|
Australia8532 Posts
On April 29 2011 12:49 Weirdkid wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2011 04:59 shinarit wrote:she underwent many changes due to the Protoss artifact Wasnt it a xelnaga artifact? Oops sorry my bad. The original article only says artifact, and somehow I wrote Protoss artifact. Thanks for pointing it out! I feel a bit sad at all the negative comments though.
Thanks for the translation  nice to hear this straight from the man himself; i suppose all the zergs will argue that his views on balance are a well-thought out troll. Then again, i imagine the data doesn't lie.
I would also prefer the clan system to be at least on the list of things to do.
|
Wow, TL community needs to get off its high horse. I honestly can not believe some of the comments I am reading. SC2 is a fantastic game. If you guys think you can make a better game, then please show us.
That being said, I agree with a lot of what Dustin said. What did you guys expect, for him to not defend the game he worked so hard on?
Get over yourselves, stop blaming balance. Think about it, if everyone is bitching about balance, doesnt it mean that the game is balanced?
|
On April 29 2011 12:30 lololol wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2011 23:28 vek wrote:On April 28 2011 23:23 infinity2k9 wrote:
It has harder unit counters than BW for sure. Vultures vs Dragoons anyone? If a group of vultures attack moves into a group of Dragoons also attack moving then yes you are correct. The difference is that a group of well controlled Vultures planting mines in the right spots and flanking the Dragoons will win. On the other hand the opposing player with Dragoons can also micro his face off - defusing mines, spreading out and pulling back weak Dragoons. It becomes a battle of who has better control rather than who has the better army composition. The winner is always the better player. How exactly do you do the same thing when it is Thor vs Immortal? This is simply a lie. If it was true why would flash ever build tanks? Apparently the better player always wins with vultures vs goons, yet he makes tanks? Is it because he doesn't know? The sole reason terrans make tanks is to beat goons. You simply ain't going to win with vultures vs goons without an army advantage or a big blunder from the toss. Just because you can see mostly vultures in early pushes that rely on hitting when toss has fewer units, doesn't mean that vultures are actually even vs goons and it's all about control.
That isn't really what I was trying to make a point about so I don't understand your argument, sorry. I didn't say anything about never using tanks.
It was just a very specific example of Vultures vs Dragoons. With good Vulture control you can overcome a group of Dragoons. With good Dragoon control you can overcome a group of well controlled Vultures. The winner is always the better player because it comes down to skill.
It was a simple explanation of how good unit design can make battles much more dynamic. Hopefully so that people understand even if they have not played Brood War.
|
953 Posts
I love that he didn't acknowledge balance complaints. The games evolving way too fast for anyone to say that. Protoss are a critically endangered species in the GSL despite the whining, Zergs are learning ways to be both crazy aggressive and have a ridiculous economy in ZvP and ZvT, and Terrans are learning that they don't have to stick to the same 3 unit composition in any particular matchup.
Makes me happy that they're taking a far more measured approach than those in the community would have them do.
|
The balance comments coming from Dustin simply enrage me.
Always, in every interview he says something that reveals how much he lacks knowledge of high level play and how he hasn't watched professional broodwar. Yet he keeps on making comparison on how SC2 is better just because he is "entitled" to and because "he can".
It really makes wanna smash something.
And all this coming from the guy who invented to apocalypse tank in Red alert2, the unit that countered everything in the game.
I'd rather be left in the dark on what blizzard thinks about their game or what is their reasoning behind balance changes, because every friggin time I'm blown away on how clueless they are about their own creation.
|
On April 29 2011 19:37 kasumimi wrote:
The balance comments coming from Dustin simply enrage me.
Always, in every interview he says something that reveals how much he lacks knowledge of high level play and how he hasn't watched professional broodwar. Yet he keeps on making comparison on how SC2 is better just because he is "entitled" to and because "he can".
It really makes wanna smash something.
And all this coming from the guy who invented to apocalypse tank in Red alert2, the unit that countered everything in the game.
I'd rather be left in the dark on what blizzard thinks about their game or what is their reasoning behind balance changes, because every friggin time I'm blown away on how clueless they are about their own creation.
exactly how i feel.
i dont have a problem with the game developers who doesnt understand their game in pros play but blatantly saying 'sc2 is more balanced than scbw' is pure ignorance (since nobody can make that claim with 100% evidence backup). how can you completely ignore all the tournaments results which zergs are so underperforming since launch. if their target is to MERELY make sure the ladder is 'balanced', then why the hell they keep mention that 'we care about esport'.
somehow i remember the original creators of scbw are a bunch of gamers who loves games so much (and they are probably high up in blizzard management level now), these developers for sc2 simply dont have that kind of passion and hearts for the game.
|
Collosus (the single player statue) reminds me a King Oni from Red Alert 3. They should have put it in multiplayer
+ Show Spoiler +
|
In the Grandmaster Leagues and Master Leagues of the various battlenet regions in the world, the win ratios of all 3 races are between 50-55%. If we look at any one region, Protoss might be the top race one week, but they could also very well be overtaken by Terran the following week. These patterns might also show up differently in different regions. Therefore, based on the data that we have, we do not agree that there is a problem with the balance of the game.
