| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Kamuy
United States212 Posts
A. Their track record is amazing. They haven't given me any reason to doubt them. B. This game still has two expansions. Blizzard is extremely smart. They have two chances to add units or adjust them to fit the style of game play they want. The game we play now and the complaints we have will be moot points in a few years when the final product is in place. I'll reserve my judgement till then. | ||
|
Golgotha
Korea (South)8418 Posts
More skill based units; I hate the toss deathball style of click a move and the terran response to muta bling is just marine and tank (boring). also, the zerg needs a seige unit like the lurker that you can get mid game. broods are good but they are late game. | ||
|
Taiyoken
Canada130 Posts
Also there is a problem with adding 'new' units across the board - there aren't THAT many unique attributes to a unit, you'll eventually end up with slight overlap in abilities/design and then people will whine that 'omg it's the same unit' $0.02 | ||
|
a176
Canada6688 Posts
On June 12 2011 15:05 Lovedrop wrote: Blizzard employees and community managers are extremely aware at both the state of the game and its players. They read almost every popular community website on a day-to-day basis, and while fans may find their resolution lacking, it is without a doubt that they try their best to find a compromise between their vision of the game and our own. Unfortunately SC2 isn't so much a piece of design that identifies its artist's style; its a game, an interactive tool of competition, used by millions. All competition requires (and undergoes) changes to address the needs of those who play, either to make it more difficulty, more easy, or even more interesting. The way Blizzard has gone about SC2 has been very authoritarian, and very presumptuous. They force ideas and concepts onto the community despite feedback that it simply doesn't work or is wanted. Chat channels is the glorified example of Blizzard's mentality towards the community; examine how long it took them to finally "cave" into the wishes of the community and further, for implementation of the feature. But even for this thread, examining a unit - the reaper, which we had to suffer two months of 5 rax reaper before blizzard finally nerfed it into oblivion, which really only existed because of the "cool idea" to give it an impossibly cheap speed upgrade in the first place. And even the corrupter, where Browder has admitted numerous times they had no fucking idea what to do with it as far as ability, or even attack went, but stayed in the game for god knows why? Because it looks cool? Yet they admit the Archon could have been on the cutting table. Dear teamliquid, some of you put far too much blind faith into blizzard just because of their past 'record' and the fact they are 'game developers'. They are not supreme, mensa-like beings. They are humans with ideas, and some of their ideas worked, and some of them didn't. Being critical of the game doesn't mean you hate it. The OP of this thread is very critical of the game design but calmly and professionally presents the information in such an eloquent way. The more you can be critical of the game, the more blizzard can hear your voices, and the more your ideas can help make the game better in the long run, because the game is made for the community, not for blizzard. | ||
|
Tatari
United States1179 Posts
On June 12 2011 14:32 nalgene wrote: Will they plan on adding the DA/ Corsair / Arbiter / Reaver back in? They were pretty unique... especially the Reaver with its ultra slow movement that required some micro to use it or used in conjunction with the shuttle or warp prism. DA could be useful vs biological units with the maelstorm spell. Arbiters with the good ol mobility + recall into someone's base would be pretty fun... The Phoenix is far, far, FAR superior compared to the Corsair. The Graviton Beam makes mass air much more useful compared to... the Disruption Web. It actually makes Phoenixes much more viable. Not only that, their move shot allows them to kite Mutalisks while taking no damage. At best, Corsairs could only move shot Mutalisks while being on the offensive. The Reaver is good. But I abuse the fact that Colossi can shoot regardless of whether or not it's up on the high ground. The Reaver's Scarab AI depends on ground pathing. This doesn't really show an improvement of performance in units from BW to SC2. Dark Archons barely see any use. They're not as useful as you'd think. High Templars already have Feedback as their native spell, any decent Protoss will still use Forcefields to trap Zerg units (thereby having virtually the same effect as Maelstrom), and we already see how Mind Control is being used through Neural Parasite. There's only an offensive use, and there's no real bonus in controlling enemy units in SC2 in any other way. The only thing I agree with is replacing the Mothership with the Arbiter. Vortex is an overall downgrade from Stasis Field, and other than that the Mothership is a glorified Arbiter that comes with spells without research. | ||
|
zhurai
United States5660 Posts
On June 12 2011 15:31 Golgotha wrote: yeah im waiting until hots until i release my judgement. the things I want: More skill based units; I hate the toss deathball style of click a move and the terran response to muta bling is just marine and tank (boring). also, the zerg needs a seige unit like the lurker that you can get mid game. broods are good but they are late game. I'll have to agree with this post. | ||
|
DeckOneBell
United States526 Posts
They're looking to make real money, not ESPORTS DOLLARS, even if they might make more money by making more ESPORTS DOLLARS, it might not make sense to their marketing team. Eh. But David Kim is usually pretty intelligent when he talks, and he's the balance designer, not Browder. EDIT: Also, the players want a lot of things. I personally don't think SC2 should be democratically designed. Especially with how often the metagame changes at this stage in SC2. | ||
