|
On June 18 2011 10:35 MeatlessTaco wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2011 10:23 Ocedic wrote:On June 18 2011 10:10 MeatlessTaco wrote:On June 18 2011 09:32 huddo38 wrote:
Good Interview JP cheers JP failed in the followup question category. The interviewee says all but two matchups are unbalanced. There are only 3 non-mirror matchups. JP happily moves to his next question while glancing at the camera awkwardly. The interviewee says some units, like the mothership, are not a concern if they are seldom used because they are aimed at more casual players. JP moves to his next question when he could have asked what other units also fall into the "we don't care about being used in high-level play" category. And, as others have noted, he could have asked about the tendency to remove content rather than rebalance it or add new content. The hell you think this is, an interview with Halliburton on their Middle East oil contracts? JP isn't here to 'ask tough questions,' and David Kim said that those two imbalanced matchups were only slightly imbalanced. You also misunderstood, because that was from data from ALL THREE REGIONS individually, meaning two matchups from a single region were imbalanced, aka Korean TvT stats are different from North American TvT stats. Ahhh, I get the race balance thing now, my bad. Second point still stands. The point this was an opportunity to find out something interesting, rather than stuff we already knew. edit: I work for Halliburton, lol
My bad for overreacting, didn't mean to come across raging. Anyhow, I agree with you that we didn't learn as much as we'd like, but honestly Blizz has been dodging a lot questions in general, mostly because there isn't anything there to talk about.
Since 1.3 came out recently (by SC2 patch standards,) it's unlikely they have any concrete balance things to share, as DKim only mentioned the ZvT and didn't talk about any concrete changes. And as for HotS, they're currently working on singleplayer, not multiplayer. So likely JP didn't want to ask questions he knew would get the typical "We aren't ready to talk about that yet" responses.
And hehe at Halliburton.
|
On June 18 2011 19:31 Ocedic wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2011 10:35 MeatlessTaco wrote:On June 18 2011 10:23 Ocedic wrote:On June 18 2011 10:10 MeatlessTaco wrote:On June 18 2011 09:32 huddo38 wrote:
Good Interview JP cheers JP failed in the followup question category. The interviewee says all but two matchups are unbalanced. There are only 3 non-mirror matchups. JP happily moves to his next question while glancing at the camera awkwardly. The interviewee says some units, like the mothership, are not a concern if they are seldom used because they are aimed at more casual players. JP moves to his next question when he could have asked what other units also fall into the "we don't care about being used in high-level play" category. And, as others have noted, he could have asked about the tendency to remove content rather than rebalance it or add new content. The hell you think this is, an interview with Halliburton on their Middle East oil contracts? JP isn't here to 'ask tough questions,' and David Kim said that those two imbalanced matchups were only slightly imbalanced. You also misunderstood, because that was from data from ALL THREE REGIONS individually, meaning two matchups from a single region were imbalanced, aka Korean TvT stats are different from North American TvT stats. Ahhh, I get the race balance thing now, my bad. Second point still stands. The point this was an opportunity to find out something interesting, rather than stuff we already knew. edit: I work for Halliburton, lol My bad for overreacting, didn't mean to come across raging. Anyhow, I agree with you that we didn't learn as much as we'd like, but honestly Blizz has been dodging a lot questions in general, mostly because there isn't anything there to talk about. Since 1.3 came out recently (by SC2 patch standards,) it's unlikely they have any concrete balance things to share, as DKim only mentioned the ZvT and didn't talk about any concrete changes. And as for HotS, they're currently working on singleplayer, not multiplayer. So likely JP didn't want to ask questions he knew would get the typical "We aren't ready to talk about that yet" responses. And hehe at Halliburton.
Just a throwback, I don't understand how TvT stats can differ from region to region when they're both the same race...
|
On June 18 2011 10:10 MeatlessTaco wrote:JP failed in the followup question category. The interviewee says all but two matchups are unbalanced. There are only 3 non-mirror matchups. JP happily moves to his next question while glancing at the camera awkwardly. The interviewee says some units, like the mothership, are not a concern if they are seldom used because they are aimed at more casual players. JP moves to his next question when he could have asked what other units also fall into the "we don't care about being used in high-level play" category. And, as others have noted, he could have asked about the tendency to remove content rather than rebalance it or add new content.
