|
On September 24 2010 09:35 Archerofaiur wrote:
Here is an important question:
Why wouldnt you patch aggressively if you knew you were going to be upending the balance in 18 months anyway?
This.
And then they'll do it AGAIN in another 18 months or so. People are asking for gameplay mechanic overhauls: You're not going to get them without an expansion. People are asking for perfect balance: It doesn't seem likely. If this is Blizzard's first attempt at a "balance" patch, then it seems reasonable to play it like WC3: Just don't play Zerg. When (or if) they get stronger later, switch back. Were I making my living out of playing, that's what seems the reasonable thing to do.
|
On September 24 2010 09:40 MavercK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 09:37 Half wrote:
sadly no patch will fix my issues with the game other than a complete rework of the entire game. which i also dont think will happen. even after expansions i think the diversity of the races will still suffer.
Look I know you probably think your really special, but providing a little bit of evidence or support for your statements generally helps those who are less intelligent to better understand your enlightenment. my post beforehand? as im currently the maker of a starcraft 1 remake mod i've spent alot of time comparing numbers between starcraft 1 and 2.
oh didnt see that.
i think zergs weakness stems from this. They just are not supposed to work like this. starcraft 1 had fairly clearly defined roles for each race.
Terran was not really hardcore turtling but they had very strong defensive capabilities with siege tanks, bunkers and turrets.
Zerg favored mass expanding and fast moving but cheap and weak units.
Protoss had a very hard hitting army. high health. high armor. fairly slow moving army.
in starcraft 2 they seemed to look at
Terran basically had mobility and harassment added to their options.
Protoss i can't really give my opinion they dont seem very different except for faster reinforcement of their armies with forward pylons and warp gates.
Zerg had alot of their mobility removed in exchange for units with alot more hp and armor
Thats a criticism against SC2 design. One I kind of share (but disagree with some key points). But it has very little to do with how the races cannot be balanced.
How does a less mobile zerg with stronger units, a more versatile and more mobile terran, and a protoss that remains similar but with added, options, result in a game that is intrinsically not balance able?
|
Blizzard is no Valve that's for sure...
|
On September 24 2010 09:46 MythicalMage wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 09:35 Archerofaiur wrote:
Here is an important question:
Why wouldnt you patch aggressively if you knew you were going to be upending the balance in 18 months anyway? This. And then they'll do it AGAIN in another 18 months or so. People are asking for gameplay mechanic overhauls: You're not going to get them without an expansion. People are asking for perfect balance: It doesn't seem likely. If this is Blizzard's first attempt at a "balance" patch, then it seems reasonable to play it like WC3: Just don't play Zerg. When (or if) they get stronger later, switch back. Were I making my living out of playing, that's what seems the reasonable thing to do.
Actually, if Blizzard just implemented the "fake" patch notes, a good amount of the early game Z issues would be fixed. No idea if that would actually bring the race to parity, but at least it would actually address many complaints without requiring a completely overhaul of the race.
|
United States11393 Posts
On September 24 2010 09:33 Half wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 09:25 Harem wrote:On September 24 2010 09:12 Half wrote:
I beg to differ. Zerg has no scouting VS terran without suiciding ovies. Thats about it. All game. My race has maphack, and terran can scan whenever, gradually losing them 300 minerals vs Zerg losing 200 minerals and 16 supply for the ovie pincer.
Zerg can be punish easily while terran cannot is also imba. It's not a "difference" it's something that only zerg suffers from, with nothing to balance it out. Terrans can easily find out about zerg mistakes and punish them. Zerg cannot do either.
Weak AA. Again, a weakness no other race has. Ex. Tosses Anti air is not as bad as zergs, but they are amazingly good against ground units lategame. Zerg is weakest on ground and air.
T3 is more necessary for zerg than any other race, and yet it's almost impossible to get. Toss needs T3 to beat bioballs, but we can get it with relative speed. Zerg can't
Your T1 scout example also fails. Why? Because protoss have incredible midgame scouting to balance it out. For zerg there is no such mitigating factor.
Need I go on?