|
Yoshi Kirishima
United States10327 Posts
Wow didn't know/remember that the Arbiter needed to research stuff, I always thought the Mothership was weird after realizing it was pretty much an Arbiter. But I guess that's slightly wrong. You say Vortex is an overall downgrade; that may be true, but I just want to say I really like how you can use Vortex with splash to do a shit ton of damage. It really adds to the late late game power of Protoss. I just hope we get to the late late game more xD @windsupernova Well said! | ||
|
Nazza
Australia1654 Posts
On June 12 2011 15:33 Tatari wrote: The Phoenix is far, far, FAR superior compared to the Corsair. The Graviton Beam makes mass air much more useful compared to... the Disruption Web. It actually makes Phoenixes much more viable. Not only that, their move shot allows them to kite Mutalisks while taking no damage. At best, Corsairs could only move shot Mutalisks while being on the offensive. The Reaver is good. But I abuse the fact that Colossi can shoot regardless of whether or not it's up on the high ground. The Reaver's Scarab AI depends on ground pathing. This doesn't really show an improvement of performance in units from BW to SC2. Dark Archons barely see any use. They're not as useful as you'd think. High Templars already have Feedback as their native spell, any decent Protoss will still use Forcefields to trap Zerg units (thereby having virtually the same effect as Maelstrom), and we already see how Mind Control is being used through Neural Parasite. There's only an offensive use, and there's no real bonus in controlling enemy units in SC2 in any other way. The only thing I agree with is replacing the Mothership with the Arbiter. Vortex is an overall downgrade from Stasis Field, and other than that the Mothership is a glorified Arbiter that comes with spells without research. Agreed, the phoenix is a better unit, except for the fact that it can shoot while moving without any micro, which is silly. Kiting should be done actively, not passively. | ||
|
starcraft911
Korea (South)1263 Posts
I'm not sure why the overseer needs an overhaul either. I don't think it 'needs' to be interesting. It's job is to detect and scout enemy bases... it does that... oh yea, it can also contaminate... what am i missing? I've been very critical in the past of balance issues, but I think the game is in a very good spot right now. I'm not a big fan of how much micro I must do in order to beat a zerg who attack moves with banelings, but it's nothing I can't handle and I enjoy the challenge. All-in-all I think blizzard is doing a pretty good job of balance. I feel T is slightly behind in TvZ, but that may be due to the fact that i play terran primarily and it's only in the power of the infestor that i believe this. I know that in CN the protoss players are cleaning house so I'd like to know specifically what it is they find to be imbalanced? I open 1 rax expand 80% of the time and I fear very little early agression so yea... :D I'd like to see Hunter Seeker Missiles not be 100% useless. A good player will simply move the targeted unit away. The fact that it does less dmg than a storm and costs more energy, money, and is from a more expensive unit, and hurts my own units boggles my mind. On June 12 2011 15:38 Nazza wrote: Agreed, the phoenix is a better unit, except for the fact that it can shoot while moving without any micro, which is silly. Kiting should be done actively, not passively. Phoenix was dogshit before the change. I think it's fine the way it is. It has an active ability that must be used smartly that detracts from your attention and I don't think it's op. | ||
|
Techno
1900 Posts
Rushes seem strong because we havent had as many years to perfect these economical builds. Jesus we've been through this before!!! | ||
|
I Hott Sauce I
United States91 Posts
Then give back Hydra speed :-( | ||
|
Takezou
United States320 Posts
Most of the coaches, scouts, gms of professional sports teams are lower tier players or sometimes even people who didn't play professionally. | ||
|
DNA61289
United States665 Posts
| ||
|
Tatari
United States1179 Posts
On June 12 2011 15:38 Nazza wrote: Agreed, the phoenix is a better unit, except for the fact that it can shoot while moving without any micro, which is silly. Kiting should be done actively, not passively. I've seen beta videos of the Phoenix before the shooting while moving change. ... Dear lord that thing sucked the Corsair's left nut. On June 12 2011 15:40 I Hott Sauce I wrote: All Blizzard has to do is take out sentries from this game, and bam, near perfection. Then give back Hydra speed :-( You basically want Protoss to be absolutely unplayable in the early game? PvT would be impossible since every Protoss would roll over and die to even a 2 rax Shell rush. PvZ would end up with Protosses rolling over and dying to masses of Zerg units from Spawn Larva. Far from even being "near perfection." And it seems like someone doesn't even spread their creep. And why would you want Hydras to have their speed upgrade again? Their role in the game is already non existent. Changing their speed wouldn't have much of an impact. | ||
|
BEARDiaguz
Australia2362 Posts
Blizzard knows when the listen to us and when not to. It's worked pretty well for us so far as far as patch changes go and as far as maps go. They don't rush to do thing and they do them well. Huzzah for blizzard! Well, except for the LAN thing of course. | ||
|
Dommk
Australia4865 Posts
The way Blizzard has gone about SC2 has been very authoritarian, and very presumptuous. They force ideas and concepts onto the community despite feedback that it simply doesn't work or is wanted. Chat channels is the glorified example of Blizzard's mentality towards the community; examine how long it took them to finally "cave" into the wishes of the community and further, for implementation of the feature. I find that quite funny as community, TL in particular, are very authoritarian and presumptuous with the changes they want as well, most people here hold Broodwar fairly dear to their hearts and consider it perfect and without fail often bring units from Broodwar as suggestions to what needs to be introduced to this game rather than creating new units based on what is currently lacking. Broodwar is a great game but that doesn't mean the units were designed that well, it just happened to work out. | ||
