|
On August 28 2013 18:43 aZealot wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2013 18:33 saddaromma wrote:On August 28 2013 18:13 aZealot wrote:
It never works? WOL was full of pros figuring out stuff (e.g. Protoss players figuring out the Stephano style Roach max) and the same in HOTS. The only thing is that given the packed tournament schedule, it actually works against players finding out solutions to problems and also experimenting with new strategies and styles (there is no time for "play" or for just "empty" time where ideas at the bottom of your brain bubble up to the surface when you are doing something else). As there is so much reason to win, there is a strong incentive to stick with successful builds or even just recycle old successful builds. Full of pros figuring out? and you provide a less known strategy with short success history in EU/NA. Grats, you proved me very wrong. Don't you think pros, who train at least 10 hours a day for 6 months, couldn't have found better solution if it already existed? In fact 4M got even stronger the more pros learn how to utilize it. Nope, just pointing out your hyperbole. "Never" is a strong word to use. You were obviously wrong. As to the pros, that remains to be seen. I didn't know there was an expected timer on finding solutions. Is 4M imbalanced? Maybe. Is it badly imbalanced? I don't know. If Zergs need to suffer for another 3 - 6 months to make sure that Blizzard need to do more than give a slight overseer speed buff, so be it is my view. Doing nothing is in principle the right thing to do.
So you think leaving broodlord/infestors as it is until the Hots was wise thing to do. Do you even imagine how many terrans retired and lost prize money?
|
On August 28 2013 18:47 saddaromma wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2013 18:43 aZealot wrote:On August 28 2013 18:33 saddaromma wrote:On August 28 2013 18:13 aZealot wrote:
It never works? WOL was full of pros figuring out stuff (e.g. Protoss players figuring out the Stephano style Roach max) and the same in HOTS. The only thing is that given the packed tournament schedule, it actually works against players finding out solutions to problems and also experimenting with new strategies and styles (there is no time for "play" or for just "empty" time where ideas at the bottom of your brain bubble up to the surface when you are doing something else). As there is so much reason to win, there is a strong incentive to stick with successful builds or even just recycle old successful builds. Full of pros figuring out? and you provide a less known strategy with short success history in EU/NA. Grats, you proved me very wrong. Don't you think pros, who train at least 10 hours a day for 6 months, couldn't have found better solution if it already existed? In fact 4M got even stronger the more pros learn how to utilize it. Nope, just pointing out your hyperbole. "Never" is a strong word to use. You were obviously wrong. As to the pros, that remains to be seen. I didn't know there was an expected timer on finding solutions. Is 4M imbalanced? Maybe. Is it badly imbalanced? I don't know. If Zergs need to suffer for another 3 - 6 months to make sure that Blizzard need to do more than give a slight overseer speed buff, so be it is my view. Doing nothing is in principle the right thing to do. So you think leaving broodlord/infestors as it is until the Hots was wise thing to do. Do you even imagine how many terrans retired and lost prize money?
It's ironic you bring that up because, arguably, the dominance of BL/Infestor was an unintended consequence of two Zerg buffs (OL speed buff and Queen buff). But, yeah. Looking back, leaving WOL alone (if that was the intention of the balance team - they may have decided to leave it with HOTS on the horizon) with mass BL/Infestor was the right thing to do. I'd rather Blizzard follow what, to me, are good principles (patch rarely and carefully) and get it wrong occasionally rather than follow the wrong principles (patch often and quickly) and get it wrong most of the time.