... On September 24 2010 09:10 stormtemplar wrote:
Your T1 scout example also fails. Why? Because protoss have incredible midgame scouting to balance it out. For zerg there is no such mitigating factor.
lollolololol. You mean that isolated statements of fact in disregard of context have absolutely no meaning or relevance, and your previous, incredibly obvious observations you pointed out were a complete waste of time? Ok, thanks. What I was talking about. In terms of Z scouting, Lalush has covered pretty extensively the problems associated with it. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=6220714http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=6315341 I'm not argueing that Z scouting isn't problematic. In fact, Lalush is post is exactly what I was encouraging. I'm saying that saying "Zerg scouting is worse then terran" in itself is not a problem, just the statement of a fact.
Yeah, I know.
I linked it to post something actually constructive that people can actually discuss to find the more underlying problems instead of the typical one-liners that people usually post that serve no purpose and don't fuel discussion at all. (ie stormtemplar's post)
Being able to find the why and then presenting that to Blizzard works much better than just saying X is too ___ and praying that Blizzard fixes that right.
|
On September 24 2010 09:43 MythicalMage wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 09:42 teamsolid wrote:
There isn't a single top Z out there that doesn't bitch about how bad Z is... Cool, Check, Zenio, July, Idra, Dimaga, etc, etc. I hope some of them actually switch to Terran so they can get the wins that they truly deserve, at least until Blizzard makes some real changes. I don't believe Slush has ever mentioned it.
Didn't Slush type "gg terran" when he lost to CauthonLuck at the KOTBH quarterfinals?
|
On September 24 2010 09:45 nodq wrote:
Remeber the "fake" patch notes for 1.1? I could imagine that Blizzard is spreading around those Patch Notes, just to see reactions of casuals and pros to it. And follow the discusions about it to get new/better ideas etc.
We all know that those Fake notes got some interesting changes.
I posted the exact same thought few days ago hah 
|
On September 24 2010 09:46 Half wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 09:40 MavercK wrote:On September 24 2010 09:37 Half wrote:
sadly no patch will fix my issues with the game other than a complete rework of the entire game. which i also dont think will happen. even after expansions i think the diversity of the races will still suffer.
Look I know you probably think your really special, but providing a little bit of evidence or support for your statements generally helps those who are less intelligent to better understand your enlightenment. my post beforehand? as im currently the maker of a starcraft 1 remake mod i've spent alot of time comparing numbers between starcraft 1 and 2. oh didnt see that. Show nested quote +
i think zergs weakness stems from this. They just are not supposed to work like this. starcraft 1 had fairly clearly defined roles for each race.
Terran was not really hardcore turtling but they had very strong defensive capabilities with siege tanks, bunkers and turrets.
Zerg favored mass expanding and fast moving but cheap and weak units.
Protoss had a very hard hitting army. high health. high armor. fairly slow moving army.
in starcraft 2 they seemed to look at
Terran basically had mobility and harassment added to their options.
Protoss i can't really give my opinion they dont seem very different except for faster reinforcement of their armies with forward pylons and warp gates.
Zerg had alot of their mobility removed in exchange for units with alot more hp and armor
Thats a criticism against SC2 design. One I kind of share (but disagree with some key points). But it has very little to do with how the races cannot be balanced.
i just dont think zerg will work without proper diversity.
to sum up my post in 1 sentance
|
Also of note: Zerg still needs more units to win, but units cost more supply, and the supply cap hasn't increased. Zerg can't really "mass" anything, and their racial identity is somewhat lost in the crossfire. This isn't about the roach supply, if anything that fits with everything else. This is about the hydralisk supply, and the mutalisk supply, and the infestor supply and the ultra supply, and pretty much everything else other than the drone and the zergling.
|
On September 24 2010 09:49 MavercK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 09:46 Half wrote:On September 24 2010 09:40 MavercK wrote:On September 24 2010 09:37 Half wrote:
sadly no patch will fix my issues with the game other than a complete rework of the entire game. which i also dont think will happen. even after expansions i think the diversity of the races will still suffer.
Look I know you probably think your really special, but providing a little bit of evidence or support for your statements generally helps those who are less intelligent to better understand your enlightenment. my post beforehand? as im currently the maker of a starcraft 1 remake mod i've spent alot of time comparing numbers between starcraft 1 and 2. oh didnt see that.
i think zergs weakness stems from this. They just are not supposed to work like this. starcraft 1 had fairly clearly defined roles for each race.
Terran was not really hardcore turtling but they had very strong defensive capabilities with siege tanks, bunkers and turrets.
Zerg favored mass expanding and fast moving but cheap and weak units.