|
will.pity
Australia89 Posts
I agree with his point on ladder maps, they are fine now. Sure theres a couple of close spawns but its not a tourny its just practice. If newbies want a couple rush maps I dont see a problem, jus vetoe it if its that big a problem. Uninteresting units can be classified by different factors. Blizzard obviously want to make cool looking interesting units to a new player picking up the game. As such their example that they give seem reasonable with this line of thinking. Your examples (taken from TL a biased viewpoint) are reflections on the way people with a BW background or of people who are annoyed with current trends in the game. Your three units given are arguably some of the three most used units in competitive play (except for probably marines). I agree that he should listen to community but to be honest in terms of balance I prefer that they dont listen to this community or the bnet one as a primary source. This is for 2 reasons. 1. The community just whines about any little thing they are having trouble with before they actively try new things. New strategies dont come about immediately and thats what makes them interesting and awesome! 2. People are often incorrect and biased, even when they have tried many things to get around a problem (sen, idra). Sure they are amazing inventive, skilled players but they are still biased and often neglect trying new things to try and force old strategies to work - often this is frustrating and leads to public displays of balance complaints. I do not claim this game is balanced and neither does blizzard, but I think its a bit rich to say "Blizzard is totally out of touch with the community" They stated they use multiple methods to identify and act on balance, and all of the information sources he recommended seem logical, and I would be dissapointed if they ignored those in favour of a 1000 page thread saying collosus should be removed. If they instead removed collosus, the game would be irreversably changed and the interim period of trying to fix it back up is not worth the (possible?) improvement. In response to your quotes about browder not understanding micro/game terminology. I dont feel like he should/needs to, you have to bear in mind this guy is the head developer he leads a team on balance as only a part of his job, which involves organising press, coming up with new ideas etc etc. Obviously he is no pro SCII player and may misunderstand the intricacies of gameplay but that is what his team is for. Also those quotes are not from this interview and I mean if you go back into the history of any person Im sure you can find them saying stupid shit too. Just ask incontrol im sure he would agree hes said some dumb shit which he would not want quoted to his current point of view. I think the point of view you are representing is very one-sided and biased. That poll for example, is more of a 'what unit do you hate and never want to see again?' that 'most uninteresting unit'. I dont think anybody is not interested when a protoss has 4+ collosi, they are either scared for the zerg/terran or happy cos the protoss is looking powerful. How can that be called "uninteresting"? I believe browder and team have improved the game substantially in balance since initial release and rarely have new patches created a worse game than previously. Moving away from balance as that is not in respect to this OP, game design is a difficult concept made more difficult when you take into account the casual gamer up to the pro. All pro concerns are valid there is no doubt, however over time they will change somewhat due to new strategies. What will not change is a casual gamers impression of the game when a mothership pops. Listening to any community is dangerous in terms of game design since so many have a vested interest in certain areas. I think that they do listen to community perhaps not as directly as you like but it would be pretty ignorant to say they ignore it. Any more and I fear the result of what the game would turn into. Just because their opinions dont match up to a poll of 155 of TL's most passionately biased voters who are too scared to play so they troll forums and rage about collossi is not a good indication of game design. | ||
ArvickHero
10387 Posts
Dustin Browder: This situation where one unit counters another unit is not as serious as it was in Starcraft 1. Let's say we have a templar fighting a zergling, and the templar always loses. That's a situation where we really see one unit countering another unit. As of now, the balance between unit-counters and micro is better than in Starcraft 1. Holy fuck I think I just got dumber by reading that example. Hey Dustin.. DO HTs BEAT ZERGLINGS IN SC2 NOW??? | ||
|
Takezou
United States320 Posts
Most of the coaches, scouts, gms of professional sports teams are lower tier players or sometimes even people who didn't play professionally. | ||
| ||
FEL
Polish Championship - Group B
Spirit vs ArTLIVE!
Gerald vs TBD
PAPI vs TBD
IndyStarCraft
 232[ Submit Event ] |
|
|
|
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
Bonyth vs QiaoGege
Dewalt vs Fengzi
Hawk vs Zhanhun
Sziky vs Mihu
Mihu vs QiaoGege
Zhanhun vs Sziky
Fengzi vs Hawk
DaveTesta Events
Sparkling Tuna Cup
RSL Revival
Classic vs Clem
FEL
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
Bonyth vs Dewalt
QiaoGege vs Dewalt
Hawk vs Bonyth
Sziky vs Fengzi
Mihu vs Zhanhun
QiaoGege vs Zhanhun
Fengzi vs Mihu
Wardi Open
Replay Cast
WardiTV European League
PiGosaur Monday
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
