EPTDesignated Balance Discussion Thread - Page 1174
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
SatedSC2
England3012 Posts
| ||
|
pure.Wasted
Canada4701 Posts
On October 28 2014 01:53 SatedSC2 wrote: What you enjoy watching and what's actually balanced to play are two completely different things. Roman gladiatorial combat wasn't supposed to be fair so I don't know why you're bringing that up. We're not talking about balance. The Reaper is balanced. It's badly designed. Not because it's always completely useless -- it has its uses -- but because Terran's 7/14 usable units don't leave a lot of room for niche units that are only there for 30 seconds. | ||
|
DCsFinest
9 Posts
| ||
|
SatedSC2
England3012 Posts
| ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
 ).Remember when Sniper won the GSL? No. Because we were so sick of ZvZ that none of us watched those games. Remember when Protoss was winning everything and viewership started decreasing? A balanced game will do more for viewership than fun late game Reaper usage. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
I would say that the latter is quite bad because it's unintuitive. If you have too many zerglings you can easily use them for harassment, if you have too many roaches then this might fall under the grey area of you having strategically failed by not trading them earlier. But once you've used your oracle and the opponent has proper defense then it becomes annoying to find uses for them. If you've done a very good job of keeping your phoenixes alive you'll be reminded that no good deed goes unpunished as it becomes increasingly difficult and taxing to harass with them. I think another problem is when you spend resources on expensive upgrades or tech buildings only to be forced into another tech path. Let's say you always had to transition into mech in the late-game, every game you'd be faced with useless barracks that you might as well fly around on a mission of tourism. I don't think this is good to have in your game. You might say something about sunk cost fallacy or strategic complexity, but people don't think that way and players don't want to be confronted with these things. I would say that the reaper is remarkably functional for a unit that's so "limited", however I would still agree that it would be superior if it had late-game uses because now it does feel a bit limiting. But those are more abstract considerations that mainly interest people on forums while not being that impactful in concrete situations. | ||
|
pure.Wasted
Canada4701 Posts
On October 28 2014 02:03 SatedSC2 wrote: The Reaper was not used at the end of WoL. Blizzard re-designed the Reaper so that it could be used to gather scouting information early in the game and it fills this role perfectly. If it does what it's supposed to do very well then it is well designed and you're talking out of your arse if you say otherwise. The opposite of this would be the Swarm Host. Blizzard said that they wanted the Swarm Host to be a siege unit that could be used to break turtling opponents, which means that it's supposed to be used offensively. It's instead a unit that induces turtling and tends to be used defensively. It doesn't do any of the things that it was supposed to do and so it is badly designed. Your assertion that the Reaper is badly designed is akin to saying that hammers are badly designed because they don't screw screws, despite the fact that's not what they're intended for and the fact that screwdrivers already exist. But like I said, you don't even play the game so why am I even bothering... The Terran race, as currently designed, does not have room for a unit that "could be used to gather scouting information early in the game" while doing nothing else. You know how we know that? Because every single TvP looks identical for the T. Pick a TvZ at random and you'll never be sure to guess the contents. Is it 2rax? Is it a Hellion timing? Is it a Hellbat timing? Is it a Banshee opening? Is it MMM + WM? Is it MMM + Hellbats? Is it MMM + tanks? Is it MMM + Thor? Is it pure mech? Into sky Terran? Pick a TvP at random and there's one question to answer from the Terran's perspective: did he SCV all-in? The rest is all the same, MMMVG all day, every day, and a few mines on Probe killing duty. You don't like "the Reaper is poorly designed"? Fine, "the Terran race is poorly designed." "TvP is poorly designed." Pick whichever one you prefer. Terran needs more units in the MU or it's going to be the same shit for another 4 years. You think that'll grow the viewership? And if I'm Blizzard, it makes a lot more sense to retool the units already in the game (ie, the Reaper) than to invent brand new ones so that Terran ends up with 20 total by the time SC2 has run its course. | ||
|
pure.Wasted
Canada4701 Posts