Well ZvZ has always been kinda debated. PvP is definitely one of the most complained matchups. and then there is PvZ/ZvP players arguing about the other being op.
The mothership is pretty much the only unit they've ever said this about (multiple times in other interviews). The other units they've mentioned that may be removed or changed are overseer, reaper, warp prism, archon, immortal, corruptor, and just generally adding some zerg units
and Ruscour, TvT stats can vary because blizzard has more stats than just win percentages. They have average game time, most used units, etc.
|
On June 18 2011 19:40 Ruscour wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2011 19:31 Ocedic wrote:On June 18 2011 10:35 MeatlessTaco wrote:On June 18 2011 10:23 Ocedic wrote:On June 18 2011 10:10 MeatlessTaco wrote:On June 18 2011 09:32 huddo38 wrote:
Good Interview JP cheers JP failed in the followup question category. The interviewee says all but two matchups are unbalanced. There are only 3 non-mirror matchups. JP happily moves to his next question while glancing at the camera awkwardly. The interviewee says some units, like the mothership, are not a concern if they are seldom used because they are aimed at more casual players. JP moves to his next question when he could have asked what other units also fall into the "we don't care about being used in high-level play" category. And, as others have noted, he could have asked about the tendency to remove content rather than rebalance it or add new content. The hell you think this is, an interview with Halliburton on their Middle East oil contracts? JP isn't here to 'ask tough questions,' and David Kim said that those two imbalanced matchups were only slightly imbalanced. You also misunderstood, because that was from data from ALL THREE REGIONS individually, meaning two matchups from a single region were imbalanced, aka Korean TvT stats are different from North American TvT stats. Ahhh, I get the race balance thing now, my bad. Second point still stands. The point this was an opportunity to find out something interesting, rather than stuff we already knew. edit: I work for Halliburton, lol My bad for overreacting, didn't mean to come across raging. Anyhow, I agree with you that we didn't learn as much as we'd like, but honestly Blizz has been dodging a lot questions in general, mostly because there isn't anything there to talk about. Since 1.3 came out recently (by SC2 patch standards,) it's unlikely they have any concrete balance things to share, as DKim only mentioned the ZvT and didn't talk about any concrete changes. And as for HotS, they're currently working on singleplayer, not multiplayer. So likely JP didn't want to ask questions he knew would get the typical "We aren't ready to talk about that yet" responses. And hehe at Halliburton. Just a throwback, I don't understand how TvT stats can differ from region to region when they're both the same race...
Oops, you got the point though -.-
|
I don't know, this doesn't sound good. The fact that this guy mentioned TvZ BL/infestor (even as example) couple of times and didn't even touch the fact that the community (not just zerg) has been in a crusade for the past 5 months against protoss units such as colossus and sentries, really makes me worried that they are thinking things are "ok" when they are actually not.
Also, thye are looking into BL/infestor builds when they didn't even "look into" massive deathballs of void/colossus few months ago that used melt 200 zerg amries without losing more than 15 supply themselves, yet look how that worked out by itself. I think BL/infestor is fine, the problem is in the current meta-game most terran players have not learned that they can build ghost in TvZ and use EMP/snipe. I've played lately on the ladder some mid-master terrans that started doing it, they just don't seem to have the APM to use ghosts, which is understanble since they are used to play at low APMs as terran, but then again, that's not an imbalance issue.
All in all, this interview worries me that Kim and his team are really disconnected with the community, the fact they didn't even mention protoss (which has been THE trending issue in balance for 5 months now) is kind of insulting to the community. It's like saying, yeah..you guys don't know what you are talking about so I won't even mention it, I rather talk about a new issue that could potentially most likely be a meta-game stage than anything else.
The HoTs stuff looks good, not that I care much for the campaign but looks fun.
|
On June 17 2011 06:08 GwSC wrote:
Good interviews
A little strange to me that he specifically mentions broodlord+infestor vs T as something they are looking at.
It seems that especially Korean Terrans with their crazy drop play are able to roll over that comp, being that its so slow.
