turtle death balls are why zergs like Idra have been so reluctant to play very aggressively. Although balance discussion is quite important to the community, I don't think it should be stressed upon too much. IMO, Blizzard rushing in to change stats based in the whim of the community can be just as bad as Blizzard taking inaction. Matchups can become imbalanced due to new strategies, yet the imbalance can easily swing the other way due to changes in the metagame, not just changes in balance. Of course, it would be damaging to the game if Blizzard waits too long to fix imbalances. However, it can also be damaging and volatile if Blizzard too often introduces too many balance "fixes" that only create more unintended problems. IMO, it's easier to look at one's own play and fix that instead of coercing balance changes that may dissatisfy players of the other 2 races. Balance discussion should still exist, but done in strict moderation since it's effects are greatly exaggerated. Exactly. Brood War has been out for over a decade, and that game still isn't completely "figured out". If Blizzard had come into Brood War in 2001 and gave Terran huge buffs, the game would be completely worthless today because it took multiple years for Terrans to figure out how to be competitive.
Actually, Blizzard did buff Terran in their famous patch 1.08. Released in 2001, it was their last official balance patch, with the rest of their patches up until 1.16.1 being non-balance tweaks.
+ Show Spoiler +TERRAN:
Valkyrie:
- Damage increase to 6 per missile.
- Acceleration and velocity increased slightly.
- Build time decreased.
Science Facility:
- Build time decreased.
- Irradiate research cost increased to 200 minerals, 200 gas.
- Yamato Cannon research cost decreased to 100 minerals, 100 gas.
Missile Turret:
- Decreased cost to 75 minerals.
Factory:
- Charon Missile Booster research cost decreased to 100 minerals, 100 gas.
Dropship:
- Increased speed.
Goliath:
- Increased ground attack range.
Battle Cruiser:
- Build time decreased.
- Supply cost decreased to 6.
However, I don't think the patched changed things overnight. Boxer was already in the middle of redefining Terran play by the time the patch was released, and the patch only helped to speed up the metagame stabilization by a bit. Nevertheless, I think it was mainly the players themselves, not the balance patch, that created the BW that we all come to love. Even if 1.08 wasn't released, players would still find a way to stabilize the metagame even with these supposed imbalances.
|
On April 06 2011 15:45 nodule wrote:
Doesn't day9 play random? I don't see how he would be biased against "helping" zerg. He's legit.
I play random too, but at the same time I favor some races more than others. Same could be for Day9
|
I miss the multi-person shows. Get Greg a pillar spot and make it 5 hosts + a guest.
Also the balance debate falls flat without Artosis/Incontrol in there. It should be a show rule that balance can only be discussed when those two are present.
|
On April 06 2011 15:45 eviltomahawk wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2011 15:33 dcemuser wrote:On April 06 2011 15:09 eviltomahawk wrote:On April 06 2011 15:00 Bosu wrote:On April 06 2011 14:50 1800STFU wrote:
Idra had alot of really good points....
I dont think the game is broken at all, but was really hoping you'd explore that further. I do think zerg is by far the hardest to play though. Some 30 apm champion toss can 4 gate you and you have to scramble to scout it and make every larva count to put together the proper defense.
I do think zerg is played a bit improperly though....too drone heavy and predictable alot of times. Zerg can reproduce an army pretty much out of nowhere and I think surprises like that need to be explored more. July does this quite a bit and that more aggressive style is something Zerg NEEDS to do more often to prevent 2base turtle deathballs.
