|
On October 01 2010 08:39 johngalt90 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2010 07:56 csfield wrote:On October 01 2010 07:46 Raiden X wrote:On October 01 2010 07:43 csfield wrote:
It's well-established that BW is only balanced through a miracle (and excellent map-makers), and not through Blizzard's foresight or understanding.
They had little to no idea how strategy would evolve. And the ingenuity of players. It wasn't until Boxer that people actually took Terran seriously. Or After that July to even out TvZ. BW went though countless stages of innovation. SC2 on the other hand with its Crappy hard counter system will take way more time to balance. As SCBW was more flexible with its units. The bonus damage counter system is stupid. Strategy should be more than rock/paper/scissors. ur an idiot. there also was dmg reduction in bw do you not remember explosive dmg from vultures tanks and dragoons. bw also revolved around abusing very powerful units (reaver, lurker, siege tank) these units werent hard countered by single units and by standards of starcraft 2 would be nerfed into a former shadow of themselves (the siege tank stands as a great example). armored and bonus vs armor etc. doesnt work much differently from the bw dmg functions
Maybe you should use real sentences and punctuation if you want to call someone an idiot.
And then you make statements that support my point (i.e. those powerful units didn't have hard counters). Seriously, get a clue.
Learn to read. Learn to think. Learn to express yourself intelligently.
edit: lol, I just replied to a Randian. Maybe I am an idiot
|
On October 01 2010 07:41 Pawshter wrote:
What proof do you have that wc3 is unbalanced? Unsupported statements. WC3 is not balanced. WC3 is plagued with imbalanced matchups and even flawed race design (undead.)
Orc is overpowered because ensnare counters micro and the blademaster scales too well. Prior to this tactic orc was considered one of the weakest races because they are vulnerable to timing pushes and borrow harassment. Their units are vulnerable to many abilities/heros as well.
Undead have ridiculously strong units/heros but are useless 1v1 because they must defend their base and can't expand so the other races can all exploit that to win no matter how badly they would get slaughtered in an upfront fight.
Night Elf are reasonably balanced, if not a little subdued at times because competitively they were the top race due to having no bad matchup. They were considered imbalanced solely because human was too weak/easily faultered and because they could beat any race.
Human are like zerg. You can lose in a thousand different ways and some times it isn't even your fault. Competitively they've seen success for two reasons. One, they have towers which are crazy overpowered and allow them to macro up and get experience for their strong late game heros and build replacable armies. Two, they had strong timing pushes due to the archmage's strength early game. In TFT timing pushes aren't all-in because you have a get out of jail free card for any attack so this allowed Sky to dominate for a short while. Then people adapted.
The following spoiler is a matchup breakdown as of a year and a half ago, maybe two years now.
+ Show Spoiler +
Orc vs UD has always been a literal 7-3 matchup in orc's favor. You can literally off-race Orc vs a top UD and probably win a bo5 series or come close to it.
Hu vs Orc has been near broodwar balanced for the most part. It was a lot more difficult for the orc player to learn the matchup and orc struggled when sorceress first hit the field. Late game was considered in human favor due to gryphons (despite it almost never getting to that point), but since ensnare+blademaster abuse began and people wisened up about speed scroll usage and unit choice it has been in orc's favor. There is no answer to ensnare+blademaster abuse because ensnare counters micro and once the blademaster is beefy he can tear through any non-hero unit in the game and practically ignore or slay hero units when backed up by raiders and decent micro. I don't know the matchup percentage these days, but we can call it close to broodwar even just to give WC3 some credit.
Ne vs UD was considered even when I played. I doubt it deviates by more than any racial matchup percentage in brood war (55% or less in one race's favor.)
Ud vs Hu was considered 7-3 for UD for a long time because their heroes rape your heros until very late in the game, their units horribly destroy your units, and fast destroyers beats everything because their counters are mowed down by the UD heroes. Then humans started massing towers and abusing UD's universal weakness. UD has no real answer to the towers.
Ne vs Orc was considered 7-3 or 8-2 in NE's favor during the dott abuse days. Then ensnsare+blademaster became popular. I don't know the state of the matchup today, but when I quit it was considered amazing when moon beat any top orc player.