On October 28 2014 02:14 DinoMight wrote: At the end of the day spectators like to watch a balanced game (or one in which Terran is favored ).Remember when Sniper won the GSL? No. Because we were so sick of ZvZ that none of us watched those games. Remember when Protoss was winning everything and viewership started decreasing? A balanced game will do more for viewership than fun late game Reaper usage. I haven't seen any numbers on SC2 viewership in 2014. I'd be really interested in seeing just when the drop-off occurred. Did it start back in 2013 s3? The interesting thing about what you say is that balance in SC2 is impossible to gauge to 100% certainty. Like, we can be damn sure we're interpreting all the signs correctly, but not perfectly sure. A flukey tournament, a chaotic meta, not enough race X in tournaments, whatever could be responsible for the stats. Case in point, throughout 2014, Blizzard insisted that the winratio proved the game was very close to balanced. Finally, after many months, they gave in and buffed the WM. Whatever happened to the winratio? So that makes me very curious to find out when viewership dropped off, because that would tell us when people started perceiving an issue and trusting their gut over Blizzard's numbers. I doubt you have these on hand, but I'd also be curious to know what the viewership was doing throughout 2013. Blizzard's explicit reasoning for nerfing the mine was to make the MU more fresh and exciting, despite the balanced results of contemporary tournaments. So I wonder how that would stack up against your theory. Just food for thought. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
Why do Ps rush Colossi and get Templar eventually? Because they need to by strategic unit design. In ZvT we already see this much more optional again, since the balance team has banned infestors and broodlords from the matchup and balanced around banelings - with ultralisks being kind of optional but not really much better than ling/bling. I actually don't think Protoss is in a very interesting spot vs Terran. They have a few optional unitas like oracles or immortals, but at the end of the day they arent that useful to allow you tonplay fundamentially different, except for phoenix/collossus which is still just collossusturtle play as always. | ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
On October 28 2014 02:43 Big J wrote: I agree with you pure, it would be muc better to extend the usefulness of existing Terran units than to introduce new ones. But as a comparison to the other races, Terran doesnt use as many units because unlike Z/P lowtech units, Terran lowtech units dont really lose their viability on their own and thus the latee game units have never really been brought into the matchups. Why do Ps rush Colossi and get Templar eventually? Because they need to by strategic unit design. In ZvT we already see this much more optional again, since the balance team has banned infestors and broodlords from the matchup and balanced around banelings - with ultralisks being kind of optional but not really much better than ling/bling. I actually don't think Protoss is in a very interesting spot vs Terran. They have a few optional unitas like oracles or immortals, but at the end of the day they arent that useful to allow you tonplay fundamentially different, except for phoenix/collossus which is still just collossusturtle play as always. I started turtling on Templar and ditching Colo for Tempests. I build a massive Tempest/HT ball and just turtle the whole game. Until I have a dozen bases with billions of cannons everywhere. Then I do a Cannon/Tempest push. That's fun. But yeah at the pro level the options for Protoss are very limited. While it's true that Protoss builds more of their units on average in that MU, I think it's more about the units that you HAVE to build. Colo every game for P these days :/ | ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
Especially protoss. But seriously, all races needs a redesign. Imo, terran going bio everygame is not the dull part. The dull part is that colossus are so freaking boring and ruins the gameplay. The fun part about RTS is when units have options. Where to move, where to attack, where to defend. Those simple things can add so much. I would not be tired of tvp if those things were all game long. For terran and for protoss. But the colossus makes the bio camp and wait for the right hardcounter. About reaper, what is so good about this unit when it is so restricted to the opening phase purely. Saying this is good design makes no sense. | ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
On October 28 2014 02:51 DinoMight wrote: I started turtling on Templar and ditching Colo for Tempests. I build a massive Tempest/HT ball and just turtle the whole game. Until I have a dozen bases with billions of cannons everywhere. Then I do a Cannon/Tempest push. That's fun. But yeah at the pro level the options for Protoss are very limited. While it's true that Protoss builds more of their units on average in that MU, I think it's more about the units that you HAVE to build.Colo every game for P these days :/ Protoss units have very bad interactions with every other unit in the game. Doesnt matter if there are a good variance. Its dull as hell. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
On October 28 2014 02:53 Foxxan wrote: About reaper, what is so good about this unit when it is so restricted to the opening pase purely. Saying this is good design makes no sense. It's not great design, but imo the reaper is not the best example when discussing badly designed units. Pointing out that it becomes obsolete in late-game is a bit of a cheap shot that doesn't adequately describe why the unit is symptomatic of bad Blizzard design decisions. And I don't think it is; certainly there are much better targets. | ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