Edit: Would like to add, I'm all for brood+infestor being less prominent. Slow powerful units as the center of the unit comp just doesn't feel zergy
I haaaaaaate broodlords. I wish they were way weaker but cheaper and more mobile. It's probably just my mindset and playstyle but it took me a long time to learn to even use them properly and I still try to avoid them if I can stay on tier 2 tech and win.
|
Nice interviews, a bit sad to see a lot of the posts devolve into balance/race whines but to be expected 
|
All balance issues aside they are right in saying the game is fairly balanced. Taking pros only in consideration and just observing how the scene has evolved we can say that the game has reached a state of APPARENT balance. There isn't a non-mirror matchup that is clearly broken.
But there are a few units that are a bit too strong and when abused they SEEM to make games go in ways they shouldn't. Broodlords are 100% fine but infestors indeed are a bit too strong. The real problem in BL/Infestor in TvZ is that you can' really build vikings to counter it as they cripple severely your ground army and the infestors clears a huge chunk of units on the ground before they are cleared. After that the zergling carpet can easily clear anything left.
Sentries are a tad too strong in early PvZ as zergs can't really counter it at all. So the protoss can sit on (usually) 2 bases for a long period of time ramping up production to do a very strong push while zerg has to try to keep up on macro or all-in.
Terrans right now are mainly abusing bunker harass against zerg with 2 rax. That is probably the most "abusive" thing viable right now.
And there are the "shit tier" units. Carriers, Mothership, Reapers, hydras(they aren't shit but are only viable in one matchup), battlecruisers...
|
On June 18 2011 23:45 the.bishOp wrote:
And there are the "shit tier" units. Carriers, Mothership, Reapers, hydras(they aren't shit but are only viable in one matchup), battlecruisers...
Carriers are the only definitively useless unit you got on there. Kiwikaki has proven time and time again that mothership play is a powerful option. Reapers can still harass and scout early game. If hydra's aren't shit why put them in that category? It's like saying "Robert Downey Jr. is black (he isn't black but is black in one movie)"
Battlecruisers... I know some Terrans in masters use them but it's usually the case of " The Everything Build" so I can't really say how useful they are.
|
On June 19 2011 00:32 Remaker12 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2011 23:45 the.bishOp wrote:
And there are the "shit tier" units. Carriers, Mothership, Reapers, hydras(they aren't shit but are only viable in one matchup), battlecruisers... Carriers are the only definitively useless unit you got on there. Kiwikaki has proven time and time again that mothership play is a powerful option. Reapers can still harass and scout early game. If hydra's aren't shit why put them in that category? It's like saying "Robert Downey Jr. is black (he isn't black but is black in one movie)" Battlecruisers... I know some Terrans in masters use them but it's usually the case of " The Everything Build" so I can't really say how useful they are.
Hydras are only viable in PvZ and only on certain situations. They are not bad IN THAT situation but they are very limited. Motherships are jokes sorry.
Reapers aren't bad for scouting and a BIT of harass but they have an upgrade that make absolutley no sense at all. BCs are bad too. They are useful in the same situations that Carriers and Motherships are.
|
On June 17 2011 06:08 GwSC wrote:
Good interviews
A little strange to me that he specifically mentions broodlord+infestor vs T as something they are looking at.
It seems that especially Korean Terrans with their crazy drop play are able to roll over that comp, being that its so slow.
Edit: Would like to add, I'm all for brood+infestor being less prominent. Slow powerful units as the center of the unit comp just doesn't feel zergy
Guardians queens defilers lurkers. Pretty slow clunky, space controlling, and ability powerful units.
|
On June 19 2011 01:01 Aberu wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2011 06:08 GwSC wrote:
Good interviews
A little strange to me that he specifically mentions broodlord+infestor vs T as something they are looking at.
It seems that especially Korean Terrans with their crazy drop play are able to roll over that comp, being that its so slow.
Edit: Would like to add, I'm all for brood+infestor being less prominent. Slow powerful units as the center of the unit comp just doesn't feel zergy Guardians queens defilers lurkers. Pretty slow clunky, space controlling, and ability powerful units.
and can you tell me how I do build those units? Am I the only person who doesn't find the lurker upgrade in his T2 hydra den? obviously, this thread is about SC2, so plz comment on SC2!
however, I don't think BL,Infestor is too strong or unzergish. Without blizzard mentioning it, most people would not even have thought of it being OP...