Uhh.. 2 base turtle death balls are why zergs like Idra have been so reluctant to play very aggressively. Although balance discussion is quite important to the community, I don't think it should be stressed upon too much. IMO, Blizzard rushing in to change stats based in the whim of the community can be just as bad as Blizzard taking inaction. Matchups can become imbalanced due to new strategies, yet the imbalance can easily swing the other way due to changes in the metagame, not just changes in balance. Of course, it would be damaging to the game if Blizzard waits too long to fix imbalances. However, it can also be damaging and volatile if Blizzard too often introduces too many balance "fixes" that only create more unintended problems. IMO, it's easier to look at one's own play and fix that instead of coercing balance changes that may dissatisfy players of the other 2 races. Balance discussion should still exist, but done in strict moderation since it's effects are greatly exaggerated. Exactly. Brood War has been out for over a decade, and that game still isn't completely "figured out". If Blizzard had come into Brood War in 2001 and gave Terran huge buffs, the game would be completely worthless today because it took multiple years for Terrans to figure out how to be competitive. Actually, Blizzard did buff Terran in their famous patch 1.08. Released in 2001, it was their last official balance patch, with the rest of their patches up until 1.16.1 being non-balance tweaks. + Show Spoiler +TERRAN:
Valkyrie:
- Damage increase to 6 per missile.
- Acceleration and velocity increased slightly.
- Build time decreased.
Science Facility:
- Build time decreased.
- Irradiate research cost increased to 200 minerals, 200 gas.
- Yamato Cannon research cost decreased to 100 minerals, 100 gas.
Missile Turret:
- Decreased cost to 75 minerals.
Factory:
- Charon Missile Booster research cost decreased to 100 minerals, 100 gas.
Dropship:
- Increased speed.
Goliath:
- Increased ground attack range.
Battle Cruiser:
- Build time decreased.
- Supply cost decreased to 6. However, I don't think the patched changed things overnight. Boxer was already in the middle of redefining Terran play by the time the patch was released, and the patch only helped to speed up the metagame stabilization by a bit. Nevertheless, I think it was mainly the players themselves, not the balance patch, that created the BW that we all come to love. Even if 1.08 wasn't released, players would still find a way to stabilize the metagame even with these supposed imbalances.
Yeah, I removed that statement because I realized the date was wrong. I was more thinking around late 2001, early 2002, post-1.08-era.
And I agree with your statement completely, but... I mean there were a few things that were pretty big (Spawning Pool at 150 minerals... gotta love them 4-pools).
|
LOL i'm barely 20 min in and Day9 & IdrA are so funny together xD
god i fucking love this show
|
On April 06 2011 15:40 GwSC wrote:
Tyler/Day9 have the mindset that talk of imbalance is silly, which is understandable given how young the game is. What I find strange is this feeling of "Zergs need to experiment and find ways to deal with strategy issues instead of looking toward imbalance" that I get from Tyler/Day9's comments.
Doesn't the fact that it almost always falls back on Zerg struggling to deal with the newest powerful T/P strategy point to some fundamental problems with the game? I don't claim to understand the game at anything near the level that they do, but it doesn't seem like this should be the case as often as it is.
Considering that the latest patch, which contained balance changes for Zerg, has been out for less than a few weeks, it's not even a matter of the game being young. Zergs are doing something that Tyler/Day9 may well find quite distasteful: acting like they've got SC 2 completely figured out, when BW wasn't (and arguably still isn't) completely figured out after almost ten years.
Zergs have certainly looked "fragile" in many of the recent tournaments. But whether this is because of fundamental balance issues, as IdrA contends, or because of the way Zergs have chosen to play, is something that most pros seem to simply agree to disagree on.
|
I feel dumb but it's morning and I can't figure it out. How to download an audio only version?
|
On April 06 2011 15:51 Azarkon wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2011 15:40 GwSC wrote:
Tyler/Day9 have the mindset that talk of imbalance is silly, which is understandable given how young the game is. What I find strange is this feeling of "Zergs need to experiment and find ways to deal with strategy issues instead of looking toward imbalance" that I get from Tyler/Day9's comments.