On October 28 2014 02:55 Foxxan wrote: No. Protoss units have so bad interactions with every unit in the game. This is dull. Doesnt matter if there is a good variance. It's hard for anyone to take you seriously when you write things like your last 2 comments. Would you please indulge us with... maybe some reasons why you feel that way? I don't think Protoss is designed poorly. I think the Oracle, the Widow Mine, and the SH/Viper are designed poorly. Here's what I'd change: Oracle - it's only used to kill workers in the early game. If you manage to keep it alive you can fly around and spam revelation. And in PvP you can use it for detection if you went Stargate and your opponent went DTs. But I think that unit would be much better designed with a spell that's still relevant in the late game you can get a little more utility out of instead of just something that forces missile turrets. Widow Mine - it could kill 13 banelings and completely change the outcome of a game. Or it could kill one Zergling. It's too inconsistent and luck with it determines too much. Given the size/scale of SC2 battles the micro required to use it reliably (and play against it reliably) may be asking a bit too much of the players (on both sides). SH/Viper - Free energy from consuming buildings (that don't cost gas), free locusts, blinding cloud just ruin the game. This is essentially a strategy game about taking bases and growing your economy and those two units combined basically remove that from the equation. The SH/Viper interaction is too good. Making blinding cloud not affect mechanical units would be a good start to fixing this. Forcing Swarm Hosts to expose themselves more than they do by reducing the lifespan of the locusts but increasing their spawning time might work as well. | ||
|
JCoto
Spain574 Posts
On October 28 2014 02:53 Foxxan wrote: The game needs a redesign. Especially protoss. But seriously, all races needs a redesign. Imo, terran going bio everygame is not the dull part. The dull part is that colossus are so freaking boring and ruins the gameplay. The fun part about RTS is when units have options. Where to move, where to attack, where to defend. Those simple things can add so much. I would not be tired of tvp if those things were all game long. For terran and for protoss. But the colossus makes the bio camp and wait for the right hardcounter. About reaper, what is so good about this unit when it is so restricted to the opening phase purely. Saying this is good design makes no sense. I don't get the point on accusing protoss of bad unit design, given that they use at least 2/3 of their units almost everygame, instead of the number of units you can count with one hand. What's more, you are saying that using almost every unit is dull, but using 5 out 15 as a terran isn't. If this was a discussion between android or apple, I will call you fanboy. The bad designed units as protoss are in the air, as oracles are too strong early game and Fleet Beacon units (Tempest and Carrier) are almost useless. The Tempest serves as an overpowered lategame unit killer and the carrier is almost useless in high level, all both being really expensive to tech to. The other ones work fine and what's more, they are needed almost every game. If you have stated that the protoss design is simple instead of bad, I would have simply told that you are right. Regarding design, protoss units are fare more simple as almost every unit has very limited usses and an assigned role. However, they work fine as a whole. Sometimes the simplest solutions are the best. However it's true that the units introduced in HOTS for Protoss are not very good designed. And what they have done to the Carrier is deplorable. Make all terran units usable and then rework protoss if you want. I would start by nerfing Tempest damage in first pplace. | ||
|
SatedSC2
England3012 Posts
| ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
On October 28 2014 03:36 JCoto wrote: I don't get the point on accusing protoss of bad unit design, given that they use at least 2/3 of their units almost everygame, instead of the number of units you can count with one hand. What's more, you are saying that using almost every unit is dull, but using 5 out 15 as a terran isn't. If this was a discussion between android or apple, I will call you fanboy. The bad designed units as protoss are in the air, as oracles are too strong early game and Fleet Beacon units (Tempest and Carrier) are almost useless. The Tempest serves as an overpowered lategame unit killer and the carrier is almost useless in high level, all both being really expensive to tech to. The other ones work fine and what's more, they are needed almost every game. If you have stated that the protoss design is simple instead of bad, I would have simply told that you are right. Regarding design, protoss units are fare more simple as almost every unit has very limited usses and an assigned role. However, they work fine as a whole. Sometimes the simplest solutions are the best. However it's true that the units introduced in HOTS for Protoss are not very good designed. And what they have done to the Carrier is deplorable. Make all terran units usable and then rework protoss if you want. I would start by nerfing Tempest damage in first pplace. You just said the Tempest is almost useless, but you would start by nerfing it? I don't follow. I actually wish we saw good Tempest play. It's actually a really hard unit to use correctly as it's fragile and does very little DPS (to regular targets). Its range also means that it requires babysitting or it will start charging into battle ahead of the rest of your army. So typically, you'll have Tempests, High Templar to protect from mass AA such as Vikings and Corruptors, an Oracle for Revelation so you have the full range of the Tempests available, and then stuff to protect your HT and Tempests such as a Colossus, some gateway units, etc. It requires micro and good control and all those things that people complain that Protoss doesn't require enough.... and it's amazing to watch someone do it well. I know it's the hundredth time I mention this series but CJ Hero did an amazing job managing this composition in his IEM games vs. Snute. | ||