On June 19 2011 00:32 Remaker12 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2011 23:45 the.bishOp wrote:
And there are the "shit tier" units. Carriers, Mothership, Reapers, hydras(they aren't shit but are only viable in one matchup), battlecruisers... Carriers are the only definitively useless unit you got on there. Kiwikaki has proven time and time again that mothership play is a powerful option. Reapers can still harass and scout early game. If hydra's aren't shit why put them in that category? It's like saying "Robert Downey Jr. is black (he isn't black but is black in one movie)" Battlecruisers... I know some Terrans in masters use them but it's usually the case of " The Everything Build" so I can't really say how useful they are.
There have been carrier and mothership rushes in the GSL that worked.
I really hate, how people confuse units that are in the game for a particular purpose (BCs to counter Mech), with units that you simply have to get, because they are basic.
Why is the carrier in the game? Because they are maybe the best counter to a meching terran in the lategame. Why don't we see them? Because hardly anybody ever plays mech in TvP! If you want to see carriers, watch Goody vs Protoss. Then you will see Carriers.Winning!
(If you want to see BCs, just watch a random IMMVP game - maybe the best terran in the world - in nearly any 20min+ TvT. Or Thorzain. Or TLO. Those guys LOVE their BCs in TvT)
It's like asking: "Why don't we see more hydras vs tanks?" (obviously because this is not the situation in which you need hydras...)
|
On June 17 2011 06:16 FMStyles wrote:
"For 1v1 maps specifically, we're trying to make a very diverse set of maps so players who love rushing, macro, or more normal game play can all enjoy the different formats."
who love rushing
love rushing
rushing...
bitbybit
|
On June 19 2011 02:01 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2011 01:01 Aberu wrote:On June 17 2011 06:08 GwSC wrote:
Good interviews
A little strange to me that he specifically mentions broodlord+infestor vs T as something they are looking at.
It seems that especially Korean Terrans with their crazy drop play are able to roll over that comp, being that its so slow.
Edit: Would like to add, I'm all for brood+infestor being less prominent. Slow powerful units as the center of the unit comp just doesn't feel zergy Guardians queens defilers lurkers. Pretty slow clunky, space controlling, and ability powerful units. and can you tell me how I do build those units? Am I the only person who doesn't find the lurker upgrade in his T2 hydra den? obviously, this thread is about SC2, so plz comment on SC2! however, I don't think BL,Infestor is too strong or unzergish. Without blizzard mentioning it, most people would not even have thought of it being OP... Show nested quote +On June 19 2011 00:32 Remaker12 wrote:On June 18 2011 23:45 the.bishOp wrote:
And there are the "shit tier" units. Carriers, Mothership, Reapers, hydras(they aren't shit but are only viable in one matchup), battlecruisers... Carriers are the only definitively useless unit you got on there. Kiwikaki has proven time and time again that mothership play is a powerful option. Reapers can still harass and scout early game. If hydra's aren't shit why put them in that category? It's like saying "Robert Downey Jr. is black (he isn't black but is black in one movie)" Battlecruisers... I know some Terrans in masters use them but it's usually the case of " The Everything Build" so I can't really say how useful they are. There have been carrier and mothership rushes in the GSL that worked. I really hate, how people confuse units that are in the game for a particular purpose (BCs to counter Mech), with units that you simply have to get, because they are basic. Why is the carrier in the game? Because they are maybe the best counter to a meching terran. Why don't we see them? Because hardly anybody ever plays mech in TvP! If you want to see carriers, watch Goody vs Protoss. Then you will see Carriers.Winning! (If you want to see BCs, just watch a random IMMVP game - maybe the best terran in the world - in nearly any 20min+ TvT. Or Thorzain. Or TLO. Those guys LOVE their BCs in TvT)
Carriers and BCs are similar in use but are bad for different reasons. BCs are bad because they are good in ONE situation and carriers are bad because you can't transition safely to them.