Doesn't the fact that it almost always falls back on Zerg struggling to deal with the newest powerful T/P strategy point to some fundamental problems with the game? I don't claim to understand the game at anything near the level that they do, but it doesn't seem like this should be the case as often as it is. Considering that the latest patch, which contained balance changes for Zerg, has been out for less than a few weeks, it's not even a matter of the game being young. Zergs are doing something that Tyler/Day9 may well find quite distasteful: acting like they've got SC 2 completely figured out, when BW wasn't (and arguably still isn't) completely figured out after almost ten years.
Just out of curiousity. How can a game not be figured out after 10 years?`i call that bullshit. Its a freaking game and not science. Everyone has all available information in front of him (the game itself). How can it be hard to look for certain ways of playing? I cant unterstand that as a relativly new player in rts games. It just seems that all players are to stupid to think or I am missing something? For example Now Zerg. There cant be some new form of play for Zerg. Thats just not possible. I cant understand that.
|
On April 06 2011 15:54 vyyye wrote:I feel dumb but it's morning and I can't figure it out. How to download an audio only version?
JP usealy uploads a MP3 version with it, but if i got it correct he is of to bed atm
|
Why are people assuming that SC2 has been made by some Entity and that by definition it is perfect ?
Since the release zerg has been UP, with small 2 week timing (before 2rax), when T couldn't play a macro game vs Zerg nor pressure.
Every single unit has been used, drops, nyduses, Hive tech, rushes, burrow, bling drops, infestors, parasites...
Larger maps, which were stated to be the main problem are now implemented, they didn't help...
I don't know what else are we waiting for...any new tactics that pop up will quickly be dealt with (such as some weird timings, or july's aggressive style which won't work soon i am sure of it....T/P are so good defensively).
SC2 needs work...so stop saying stuff about figuring it out or how it's a new game etc...
|
On April 06 2011 15:51 Azarkon wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2011 15:40 GwSC wrote:
Tyler/Day9 have the mindset that talk of imbalance is silly, which is understandable given how young the game is. What I find strange is this feeling of "Zergs need to experiment and find ways to deal with strategy issues instead of looking toward imbalance" that I get from Tyler/Day9's comments.
Doesn't the fact that it almost always falls back on Zerg struggling to deal with the newest powerful T/P strategy point to some fundamental problems with the game? I don't claim to understand the game at anything near the level that they do, but it doesn't seem like this should be the case as often as it is. Considering that the latest patch, which contained balance changes for Zerg, has been out for less than a few weeks, it's not even a matter of the game being young. Zergs are doing something that Tyler/Day9 may well find quite distasteful: acting like they've got SC 2 completely figured out, when BW wasn't (and arguably still isn't) completely figured out after almost ten years. Zergs have certainly looked "fragile" in many of the recent tournaments. But whether this is because of fundamental balance issues, as IdrA contends, or because of the way Zergs have chosen to play, is something that most pros seem to simply agree to disagree on.
It's interesting that people keep repeating zergs need to figure stuff out still, as if they were some sort of third world country that can't get their act together as opposed to T/P. The game may be young, but the fact is that most zerg pros keep running into brick walls in terms keeping up with terrans and protoss at the highest levels. It's kinda hard to deny that zerg needs something at this point.
Personally, I find zerg opening options severely limited. It's like in every game you are stuck in a sluggish slow tech path that does not allow for much early creativity. At least not much effective early creativity.
|
On April 06 2011 16:05 Panicc wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2011 15:51 Azarkon wrote:On April 06 2011 15:40 GwSC wrote:
Tyler/Day9 have the mindset that talk of imbalance is silly, which is understandable given how young the game is. What I find strange is this feeling of "Zergs need to experiment and find ways to deal with strategy issues instead of looking toward imbalance" that I get from Tyler/Day9's comments.