And, hey, I am a Protoss player. I know the pain of BL/Infestor. But, even then, towards the end of WOL you saw Protoss players refining solutions to the problem. And not just MS and Archon toilet (especially once Zerg players learned to split their BL and/or spammed IT to stop Archons getting into the toilet) but use of Templar and Carrier play, WP harass, Zealot runbys, DT backstabs etc which abused the immobility of BL/Infestor. Sure, on some maps (e.g. Daybreak) you'd lose once Zerg got to their "I win" composition. But, the fact was that Protoss players were developing their play against that dominant composition. I don't know if they would have been successful, as HOTS interfered, but it was interesting to see the process.
|
They only lost the tournaments, the money was never theyr, anyway, off topic... The problem right now doesn't really seem to be the win rates( as a spectator ) it seems to be how simple and easy terran has it in terms of strategy, they build the same units all game and cheap units to boot, it makes them easier to play and less risky because they can play very scrappy/low eco games, not only that one of their main units (widow mine) as the added advantages of coming early in the game, being a very strong defensive unit(has AOE + invisible) not only that the unit that allows T being agressive is the first unit they get, which attacks both ground and air, has a very good attack rate, has huge growth potential since it has good attack speed making it a very powerful unit when having a upgrade advantage, all this coupled with the fact their cheap in minerals and free in gas allows them to get the upgrades soon making it very viable.
The reason i talked about all this is pretty simple, this strategy 4m is too simple to execute having a very stable and start, mid and late game, making it a bit too good. If this all units/upgrades involved in the build remain with same costs/upgrade time/build time this build will allways remain relevant, and since its so easy to get too it just makes the player never want to leave it making the games very stale for spectators.
My 2cents.
|
On August 28 2013 19:11 Bazik wrote:
They only lost the tournaments, the money was never theyr, anyway, off topic... The problem right now doesn't really seem to be the win rates( as a spectator ) it seems to be how simple and easy terran has it in terms of strategy, they build the same units all game and cheap units to boot, it makes them easier to play and less risky because they can play very scrappy/low eco games, not only that one of their main units (widow mine) as the added advantages of coming early in the game, being a very strong defensive unit(has AOE + invisible) not only that the unit that allows T being agressive is the first unit they get, which attacks both ground and air, has a very good attack rate, has huge growth potential since it has good attack speed making it a very powerful unit when having a upgrade advantage, all this coupled with the fact their cheap in minerals and free in gas allows them to get the upgrades soon making it very viable.
The reason i talked about all this is pretty simple, this strategy 4m is too simple to execute having a very stable and start, mid and late game, making it a bit too good. If this all units/upgrades involved in the build remain with same costs/upgrade time/build time this build will allways remain relevant, and since its so easy to get too it just makes the player never want to leave it making the games very stale for spectators.
My 2cents.
Too simple to execute = imbalanced
So do you want to say it is imbalanced?
|
I mean to say it needs to have more risk involved. It's too safe right now.
Ok, instead of pointing only the problem i'll try and ellaborate on 2 possible solutions.
1st is the simple increase costs, making the build costing a little bit more to get/maintain might solve the problem. It has the added benefit of making it more skill based, if ur good with ur micro then u don't need to replace as many units hence not needing has much money.
2nd is the one that i don't like and was the one used in WoL, buff something to solve the problem. Examples that ppl might not remember that were needed and had awsome results was the removal of the high templar upgrade(kaydaran crystal or something) that gave them extra energy after building, the1 range added to roachs where they started being able to attack behind a forcefield this are a couple that i think were awsome for the game. Then you have the controversial ones, like giving the infestor AOE damage (at the start of WoL fungal didn't do dmg and instead lasted longer). Another one was when terran started needing a supply depot before rax. Remember GSL 2 when many of the TvZ where basically 5m games where the terran did a marine/SCV all in and the zerg either held and won or instantly loose.