NE vs Hu was considered 6-4 NE favor, some times even 7-3. Strong timing pushes came out against the popular fast tech build order, the matchup evolved a bit, and for a while it was 5.5-4.5 NE favor. I don't know what it is today.
|
On October 01 2010 09:50 Oleksandr wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2010 08:02 NATO wrote:
It seems ridiculous that people have been begging for balance changes super fast, when the game everyone praises - SC:BW had very long times between balance patches. Which is exactly why they should be able to do things quicker now since they have had over a decade of experience of balancing a very similar game. But I guess not much learning happened. Show nested quote +On October 01 2010 08:02 NATO wrote:I think the beta made everyone crazy - they think they are entitled to making whatever race they play more powerful right, now, and in the exact way they want. Says Terran.
Lol, Olex, do you just follow all my posts? 
Seriously though, you should know I was saying the same thing when Terran players where whining in the beta. I haven't changed my position, no matter who was whining. (Although I did change my race!)
|
On October 01 2010 09:58 ooni wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2010 09:43 AssuredVacancy wrote:On October 01 2010 09:36 Teddyman wrote:On October 01 2010 09:25 andrewlt wrote:On October 01 2010 08:39 johngalt90 wrote:On October 01 2010 07:56 csfield wrote:On October 01 2010 07:46 Raiden X wrote:On October 01 2010 07:43 csfield wrote:
It's well-established that BW is only balanced through a miracle (and excellent map-makers), and not through Blizzard's foresight or understanding.
They had little to no idea how strategy would evolve. And the ingenuity of players. It wasn't until Boxer that people actually took Terran seriously. Or After that July to even out TvZ. BW went though countless stages of innovation. SC2 on the other hand with its Crappy hard counter system will take way more time to balance. As SCBW was more flexible with its units. The bonus damage counter system is stupid. Strategy should be more than rock/paper/scissors. ur an idiot. there also was dmg reduction in bw do you not remember explosive dmg from vultures tanks and dragoons. bw also revolved around abusing very powerful units (reaver, lurker, siege tank) these units werent hard countered by single units and by standards of starcraft 2 would be nerfed into a former shadow of themselves (the siege tank stands as a great example). armored and bonus vs armor etc. doesnt work much differently from the bw dmg functions You're joking, right? In BW, there were only 3 damage types. Normal did 100% against everything, explosive did 100% to large, 75% to medium and 50% to small, concussive did 25% to large, 50% to medium and 100% to small. Doing it the SC2 way, you could say that concussive had a 4x bonus to small compared to large. There are only 3 units I recall with concussive (vulture, firebat and ghost). 2 of these are rarely used in normal play. That means BW has virtually no units with more than a 2x damage modifier. How many units in SC2 deal more than 2x the damage against one type of armor compared to other types? Way too freaking many. Reaper, Immortal, Ultralisk. How about hellion, marauders, ghosts, phoenixes, banelings, thors(air), voidrays? Marauders, ghosts, phoenixs banelings, thors do more than 2x the damage now? Need to update my patch, gogogo! The problem with SC2, battle speed is not because of the damage system. It's because marines, zealots or any other unit (besides zlings) got attack speed boost, marines 1->0.86 and so on. Units attack much faster. Another reason is there are less tactics that stops battles (Lurker, plague, large AOE emp). Another reason is that now units clump up, dealing more DPS at the same time. Another reason is Marauders are do same damage as dragoons but with stim! with stim! They are two different games, SC2 is more fast paced, get over it. Blizzard will help the game, metagame/maps should help too (Plz don't let blizzard maps be primary maps T-T). Only reason Blizzard is constantly patching sc2 is that, SC2 has high expectations. SC2 need to be balanced quick so SC1 pro players looks at SC2 as a good esport. That's how it is.
Marauders are 10+10, 2x vs armored, ghosts are 10+10, 2x vs light, phoenixes are 5+5, 2x vs light, banelings are 20+15, almost 2x, thors do 6+6 air damage, 2x vs light.
|
United States47024 Posts
On October 01 2010 09:25 andrewlt wrote:
There are only 3 units I recall with concussive (vulture, firebat and ghost). 2 of these are rarely used in normal play. That means BW has virtually no units with more than a 2x damage modifier. How many units in SC2 deal more than 2x the damage against one type of armor compared to other types? Way too freaking many.
Hellion
Reaper
Immortal
Ultralisk
One per race, plus one more for Terran, is "way too freaking many"?
Also, lol @ vultures "rarely used in normal play".
On October 01 2010 11:34 AssuredVacancy wrote:
Marauders are 10+10, 2x vs armored, ghosts are 10+10, 2x vs light, phoenixes are 5+5, 2x vs light, banelings are 20+15, almost 2x, thors do 6+6 air damage, 2x vs light.