Doesn't the fact that it almost always falls back on Zerg struggling to deal with the newest powerful T/P strategy point to some fundamental problems with the game? I don't claim to understand the game at anything near the level that they do, but it doesn't seem like this should be the case as often as it is. Considering that the latest patch, which contained balance changes for Zerg, has been out for less than a few weeks, it's not even a matter of the game being young. Zergs are doing something that Tyler/Day9 may well find quite distasteful: acting like they've got SC 2 completely figured out, when BW wasn't (and arguably still isn't) completely figured out after almost ten years. Just out of curiousity. How can a game not be figured out after 10 years?`i call that bullshit. Its a freaking game and not science. Everyone has all available information in front of him (the game itself). How can it be hard to look for certain ways of playing? I cant unterstand that as a relativly new player in rts games. It just seems that all players are to stupid to think or I am missing something? For example Now Zerg. There cant be some new form of play for Zerg. Thats just not possible. I cant understand that.
Oh come on. It isn't like a human mind can "figure out" chess perfectly. You can't say, "There are only 16 pieces!" It's a dynamic, free flowing game. If you figured out tic-tac-toe, that's great. SC2 isn't the same thing.
|
On April 06 2011 16:05 Panicc wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2011 15:51 Azarkon wrote:On April 06 2011 15:40 GwSC wrote:
Tyler/Day9 have the mindset that talk of imbalance is silly, which is understandable given how young the game is. What I find strange is this feeling of "Zergs need to experiment and find ways to deal with strategy issues instead of looking toward imbalance" that I get from Tyler/Day9's comments.
Doesn't the fact that it almost always falls back on Zerg struggling to deal with the newest powerful T/P strategy point to some fundamental problems with the game? I don't claim to understand the game at anything near the level that they do, but it doesn't seem like this should be the case as often as it is. Considering that the latest patch, which contained balance changes for Zerg, has been out for less than a few weeks, it's not even a matter of the game being young. Zergs are doing something that Tyler/Day9 may well find quite distasteful: acting like they've got SC 2 completely figured out, when BW wasn't (and arguably still isn't) completely figured out after almost ten years. Just out of curiousity. How can a game not be figured out after 10 years?`i call that bullshit. Its a freaking game and not science. Everyone has all available information in front of him (the game itself). How can it be hard to look for certain ways of playing? I cant unterstand that as a relativly new player in rts games. It just seems that all players are to stupid to think or I am missing something? For example Now Zerg. There cant be some new form of play for Zerg. Thats just not possible. I cant understand that.
Well, consider Chess, which hasn't been figured out even after hundreds of years...
|
Chess has been figured out.
|
On April 06 2011 16:05 Panicc wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2011 15:51 Azarkon wrote:On April 06 2011 15:40 GwSC wrote:
Tyler/Day9 have the mindset that talk of imbalance is silly, which is understandable given how young the game is. What I find strange is this feeling of "Zergs need to experiment and find ways to deal with strategy issues instead of looking toward imbalance" that I get from Tyler/Day9's comments.
Doesn't the fact that it almost always falls back on Zerg struggling to deal with the newest powerful T/P strategy point to some fundamental problems with the game? I don't claim to understand the game at anything near the level that they do, but it doesn't seem like this should be the case as often as it is. Considering that the latest patch, which contained balance changes for Zerg, has been out for less than a few weeks, it's not even a matter of the game being young. Zergs are doing something that Tyler/Day9 may well find quite distasteful: acting like they've got SC 2 completely figured out, when BW wasn't (and arguably still isn't) completely figured out after almost ten years. Just out of curiousity. How can a game not be figured out after 10 years?`i call that bullshit. Its a freaking game and not science. Everyone has all available information in front of him (the game itself). How can it be hard to look for certain ways of playing? I cant unterstand that as a relativly new player in rts games. It just seems that all players are to stupid to think or I am missing something? For example Now Zerg. There cant be some new form of play for Zerg. Thats just not possible. I cant understand that.