|
On August 28 2013 19:03 aZealot wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2013 18:47 saddaromma wrote:On August 28 2013 18:43 aZealot wrote:On August 28 2013 18:33 saddaromma wrote:On August 28 2013 18:13 aZealot wrote:
It never works? WOL was full of pros figuring out stuff (e.g. Protoss players figuring out the Stephano style Roach max) and the same in HOTS. The only thing is that given the packed tournament schedule, it actually works against players finding out solutions to problems and also experimenting with new strategies and styles (there is no time for "play" or for just "empty" time where ideas at the bottom of your brain bubble up to the surface when you are doing something else). As there is so much reason to win, there is a strong incentive to stick with successful builds or even just recycle old successful builds. Full of pros figuring out? and you provide a less known strategy with short success history in EU/NA. Grats, you proved me very wrong. Don't you think pros, who train at least 10 hours a day for 6 months, couldn't have found better solution if it already existed? In fact 4M got even stronger the more pros learn how to utilize it. Nope, just pointing out your hyperbole. "Never" is a strong word to use. You were obviously wrong. As to the pros, that remains to be seen. I didn't know there was an expected timer on finding solutions. Is 4M imbalanced? Maybe. Is it badly imbalanced? I don't know. If Zergs need to suffer for another 3 - 6 months to make sure that Blizzard need to do more than give a slight overseer speed buff, so be it is my view. Doing nothing is in principle the right thing to do. So you think leaving broodlord/infestors as it is until the Hots was wise thing to do. Do you even imagine how many terrans retired and lost prize money? It's ironic you bring that up because, arguably, the dominance of BL/Infestor was an unintended consequence of two Zerg buffs (OL speed buff and Queen buff). But, yeah. Looking back, leaving WOL alone (if that was the intention of the balance team - they may have decided to leave it with HOTS on the horizon) with mass BL/Infestor was the right thing to do. I'd rather Blizzard follow what, to me, are good principles (patch rarely and carefully) and get it wrong occasionally rather than follow the wrong principles (patch often and quickly) and get it wrong most of the time. And, hey, I am a Protoss player. I know the pain of BL/Infestor. But, even then, towards the end of WOL you saw Protoss players refining solutions to the problem. And not just MS and Archon toilet (especially once Zerg players learned to split their BL and/or spammed IT to stop Archons getting into the toilet) but use of Templar and Carrier play, WP harass, Zealot runbys, DT backstabs etc which abused the immobility of BL/Infestor. Sure, on some maps (e.g. Daybreak) you'd lose once Zerg got to their "I win" composition. But, the fact was that Protoss players were developing their play against that dominant composition. I don't know if they would have been successful, as HOTS interfered, but it was interesting to see the process.
Well, not to be offensive, but you have a terrible viewpoint on this matter. First of all, sc2 was literally dying in the end of WoL, mostly because how stale it become. It makes game boring for spectators and for players. Secondly eventhough it was "getting figured out", I attribute it to zergs getting over-confident and not caring to micro their armies or patchzergs not managing to do basic micro, BL/Infestor still stayed strong in the right hands.
Lets look to other games:
LoL patches the game frequently and do major reworks of champions, eventhough the game doesn't look imbalanced. I think its partly because they want the game to be more dynamic and strategies being less stale. And In order to keep long-term players heated.
Dota 2. Eventhough, valve don't patch the game frequently, they still try to buff underused heroes and nerf overused ones. They too don't want the game to be stale.
See, both games don't wait to be getting figured out. They act. And to this day, we see it sworking since both games are popular. If Blizzard will use same approach I don't really think that they will make harsh changes which will turn the game upside down. But if they made ravens, carriers, nydus more viable, wouldn't you like it? or making TvZ more diverse than 4M vs everything?
|
You cannot compare MobA to RTS in terms of balance, really you can't.
|
On August 28 2013 16:18 Insoleet wrote:
I dont think TvZ is imbalanced. The 3 bases push of korean terrans is stupidly strong, yes, but its a matter of time before zergs figure it out.
Just look at Scarlett who lost only 3-2 to Bomber. If jaedong got destroyed 4-0 by Polt & Bomber, its mostly because ... he is terrible at ZvT.
This push has a huge weakness : there is no 4th OC. There cant be one.