The discussion was about units with more than a 2x bonus, seeing as units that do explosive damage are extremely common in BW.
|
1.08 patch was the game changer without it bw wouldn't have become what it is now..
|
On October 01 2010 11:41 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2010 09:25 andrewlt wrote:
There are only 3 units I recall with concussive (vulture, firebat and ghost). 2 of these are rarely used in normal play. That means BW has virtually no units with more than a 2x damage modifier. How many units in SC2 deal more than 2x the damage against one type of armor compared to other types? Way too freaking many.
Hellion Reaper Immortal Ultralisk One per race, plus one more for Terran, is "way too freaking many"? Also, lol @ vultures "rarely used in normal play".
Ghosts and Firebats are two units not used that often, although Firebats see TvZ play. He said two, I assume he meant those.
A previous poster mentioned maps. Honestly that should be the NEXT step here. All the unit stats and things DO NOT MATTER if the level design is shoddy. Level design is actually a big part of balancing and making a good game, I'm thinking here soon that's where Blizzard needs to invest some extra time in. And hopefully the community is too (and I think they are) because I don't really trust Blizzard to get that done.
|
United States47024 Posts
On October 01 2010 08:27 .risingdragoon wrote:
SC2's balancing is kindava urgent issue, things learned through BW isn't just unlearned.
SC2 needs desperately be balanced fast. When SC came out there was not nearly the expectation of it being balanced.
I'm sort of curious what lessons everyone thinks Blizzard is supposed to have learned from balancing SC:BW, because no one seems to suggest anything other than "they should have learned something."
They can improve their methodology (which, seeing as they're doing frequent minor patches instead of sparse, major ones, I would argue they have), but honestly, short of a direct clone, balancing is still shooting at a target in the dark. I'm not sure how the fact that zealots should be 100 HP 60 Shields instead of 80 HP 80 Shields is in any way relevant to balancing SC2.
Never mind the fact that so many elements of balance were completely independent of anything Blizzard might have intended (e.g. muta stacking).
|
On October 01 2010 11:52 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2010 08:27 .risingdragoon wrote:
SC2's balancing is kindava urgent issue, things learned through BW isn't just unlearned.
SC2 needs desperately be balanced fast. When SC came out there was not nearly the expectation of it being balanced. I'm not sure how the fact that zealots should be 100 HP 60 Shields instead of 80 HP 80 Shields is in any way relevant to balancing SC2.
Ghosts..
Shield also take full damage from all dmg types I believe.
|
On October 01 2010 11:52 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2010 08:27 .risingdragoon wrote:
SC2's balancing is kindava urgent issue, things learned through BW isn't just unlearned.
SC2 needs desperately be balanced fast. When SC came out there was not nearly the expectation of it being balanced. I'm sort of curious what lessons everyone thinks Blizzard is supposed to have learned from balancing SC:BW, because no one seems to suggest anything other than "they should have learned something." They can improve their methodology (which, seeing as they're doing frequent minor patches instead of sparse, major ones, I would argue they have), but honestly, short of a direct clone, balancing is still shooting at a target in the dark. I'm not sure how the fact that zealots should be 100 HP 60 Shields instead of 80 HP 80 Shields is in any way relevant to balancing SC2. Never mind the fact that so many elements of balance were completely independent of anything Blizzard might have intended (e.g. muta stacking).
Although I agree with you the most part, I still feel that Blizzard could have carried away a few lessons from previous games, not so much balance but rather the design itself.
Two things that are important to learn in general:
1: Maps should be left to the community to balance. Blizzard keeps trying to take the helm when it comes to RTS maps, and it never works. It didn't work in SC1, it didn't work in WC3, and it's not working now.
2: Units and abilities should be designed in ways so that they can be countered with micro. JustPlay's post on WC3 balance brought up a very important point regarding game design. Raiders in WC3 basically took over the game because they had an incredible ability that essentially had no counter. One of the reasons the Marauder gets so much hate is precisely because it's concussive shell is like the Raider's ensnare: incredibly strong, counters micro, can't be stopped. Then of course you have the fact that Blizzard is making several abilities (EMP, Fungal Growth) fire off instantly, rather than in BW where the projectiles could be dodged, which led to deeper micro. The hard counter-y feel of the combat in SC2 doesn't help much either.
|
Likewise a lot of people seem to think BW just got to a magically balanced state and remained static. Not so; just read the histories of the most famous pro gamers on Liquidpedia. Before Bisu brought the fall of Savior, PvZ was considered an imbalanced matchup for example. Before Boxer, Terrans were considered weaker. JulyZerg changed the way Zerg was played.