If you're going to call bullshit, do your research first. BW strategies developed and continue to develop on as the game is played. Do you think the dual armory style of flash always existed? What about the bisu build? The meta game is always shifting, and new timings are always being discovered. The units don't change, the building don't change, minerals don't change, vespene gas doesn't change. Just about everything else does
|
On April 06 2011 16:05 Panicc wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2011 15:51 Azarkon wrote:On April 06 2011 15:40 GwSC wrote:
Tyler/Day9 have the mindset that talk of imbalance is silly, which is understandable given how young the game is. What I find strange is this feeling of "Zergs need to experiment and find ways to deal with strategy issues instead of looking toward imbalance" that I get from Tyler/Day9's comments.
Doesn't the fact that it almost always falls back on Zerg struggling to deal with the newest powerful T/P strategy point to some fundamental problems with the game? I don't claim to understand the game at anything near the level that they do, but it doesn't seem like this should be the case as often as it is. Considering that the latest patch, which contained balance changes for Zerg, has been out for less than a few weeks, it's not even a matter of the game being young. Zergs are doing something that Tyler/Day9 may well find quite distasteful: acting like they've got SC 2 completely figured out, when BW wasn't (and arguably still isn't) completely figured out after almost ten years. Just out of curiousity. How can a game not be figured out after 10 years?`i call that bullshit. Its a freaking game and not science. Everyone has all available information in front of him (the game itself). How can it be hard to look for certain ways of playing? I cant unterstand that as a relativly new player in rts games. It just seems that all players are to stupid to think or I am missing something? For example Now Zerg. There cant be some new form of play for Zerg. Thats just not possible. I cant understand that.
Give someone a piece of paper and a pen, tell him you'll take it back in two weeks. Now give another a piece of paper and a pen, tell him you'll take it back in ten years. Or better yet, if I just explained all poker rules to you would you be an expert poker player? All information will be right there in front of you.
Yes, you're missing something. Just watch VODs for a while and you'll see yourself how the game evolves without everything being 100% obvious. All you have is a bunch of rules, it's up to the players to do something with them.
There was a time when Terrans would do anything to go almost pure marauder, only using marines if they were forced to use AA. Yeah, even vs. zerg. Know why? Partly because everyone and their mom thought they were OP (which maybe they were, free concussive shell), partly because Zerg had been going a lot of fucking roach mixes because roaches were terribly OP for a time during beta (2armor 1supply). Ling/muta/bling wasn't always the goto build for zergs either. You hardly ever saw marine/tank vs. lingmutabling, then it became what 99% of TvZ looked like.
The game evolves, and it still has a lot of evolving to do.
|
I just want to mention that Zerg wasn't always looked upon as UP, and was actually considered the best race. This was during Season 2, MLG DC, And some part of Season 3. Remember Avilo's "Terrans have to All in" blog? Although Avilo may not be a pro, he wasn't the only one with this sentiment. Lots of players relied on 2 base timings or 1 base timings to take down zergs because of the (at the time) superior zerg macro game. TLO even switched to Zerg from terran, although he said it was because it fit his style (he said at that time), I can't help but think it was also partially due to the current success of zergs at that time.
The game has evolved from then, and I can't help but feel Zerg hasn't done their best to adapt except for maybe July Zerg. Did you see that guys performance in the world vs korea? Awesome. Also I want to mention day9 talked about getting bases and mainly having the bases for gas, and larva, and having some on mineral patches. This is a style of Zerg we have only seen from July and who knows if people really experiment with it, and go Infestor/Broodlord, or some crazy wacky build then maybe it just might work. It's too primitive to say something is imbalanced, however there maybe things that are abusive, but as you can see blizzard is pretty quick to remove those.
|
|
|
Cheers man! How'd you figure out the link, or find it?
Was trying to but had no idea what I should put into the last three digits (after EP33).
|
I took the long way around haha... dl-ed the FLV file then converted it to an mp3. Here is the dl link to save you some time: http://www.mediafire.com/?918vj0zy88ce5x8
edit: the mp3 link is up now on blip, so my link is for the lazy ppl who don't wanna pause and unpause constantly =D
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