So, zergs playing with mass muta are having a good winrate against terran. No hive, just mass mutalisks. Because mass muta can beat small groups of marines (15-20 marines) easily and cost-effectively, and they can kill OC very fast, they are the best answer to the never-ending push of the 3CC 4M build.
Thank you.
|
On August 28 2013 19:36 NarutO wrote:
You cannot compare MobA to RTS in terms of balance, really you can't.
Why?
|
United Kingdom12029 Posts
On August 28 2013 19:54 saddaromma wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2013 19:36 NarutO wrote:
You cannot compare MobA to RTS in terms of balance, really you can't. Why?
A Moba has 10-30 heros which even with the best balance design team in the world will never be able to be perfectly balanced in every single situation (same goes for fighting games). An RTS will have 1-4 races and although is still hard to balance, it's much easier. The issue comes in where balance then takes away variety in play and tunnels people to do certain things (for example SC2 where the entire Terran race is designed around Bio and it means every other option pales in comparison) and balance forces certain things (e.g. broodlord infestor or something like Magneto/Storm/Senti in MvC2 where they were by far the most powerful combo in the game).
|
On August 28 2013 19:54 saddaromma wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2013 19:36 NarutO wrote:
You cannot compare MobA to RTS in terms of balance, really you can't. Why?
5 players to coordinate with each other. Various hero combinations yet only a few are played on the highest level. Only one map. Starcraft has various maps, 3 different races, various playstyles and unit combinations. You have so many variables that don't exist in MobAs. While there are other things in MobA you have to take into account, I dare to say there are less or less vital points.
So yeah... really uncomparable :/
|
On August 28 2013 18:47 saddaromma wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2013 18:43 aZealot wrote:On August 28 2013 18:33 saddaromma wrote:On August 28 2013 18:13 aZealot wrote:
It never works? WOL was full of pros figuring out stuff (e.g. Protoss players figuring out the Stephano style Roach max) and the same in HOTS. The only thing is that given the packed tournament schedule, it actually works against players finding out solutions to problems and also experimenting with new strategies and styles (there is no time for "play" or for just "empty" time where ideas at the bottom of your brain bubble up to the surface when you are doing something else). As there is so much reason to win, there is a strong incentive to stick with successful builds or even just recycle old successful builds. Full of pros figuring out? and you provide a less known strategy with short success history in EU/NA. Grats, you proved me very wrong. Don't you think pros, who train at least 10 hours a day for 6 months, couldn't have found better solution if it already existed? In fact 4M got even stronger the more pros learn how to utilize it. Nope, just pointing out your hyperbole. "Never" is a strong word to use. You were obviously wrong. As to the pros, that remains to be seen. I didn't know there was an expected timer on finding solutions. Is 4M imbalanced? Maybe. Is it badly imbalanced? I don't know. If Zergs need to suffer for another 3 - 6 months to make sure that Blizzard need to do more than give a slight overseer speed buff, so be it is my view. Doing nothing is in principle the right thing to do. So you think leaving broodlord/infestors as it is until the Hots was wise thing to do. Do you even imagine how many terrans retired and lost prize money?
How can you lose something that is not yours?
|
On August 28 2013 19:57 Qikz wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2013 19:54 saddaromma wrote:On August 28 2013 19:36 NarutO wrote:
You cannot compare MobA to RTS in terms of balance, really you can't. Why? A Moba has 10-30 heros which even with the best balance design team in the world will never be able to be perfectly balanced in every single situation (same goes for fighting games). An RTS will have 1-4 races and although is still hard to balance, it's much easier. The issue comes in where balance then takes away variety in play and tunnels people to do certain things (for example SC2 where the entire Terran race is designed around Bio and it means every other option pales in comparison) and balance forces certain things (e.g. broodlord infestor or something like Magneto/Storm/Senti in MvC2 where they were by far the most powerful combo in the game).