|
Decendos
Germany1341 Posts
On October 28 2014 04:28 DinoMight wrote: You just said the Tempest is almost useless, but you would start by nerfing it? I don't follow. I actually wish we saw good Tempest play. It's actually a really hard unit to use correctly as it's fragile and does very little DPS (to regular targets). Its range also means that it requires babysitting or it will start charging into battle ahead of the rest of your army. So typically, you'll have Tempests, High Templar to protect from mass AA such as Vikings and Corruptors, an Oracle for Revelation so you have the full range of the Tempests available, and then stuff to protect your HT and Tempests such as a Colossus, some gateway units, etc. It requires micro and good control and all those things that people complain that Protoss doesn't require enough.... and it's amazing to watch someone do it well. I know it's the hundredth time I mention this series but CJ Hero did an amazing job managing this composition in his IEM games vs. Snute. tempests are hard to use because they have such a big range...like what? :D the hard thing about tempest is the focus fire you need to do with them while microing your other stuff. the range makes them obv a lot easier to use and not harder... also tempests are fragile? they have one if not THE biggest hp per supply in the whole game. even ultralisks have a lot less hp per supply than tempests and those are air units. the tempest is just a pretty badly designed unit that was introduced to do two things: making BLs useless and make PvP more than colossus wars. such a siege unit SHOULD be fragile and even slower since its an air unit...it just isnt. tempest are really broken its just protoss cant get to it in reasonable numbers in an easy way so that balances protoss but not the unit. its kind of like mass raven + support like BC etc. is broken in TvZ its just really hard for T to get to that composition. | ||
|
JCoto
Spain574 Posts
I didn't say that tempests were weak at all. In fact, they are very powerful and a really good hard counter. I messed up a bit, what i tried to say is that they are poorly designed/ were designed without considerating the impact in high tier play. They simply hardcounter Massive air and mech too well. That's why they should be a bit nerfed in terms of damage and maybe range and be given something in exchange, like the + bonus vs structures that was stated against SH or some very low splash damage that affected specially shields. Having a flyer Siege Tank with 450 total HP that has 15 range and big damage projectile (which means very low part of the damage is mitigated) that kills massive air without almost effort its not the best desing, as states Decendos. You won't see many BL or Heavy mech (Tanks, Thors, BC) against protoss with that range/damage values. It's pretty basic logic. A little ball of units (6-8) is enough to two shot really important units while zoning them. Even if DPS is not on the top, what it is important to see there is one-shoting and focus firing. Then zoning gets really important. | ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
On October 28 2014 04:46 Decendos wrote: tempests are hard to use because they have such a big range...like what? :D the hard thing about tempest is the focus fire you need to do with them while microing your other stuff. the range makes them obv a lot easier to use and not harder... also tempests are fragile? they have one if not THE biggest hp per supply in the whole game. even ultralisks have a lot less hp per supply than tempests and those are air units. the tempest is just a pretty badly designed unit that was introduced to do two things: making BLs useless and make PvP more than colossus wars. such a siege unit SHOULD be fragile and even slower since its an air unit...it just isnt. tempest are really broken its just protoss cant get to it in reasonable numbers in an easy way so that balances protoss but not the unit. its kind of like mass raven + support like BC etc. is broken in TvZ its just really hard for T to get to that composition. Tempests are hard to use because of their range, yes: -Because they have long range, they will start to acquire targets on their own and drift away, meaning you need to pull them back. -Because they have low DPS, target firing is very important thus you need to keep them in place and shooting at the specific target you want. -Because they shoot further than their range, you need to constantly make sure that you have observers/Revelation active so they can see what you want them to hit. As soon as an observer dies or Revelation wears off they will just start moving forward towards what they were shooting at. -I say they are weak not because they have low HP but because they have low DPS and everything that can hit them has significatly higher DPS (vikings, marines, Hydras, etc.). Thus they don't kill what's attacking them fast enough to survive. I feel like your comments are those of someone who 1) doesn't play protoss 2) has never played mass Tempest outside of silly team games or monobattles 3) have never watched a professional Starcraft 2 game with Tempests where the guy going Tempests wasn't already hugely ahead. | ||
| ||