Protoss had a very hard hitting army. high health. high armor. fairly slow moving army.
in starcraft 2 they seemed to look at
Terran basically had mobility and harassment added to their options.
Protoss i can't really give my opinion they dont seem very different except for faster reinforcement of their armies with forward pylons and warp gates.
Zerg had alot of their mobility removed in exchange for units with alot more hp and armor
Thats a criticism against SC2 design. One I kind of share (but disagree with some key points). But it has very little to do with how the races cannot be balanced. i just dont think zerg will work without proper diversity. to sum up my post in 1 sentance
What roles do you think zerg is missing that make the mu unbalance able?
I don't mean to be overly argumentative, I'm just saying your making an extremely broad claim, and broad claims usually should come with substantiated evidence.
|
Maybe they should bring back scourge
|
On September 24 2010 09:45 teamsolid wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 09:43 MythicalMage wrote:On September 24 2010 09:42 teamsolid wrote:
There isn't a single top Z out there that doesn't bitch about how bad Z is... Cool, Check, Zenio, July, Idra, Dimaga, etc, etc. I hope some of them actually switch to Terran so they can get the wins that they truly deserve, at least until Blizzard makes some real changes. I don't believe Slush has ever mentioned it. He just hasn't been interviewed about it. If he did, I'm pretty sure he would. He's also at least a step down in skill from those Z's.
I think cauthonluck mentioned in one of the state of the game things about slush raging about terran.
|
On September 24 2010 09:46 MythicalMage wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 09:35 Archerofaiur wrote:
Here is an important question:
Why wouldnt you patch aggressively if you knew you were going to be upending the balance in 18 months anyway? This. And then they'll do it AGAIN in another 18 months or so. People are asking for gameplay mechanic overhauls: You're not going to get them without an expansion. People are asking for perfect balance: It doesn't seem likely. If this is Blizzard's first attempt at a "balance" patch, then it seems reasonable to play it like WC3: Just don't play Zerg. When (or if) they get stronger later, switch back. Were I making my living out of playing, that's what seems the reasonable thing to do.
Except you can't have terranVSprotoss-only tournaments and expect spectators and sponsors to stay happy. No spectators and no sponsors means SC2 would die in the esports scene regardless of how much money blizzard pours into it. Blizzard's rich but not that rich.
|
On September 24 2010 09:49 Pekkz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 09:45 nodq wrote:
Remeber the "fake" patch notes for 1.1? I could imagine that Blizzard is spreading around those Patch Notes, just to see reactions of casuals and pros to it. And follow the discusions about it to get new/better ideas etc.
We all know that those Fake notes got some interesting changes. I posted the exact same thought few days ago hah
Yeh because it makes actually total sense to me. TO help Zerg, Blizzard need to do some BIG changes, to nerf some build times and dmg from tank does not help the Zerg race. So, doing such Big Changes like we saw in those Fake Patch Notes, can't be done in 4-8 Weeks. They have to be WELL done and Blizz has to think about it and test it really good before releasing such stuff.
|
On September 24 2010 09:47 teamsolid wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 09:46 MythicalMage wrote:On September 24 2010 09:35 Archerofaiur wrote:
Here is an important question:
Why wouldnt you patch aggressively if you knew you were going to be upending the balance in 18 months anyway? This. And then they'll do it AGAIN in another 18 months or so. People are asking for gameplay mechanic overhauls: You're not going to get them without an expansion. People are asking for perfect balance: It doesn't seem likely. If this is Blizzard's first attempt at a "balance" patch, then it seems reasonable to play it like WC3: Just don't play Zerg. When (or if) they get stronger later, switch back. Were I making my living out of playing, that's what seems the reasonable thing to do. Actually, if Blizzard just implemented the "fake" patch notes, a good amount of the early game Z issues would be fixed. No idea if that would actually bring the race to parity, but at least it would actually address many complaints without requiring a completely overhaul of the race.
I'm not going to try to play Blizzard, because I don't have their resources at hand. They go through numerous in-house builds and they go through tons of data. What I WOULD like to see would be something like the WoW PTR, just to see the direction they're going. (I woudln't want to be a part of it, of course.)
|
Personally, I think that Zerg is missing a stealthed unit that can strike fear into your Terran/Protoss opponent. Entire midgame pushes were nullified in BW by Lurkers if you didn't have an observer out. Terran had to scout and actively prepare their armies for Lurkers.