Actually you are thinking this waay. to simplistic You should not see it as just races but all the units as well. Not to mention you can create almost all units more then once making it yet another layer of complexity. So we got 3 races each with around 20 units that can be any number at the same time. Now have fun with all the different maps and some spells and different situations.
Balancing an RTS sounds like a complete nightmare.
|
On August 28 2013 19:58 NarutO wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2013 19:54 saddaromma wrote:On August 28 2013 19:36 NarutO wrote:
You cannot compare MobA to RTS in terms of balance, really you can't. Why? 5 players to coordinate with each other. Various hero combinations yet only a few are played on the highest level. Only one map. Starcraft has various maps, 3 different races, various playstyles and unit combinations. You have so many variables that don't exist in MobAs. While there are other things in MobA you have to take into account, I dare to say there are less or less vital points. So yeah... really uncomparable :/
I don't think any of what you said supports your claim. I could say both sc2 and moba are video-games for mass esports, so they can use similar balancing approach.
- Phantom Lancer is too popular and making game unfun? nerf it. Timbersaw never used? buff it.
- Helbats are too popular and unfun? nerf it. Nydus is never used? buff it. Buff raven as well. And maybe we see something else than 4m vs muta/bane.
Whats wrong with this approach?
|
On August 28 2013 20:07 saddaromma wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2013 19:58 NarutO wrote:On August 28 2013 19:54 saddaromma wrote:On August 28 2013 19:36 NarutO wrote:
You cannot compare MobA to RTS in terms of balance, really you can't. Why? 5 players to coordinate with each other. Various hero combinations yet only a few are played on the highest level. Only one map. Starcraft has various maps, 3 different races, various playstyles and unit combinations. You have so many variables that don't exist in MobAs. While there are other things in MobA you have to take into account, I dare to say there are less or less vital points. So yeah... really uncomparable :/ I don't think any of what you said supports your claim. I could say both sc2 and moba are video-games for mass esports, so they can use similar balancing approach. - Phantom Lancer is too popular and making game unfun? nerf it. Timbersaw never used? buff it. - Helbats are too popular and unfun? nerf it. Nydus is never used? buff it. Buff raven as well. And maybe we see something else than 4m vs muta/bane. Whats wrong with this approach?
A fun game can be balanced and a balanced game can be fun, but fun doesn't equal balance.
|
On August 28 2013 20:10 NarutO wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2013 20:07 saddaromma wrote:On August 28 2013 19:58 NarutO wrote:On August 28 2013 19:54 saddaromma wrote:On August 28 2013 19:36 NarutO wrote:
You cannot compare MobA to RTS in terms of balance, really you can't. Why? 5 players to coordinate with each other. Various hero combinations yet only a few are played on the highest level. Only one map. Starcraft has various maps, 3 different races, various playstyles and unit combinations. You have so many variables that don't exist in MobAs. While there are other things in MobA you have to take into account, I dare to say there are less or less vital points. So yeah... really uncomparable :/ I don't think any of what you said supports your claim. I could say both sc2 and moba are video-games for mass esports, so they can use similar balancing approach. - Phantom Lancer is too popular and making game unfun? nerf it. Timbersaw never used? buff it. - Helbats are too popular and unfun? nerf it. Nydus is never used? buff it. Buff raven as well. And maybe we see something else than 4m vs muta/bane. Whats wrong with this approach? A fun game can be balanced and a balanced game can be fun, but fun doesn't equal balance.