Now imagine if Blizzard had patched every time people thought a matchup was imbalanced. Right now people are crying about Zerg imbalance when Cool has clearly shown it isn't as bad as people think.
|
On October 01 2010 11:34 AssuredVacancy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2010 09:58 ooni wrote:On October 01 2010 09:43 AssuredVacancy wrote:On October 01 2010 09:36 Teddyman wrote:On October 01 2010 09:25 andrewlt wrote:On October 01 2010 08:39 johngalt90 wrote:On October 01 2010 07:56 csfield wrote:On October 01 2010 07:46 Raiden X wrote:On October 01 2010 07:43 csfield wrote:
It's well-established that BW is only balanced through a miracle (and excellent map-makers), and not through Blizzard's foresight or understanding.
They had little to no idea how strategy would evolve. And the ingenuity of players. It wasn't until Boxer that people actually took Terran seriously. Or After that July to even out TvZ. BW went though countless stages of innovation. SC2 on the other hand with its Crappy hard counter system will take way more time to balance. As SCBW was more flexible with its units. The bonus damage counter system is stupid. Strategy should be more than rock/paper/scissors. ur an idiot. there also was dmg reduction in bw do you not remember explosive dmg from vultures tanks and dragoons. bw also revolved around abusing very powerful units (reaver, lurker, siege tank) these units werent hard countered by single units and by standards of starcraft 2 would be nerfed into a former shadow of themselves (the siege tank stands as a great example). armored and bonus vs armor etc. doesnt work much differently from the bw dmg functions You're joking, right? In BW, there were only 3 damage types. Normal did 100% against everything, explosive did 100% to large, 75% to medium and 50% to small, concussive did 25% to large, 50% to medium and 100% to small. Doing it the SC2 way, you could say that concussive had a 4x bonus to small compared to large. There are only 3 units I recall with concussive (vulture, firebat and ghost). 2 of these are rarely used in normal play. That means BW has virtually no units with more than a 2x damage modifier. How many units in SC2 deal more than 2x the damage against one type of armor compared to other types? Way too freaking many. Reaper, Immortal, Ultralisk. How about hellion, marauders, ghosts, phoenixes, banelings, thors(air), voidrays? Marauders, ghosts, phoenixs banelings, thors do more than 2x the damage now? Need to update my patch, gogogo! The problem with SC2, battle speed is not because of the damage system. It's because marines, zealots or any other unit (besides zlings) got attack speed boost, marines 1->0.86 and so on. Units attack much faster. Another reason is there are less tactics that stops battles (Lurker, plague, large AOE emp). Another reason is that now units clump up, dealing more DPS at the same time. Another reason is Marauders are do same damage as dragoons but with stim! with stim! They are two different games, SC2 is more fast paced, get over it. Blizzard will help the game, metagame/maps should help too (Plz don't let blizzard maps be primary maps T-T). Only reason Blizzard is constantly patching sc2 is that, SC2 has high expectations. SC2 need to be balanced quick so SC1 pro players looks at SC2 as a good esport. That's how it is. Marauders are 10+10, 2x vs armored, ghosts are 10+10, 2x vs light, phoenixes are 5+5, 2x vs light, banelings are 20+15, almost 2x, thors do 6+6 air damage, 2x vs light.
umm dude? Read what you wrote, MORE THAN 2x
sighz, also look at what you are complaining about... gosh ppl these days
Back to what you were asking~~
How many units in SC2 deal more than 2x the damage against one type of armor compared to other types? Way too freaking many.
Not many... count them, you can count right?
|
SC:BW is balanced because of the maps. The same thing is going to work for Sc2. There will be a few minor changes to create as balanced of a game as possible, and then it will all be down to the maps.
|
On October 01 2010 07:43 csfield wrote:
It's well-established that BW is only balanced through a miracle (and excellent map-makers), and not through Blizzard's foresight or understanding.
They had little to no idea how strategy would evolve.
quoted to emphasize truth.
|
On October 01 2010 09:52 SiegeMode wrote:Show nested quote +And Blue flame is way strong. Especially against lings. Roasting 50 lings is absurd. Every see a vulture mine even do that?