Now there is no such unit in the Zerg arsenal. Banelings don't really fill the void in that aspect.
I'm not saying that Lurkers specifically need to be added, but a unit that served the same purpose would be nice.
|
On September 24 2010 09:53 Dionyseus wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 09:46 MythicalMage wrote:On September 24 2010 09:35 Archerofaiur wrote:
Here is an important question:
Why wouldnt you patch aggressively if you knew you were going to be upending the balance in 18 months anyway? This. And then they'll do it AGAIN in another 18 months or so. People are asking for gameplay mechanic overhauls: You're not going to get them without an expansion. People are asking for perfect balance: It doesn't seem likely. If this is Blizzard's first attempt at a "balance" patch, then it seems reasonable to play it like WC3: Just don't play Zerg. When (or if) they get stronger later, switch back. Were I making my living out of playing, that's what seems the reasonable thing to do. Except you can't have terranVSprotoss-only tournaments and expect spectators and sponsors to stay happy. No spectators and no sponsors means SC2 would die in the esports scene regardless of how much money blizzard pours into it. Blizzard's rich but not that rich.
Tis arguable. Warcraft 3 was arguably pretty successful. I mean, look at the IEM in NY coming up. There are no zergs, but it's still going to get tons of spectators. The GSL has two zergs left, but I doubt their stream numbers will go down; if anything, they'll likely increase. I think it's not as good as future as would be ideal, but it is still A future, which is all that is needed until the expansions bring life back into the game.
|
I hate to say it but, Blizzards track record as of late in terms of balancing has been pretty terrible, anyone playing wow knows this. I know its a different game, a different dev team but, the same attitude seems to apply, wait forever to fix something obvious. Druids in pvp season 2-4 were unkillable and never ran out of juice, it was an extremely easy fix that just never happened. We're talking 9months+ with one class litteraly using one button, and never be able to die - ever.
Same with the latest expansion, 6 months with the new class Death Knights(among others) requiring three players to take down a single guy playing a DK.
And there were no "oh yeah we're getting to it" but it was 6 months of plain stonewalling the problem saying "its fine stfu and learn to play" it went as bad as 60% of the arena teams(one team=3 players) in the top 100 of every battlegroup(so world top 2k maybe) had a Death Knight on the team, taking one down as 2 players was like two lings vs a zealot, not a chance on this planet.
It's not that it took forever to fix extremely obvious problems that got to people, it was the sheer ignorance of the problem, saying it was all fine and dandy,while the game was frankly hardly playable since it was just disgustingly imbalanced.
|
On September 24 2010 09:33 Zeroes wrote:GOOD NEWS EVERYONEhttp://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/627980736?page=3#55Blizz has responded to a poster saying that they are talking to pro players and have balance changes Show nested quote +
We're well aware of the concerns on balance, if we're not in direct contact with pro players we keep a careful eye on what they say and do. I know balance changes are planned, I've heard of some specific changes for the next patch. I can't talk about them yet. Soon.
I just hope this isn't more bait to stop Zergs from switching. They last announcement was awful close to when several Pros were seriously considering switching races and then the changes ended up being underwhelming.
|
On September 24 2010 09:44 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:
as someone pointed out the problem is less the win% balance (even tho its still there) but also the "power" balance during the game. in bw power shifted back and forth several times over the game and in the end it settled in a balanced endgame. timings,tactics and executiong decided the games.
in sc2 Z is in survival mode the whole game. Z gameplay is mostly "i somehow need to get a 2nd/3rd/4th base,get to hive,defend possible harrass/tech and survive in some way. then i can start fighting back!". the dynamics are gone. this is bad design and i dobut it will be fixed by some small number tweaks. win% balance? yes. gameplay/power balance? not without bigger changes that we wont see before hots.
add theshitty maps,limited choices,weak early game,tons of easy but powerful strats XvZ and that z is harder to play overall and you have the current situation .
Yup, playing Zerg is just not much fun. Of course most of us lose because we sucked at some point in the game(and it's easy to make mistakes as Zerg and get punished hard for it), but it's not like our opponents are magically error free.
Roach/Hydra and Corruptor/anti air are really badly designed in my opinion. I'm not saying that Corruptor are weak, they are just an abomination in terms of design.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