Balance the game to be more fun. Thats what we need to do.
|
On August 28 2013 20:12 saddaromma wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2013 20:10 NarutO wrote:On August 28 2013 20:07 saddaromma wrote:On August 28 2013 19:58 NarutO wrote:On August 28 2013 19:54 saddaromma wrote:On August 28 2013 19:36 NarutO wrote:
You cannot compare MobA to RTS in terms of balance, really you can't. Why? 5 players to coordinate with each other. Various hero combinations yet only a few are played on the highest level. Only one map. Starcraft has various maps, 3 different races, various playstyles and unit combinations. You have so many variables that don't exist in MobAs. While there are other things in MobA you have to take into account, I dare to say there are less or less vital points. So yeah... really uncomparable :/ I don't think any of what you said supports your claim. I could say both sc2 and moba are video-games for mass esports, so they can use similar balancing approach. - Phantom Lancer is too popular and making game unfun? nerf it. Timbersaw never used? buff it. - Helbats are too popular and unfun? nerf it. Nydus is never used? buff it. Buff raven as well. And maybe we see something else than 4m vs muta/bane. Whats wrong with this approach? A fun game can be balanced and a balanced game can be fun, but fun doesn't equal balance. Balance the game to be more fun. Thats what we need to do.
Not really, no.
|
On August 28 2013 20:15 NarutO wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2013 20:12 saddaromma wrote:On August 28 2013 20:10 NarutO wrote:On August 28 2013 20:07 saddaromma wrote:On August 28 2013 19:58 NarutO wrote:On August 28 2013 19:54 saddaromma wrote:On August 28 2013 19:36 NarutO wrote:
You cannot compare MobA to RTS in terms of balance, really you can't. Why? 5 players to coordinate with each other. Various hero combinations yet only a few are played on the highest level. Only one map. Starcraft has various maps, 3 different races, various playstyles and unit combinations. You have so many variables that don't exist in MobAs. While there are other things in MobA you have to take into account, I dare to say there are less or less vital points. So yeah... really uncomparable :/ I don't think any of what you said supports your claim. I could say both sc2 and moba are video-games for mass esports, so they can use similar balancing approach. - Phantom Lancer is too popular and making game unfun? nerf it. Timbersaw never used? buff it. - Helbats are too popular and unfun? nerf it. Nydus is never used? buff it. Buff raven as well. And maybe we see something else than 4m vs muta/bane. Whats wrong with this approach? A fun game can be balanced and a balanced game can be fun, but fun doesn't equal balance. Balance the game to be more fun. Thats what we need to do. Not really, no.
Oh yes. Or otherwise we'd have only one race.
|
On August 28 2013 16:18 Insoleet wrote:
I dont think TvZ is imbalanced. The 3 bases push of korean terrans is stupidly strong, yes, but its a matter of time before zergs figure it out.
Just look at Scarlett who lost only 3-2 to Bomber. If jaedong got destroyed 4-0 by Polt & Bomber, its mostly because ... he is terrible at ZvT.
This push has a huge weakness : there is no 4th OC. There cant be one.
So, zergs playing with mass muta are having a good winrate against terran. No hive, just mass mutalisks. Because mass muta can beat small groups of marines (15-20 marines) easily and cost-effectively, and they can kill OC very fast, they are the best answer to the never-ending push of the 3CC 4M build.
Jaedong lost against this build because he tried to go to hive while building a huge amount of mutalisks. But you cant.. It's not like WoL, Hive is not the answer anymore, mass muta then hive is way better.
Scarlett didn't win those games anymore than Bomber throwing them away.
1 game Bomber completely gave up on harassing or doing timings.
another Bomber had a huge lead after that hellion run bys and failing in his follow up pushes quite horribly.
And the no 4th OC is wrong, I clearly remember Ryung vs Nestea game, Ryung had a 4th.
Or just go back to Scarlett vs Bomber, bomber had a 4th OC morphing at 19 mins or game 3, bomber build a 4th in base or game number 4, bomber build 2 CCs at the same time while getting 15 marines at one cycle. game 5? also a 4th
|
just make OCs unliftable like PFs. i never understood why terrans have the advantage of moving all over the map when mined out their main/natural. if only CCs are liftable it will slow terrans down a bit and take away their overly greedyness.
also it will make them thinking about positioning and defending runbys not only by lifting the base, pull workers to another base and wait for the army to arrive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