Flawed method for determining balance... They must already know this. I have a friend who got in GM league doing nothing but 1 base all in's and he's helping determine the balance of the game? >.<
|
i finaly figured out what blizzard made of this game....
and that is bettle of upgreads (and not strategy)
simple exemple : maraders withouth stim should die from blink stalkers... or ? stimed maraders should kill blinked stalkers ....or should be equal ?
or stimed marines should kill banglings without speed...and banglings kill stimed marines when they get speed upgread....or should be equal cance of kiling ?
or if terran get stim you need at list 1 colloss to conter em...
i dont know i agree that upgreads is cool but i think then if i have charge + bling stalkers that should be = to stimed MMM... or yust MM...but it isnt....
i dont know now i figure out in what direction they are thinking but i like more bw stile + they can add upgread in that stile of playing... simply now mass dps like stim pack colloss and banglings i think is hurting game....(simply almoust no skill in it yust atc atc atc :D)
|
I'm sorry, but I'm not getting where people are seeing that he said "SC2 is more balanced than SCBW" like many have claimed. Maybe someone can enlighten me
|
wow...read all the interview..nothing was actually said..completely waste of time..its just NOTHING..bla bla..no real content..
|
As of now, the balance between unit-counters and micro is better than in Starcraft 1.
You said a mouth full... oh my gawd...
|
Wow. That's not a good thing for Sarah Kerrigan fans!
wtf?
|
On April 28 2011 22:57 Weirdkid wrote:
Thank you Mister Dustin for this exclusive interview with game.163.com. As we all know, Starcraft 2 is a competitive game, an eSport. As a result, balance is especially important. However, some of the top players from Korea, like Nestea and fruitdealer, complain that the Zerg race is very weak. What does Blizzard have to say about this?
Dustin : There is a chance they might be right, but most of the time, our views on balance have to be supported by data, As of now, from the data that we have, we are unable to support the view that the Zerg race is very weak.
In the Grandmaster Leagues and Master Leagues of the various battlenet regions in the world, the win ratios of all 3 races are between 50-55%. If we look at any one region, Protoss might be the top race one week, but they could also very well be overtaken by Terran the following week. These patterns might also show up differently in different regions. Therefore, based on the data that we have, we do not agree that there is a problem with the balance of the game.
Furthermore, you have to understand that the players of the different races are saying different things about the situation. Terran players are also complaining that Terran is hard to play. Similarly, Protoss players are also complaining about their own race. We do not acknowledge that there are signs of imbalance in the game. Our view is that the balance situation in the game is quite good as of now.
Reading that made me happy. Thanks, OP!
|
Oh, finally, zerg buff is coming
|
On April 29 2011 20:07 BurningSera wrote:i dont have a problem with the game developers who doesnt understand their game in pros play but blatantly saying 'sc2 is more balanced than scbw' is pure ignorance (since nobody can make that claim with 100% evidence backup). how can you completely ignore all the tournaments results which zergs are so underperforming since launch. if their target is to MERELY make sure the ladder is 'balanced', then why the hell they keep mention that 'we care about esport'.
It's a good thing he never said that then.
|
On April 28 2011 22:57 Weirdkid wrote:
As of now, the balance between unit-counters and micro is better than in Starcraft 1.
Does he really believe this himself?
|
Well, it is double-translated, so who knows the exact wording, or whether he said something slightly different.
And, just in terms of "unit roles," the statement might be defensible if one thinks about it not in terms of micro roles but the number of viable unit comps per matchup and the harder counter system making the specific composition of units in your army much more important to deal with specific threats than in SC1. For example, in BW TvP, Tank/Vulture was so effective against pretty much all ground units that Terran rarely if ever transitioned out of it (save to get Goliaths to counter anti-air, and adding Science Vessels later game for EMP/detection); whereas in SC2 TvP, there are certainly much more viable unit comps and strats for Terran to go.
But yeah, I'm not sure that I agree that the balance between unit comp and micro is "better"; it's certainly "more balanced" than SC1, where micro dominated to a greater extent over specific unit comps...but I think SC2 could stand a little more micro, myself.
But, again, twice-translated interview, off-the-cuff comment in response to a question translated from Chinese. I still have a lot of faith in Dustin Browder, and I wish him the best; people bashing him and openly insulting him don't know what the kark they're talking about. Enjoy the game his enthusiasm and hard work made for you, then turn around and call him the devil? S'not cool.
|
I am absolutely disgusted with the spoiled brats here lashing out at Browder. He leads a team that created an amazing game that we all play religiously... and you kids whine like there is no tomorrow. Of course he isn't going to trash his own project in an interview. Why don't one of you whiners go create a better game for us please? I'd love to bitch about how awful it is in between games on it.
We should be happy that we live in an age where updates and patches can be so easily applied. Can't patch my NES. They clearly know more about what they are doing than any of you do, and are striving to perfect the game. That's why they are zillionaires and you are not.
|
the reason i think they went for the templar and not the colossus (even though everyone hates the colossus) is that it's much harder to balance.
i would argue, and people might disagree, that it might be easier to balance the rate of storm rather than colossi DPS
but i think the more important reason is that protoss is very sensitive to colossi timings in almost every matchup. PvT you need colossi to hold, PvZ you need it to be aggressive unless you imba FF 6 gate, PvP well... you know the story there. even before 1.3 templar was completely late game, and thats where colossi mattered less anyway
i'd like storm to be buffed PvP though, if storm did more double-triple damage to shields or something, then you have storm doing something to the tune of 125 damage and it making a dent . i'd also like to see hte radius of effect be 2 (consistent with other spellcasters in that tier) but that might be too much to ask for
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