For the cost, vikings end up countering them both even though you can't kite carriers with them.
|
On June 18 2011 21:25 Tacoss23 wrote:
I don't know, this doesn't sound good. The fact that this guy mentioned TvZ BL/infestor (even as example) couple of times and didn't even touch the fact that the community (not just zerg) has been in a crusade for the past 5 months against protoss units such as colossus and sentries, really makes me worried that they are thinking things are "ok" when they are actually not.
Also, thye are looking into BL/infestor builds when they didn't even "look into" massive deathballs of void/colossus few months ago that used melt 200 zerg amries without losing more than 15 supply themselves, yet look how that worked out by itself. I think BL/infestor is fine, the problem is in the current meta-game most terran players have not learned that they can build ghost in TvZ and use EMP/snipe. I've played lately on the ladder some mid-master terrans that started doing it, they just don't seem to have the APM to use ghosts, which is understanble since they are used to play at low APMs as terran, but then again, that's not an imbalance issue.
All in all, this interview worries me that Kim and his team are really disconnected with the community, the fact they didn't even mention protoss (which has been THE trending issue in balance for 5 months now) is kind of insulting to the community. It's like saying, yeah..you guys don't know what you are talking about so I won't even mention it, I rather talk about a new issue that could potentially most likely be a meta-game stage than anything else.
The HoTs stuff looks good, not that I care much for the campaign but looks fun.
Yeh I agree. Now go coach Nada/bratok/sjow and all other top terran players on how to play tvz. Because obiviously they just need to mass ghosts, and hence they must be pretty stupid (compared to you).
|
Edit: Whoops, posted in the wrong thread.
|
On June 17 2011 06:08 GwSC wrote:
Good interviews
A little strange to me that he specifically mentions broodlord+infestor vs T as something they are looking at.
It seems that especially Korean Terrans with their crazy drop play are able to roll over that comp, being that its so slow.
Edit: Would like to add, I'm all for brood+infestor being less prominent. Slow powerful units as the center of the unit comp just doesn't feel zergy
that seems similar to the old problem of overpowered siege tanks vs banelings, where to counter it you needed to drop from overlords, where as the terran army just needed to do a slow push. So yes it can be countered, but just because the high apm pro players can counter a specific play dose'nt mean its balanced even for master or diamond leagues
|
|
|
Uggghhhhhhh.
"we're looking at Broodlord infestor"
combined with
"For 1v1 maps specifically, we're trying to make a very diverse set of maps so players who love rushing, macro, or more normal game play can all enjoy the different formats."
makes me real apprehensive. Didn't we already go through this with the release of WoL? Making tiny maps that favor a bunch of cheesy rushes is not good. That statement really should have read, "we learned a lot from the WoL map making process and are striving to make maps balanced for tournament play in all the matchups."
Also, if all the matchups are balanced, why are we looking at Broodlord - Infestor? Is it perhaps...not balanced?! And on the (touchy) subject of balance, I'd like to reiterate this:
On June 18 2011 21:25 Tacoss23 wrote:
I don't know, this doesn't sound good. The fact that this guy mentioned TvZ BL/infestor (even as example) couple of times and didn't even touch the fact that the community (not just zerg) has been in a crusade for the past 5 months against protoss units such as colossus and sentries, really makes me worried that they are thinking things are "ok" when they are actually not. Seems like plenty more complaining has been done about the collosus and the sentry than the Broodlord/infestor combo.
On a less pessimistic note, I'm kinda ok with the mothership being there as a "mostly for casuals" type unit. As long as it's the only unit of that takes that throne. Also, I definitely would love a tougher-than-brutal difficulty. Some of the brutal missions were pretty tough (In Utter Darkness comes to mind) but others were waaaaaay easy.
|
On June 19 2011 05:32 Lobotomist wrote:
"For 1v1 maps specifically, we're trying to make a very diverse set of maps so players who love rushing, macro, or more normal game play can all enjoy the different formats."
makes me real apprehensive. Didn't we already go through this with the release of WoL? Making tiny maps that favor a bunch of cheesy rushes is not good. That statement really should have read, "we learned a lot from the WoL map making process and are striving to make maps balanced for tournament play in all the matchups."
He addressed this. Battlnet maps are for all players, including the ones who like rush gameplay. Tournaments can, and should use, maps tailored for high level tournament play.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