In a word: yes. I can't even imagine the QQing if T had spider mine instead of blue flame. That ability was absurdly OP beyond anything in SC2 (like many BW abilities like dark swarm, irradiate, BW psi storm, BW stimpacks....)
Please please please tell me you're not saying Dark Swarm Irradiate the old Psi Storm and stimpacks(They do the same thing in SC2) are OP.......or you just worded that badly
|
How can we balance through maps if Blizzard will most likely not implement community maps into the ladder pool?
|
On October 01 2010 12:48 fAnTaCy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2010 09:52 SiegeMode wrote:And Blue flame is way strong. Especially against lings. Roasting 50 lings is absurd. Every see a vulture mine even do that?
In a word: yes. I can't even imagine the QQing if T had spider mine instead of blue flame. That ability was absurdly OP beyond anything in SC2 (like many BW abilities like dark swarm, irradiate, BW psi storm, BW stimpacks....) Please please please tell me you're not saying Dark Swarm Irradiate the old Psi Storm and stimpacks(They do the same thing in SC2) are OP.......or you just worded that badly
Not really
Dark Swarm: PDD, limited by Energy and does not stop ranged attacks that are not missiles also no consume to spam dark Swarm
Psi Storm: tiny radius compared to BW, BW does more Damage over time, Although SC1 storm has higher DPS
Stimpacks: 1.5 tier healers by your side after u stim
EDIT: However this actually added joy and balance to the game
Read the old article: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=120471
|
Brood War came out 6 months after Starcraft. Balance went from pretty bad to quite good. Importantly it had a different lead designer. In addition to all the new units, which made a huge difference, the biggest change was larvae spawn time was decreased significantly and Sunkens were made much stronger. What I heard at the time was Rob Pardo made it how he wanted and not many people at Blizzard agreed with him. Second hand info so it may not be accurate but I think it's somewhat accurate. If true it could mean it could take far longer for SC 2 to be balanced than it took with Brood War if they don't have someone with the vision and will that they did back then.
|
On October 01 2010 12:54 ooni wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2010 12:48 fAnTaCy wrote:On October 01 2010 09:52 SiegeMode wrote:And Blue flame is way strong. Especially against lings. Roasting 50 lings is absurd. Every see a vulture mine even do that?
In a word: yes. I can't even imagine the QQing if T had spider mine instead of blue flame. That ability was absurdly OP beyond anything in SC2 (like many BW abilities like dark swarm, irradiate, BW psi storm, BW stimpacks....) Please please please tell me you're not saying Dark Swarm Irradiate the old Psi Storm and stimpacks(They do the same thing in SC2) are OP.......or you just worded that badly Not really Dark Swarm: PDD, limited by Energy and does not stop ranged attacks that are not missiles also no consume to spam dark Swarm Psi Storm: tiny radius compared to BW, BW does more Damage over time, Although SC1 storm has higher DPS Stimpacks: 1.5 tier healers by your side after u stim EDIT: However this actually added joy and balance to the game Read the old article: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=120471
O.o.....are you agreeing with me or disagreeing with me bcause I'm still confused as to whether or not that other guy was saying those spells are OP or not
|
On October 01 2010 13:52 fAnTaCy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2010 12:54 ooni wrote:On October 01 2010 12:48 fAnTaCy wrote:On October 01 2010 09:52 SiegeMode wrote:And Blue flame is way strong. Especially against lings. Roasting 50 lings is absurd. Every see a vulture mine even do that?
In a word: yes. I can't even imagine the QQing if T had spider mine instead of blue flame. That ability was absurdly OP beyond anything in SC2 (like many BW abilities like dark swarm, irradiate, BW psi storm, BW stimpacks....) Please please please tell me you're not saying Dark Swarm Irradiate the old Psi Storm and stimpacks(They do the same thing in SC2) are OP.......or you just worded that badly Not really Dark Swarm: PDD, limited by Energy and does not stop ranged attacks that are not missiles also no consume to spam dark Swarm Psi Storm: tiny radius compared to BW, BW does more Damage over time, Although SC1 storm has higher DPS Stimpacks: 1.5 tier healers by your side after u stim EDIT: However this actually added joy and balance to the game Read the old article: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=120471 O.o.....are you agreeing with me or disagreeing with me bcause I'm still confused as to whether or not that other guy was saying those spells are OP or not
I'm guessing he's not saying OP in terms of balance but OP as in it's very very powerful compared to unit attacks and etc. Each race had powerful spells, which made the game interesting and not neccessarily imbalanced.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
