EPTWhy is Blizzard so reluctant to implement balanced GSL maps into the ladder, when the current ladder map pool is pretty imbalanced?
Are the Blizzard map makers in Bronze league??
[Bcon] Questions For Dustin Browder - Page 19
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
ilikeredheads
Canada1995 Posts
Why is Blizzard so reluctant to implement balanced GSL maps into the ladder, when the current ladder map pool is pretty imbalanced? Are the Blizzard map makers in Bronze league?? | ||
|
Gotmog
Serbia899 Posts
On October 21 2011 03:23 Gonzo103 wrote: Maybe its better to close this threat! It transform into a "Dear Dustin, why protoss is so weak and why terran is so op?" whinning. Well....he asked for balance/design questions......so it boils down to questions like that. | ||
|
VTPerfect
United States487 Posts
| ||
|
Roxy
Canada753 Posts
Their programer sdont really know how to make good maps anyways, so if they just copy whatever GSL does, this is Win/Win | ||
|
akaname
United Kingdom599 Posts
On October 20 2011 23:45 Darkdeath3 wrote: are the new units in the HOTS in your view created to address balance issues in the game or are they intended to totally change how HOTS plays compared to wings of liberty. i like this one a lot. most of the questions in this thread seem to be whining, which makes it really unpleasant to read (akaname said, without a trace of irony). why do people who hate the game so much spend time on this website! edit: like, i get that we're unhappy with the game, but why can't we appreciate the good parts of it, based on this we're too spoilt and entitled as a community! | ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
On October 21 2011 03:16 jinorazi wrote: will mothership ever be replaced by arbitor? undoubtedly arbitor-like-unit will add more depth to the game, meanwhile mothership's use is limited to non-existent, it has no serious use. terran in bw had a bio vs zerg, mech vs protoss relationship, will something like that be considered for the future of sc2? Better way to word this would be: Mothership currently only viable for defensive recalls at the highest level. Are you considering a cloaking, non-hero equivalent of the Mothership that encourages offensive recalls as well, both because you could have more than one and because cost would be slightly less? | ||
|
floor exercise
Canada5847 Posts
| ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
On October 21 2011 03:27 akaname wrote: i like this one a lot. most of the questions in this thread seem to be whining, which makes it really unpleasant to read (akaname said, without a trace of irony). why do people who hate the game so much spend time on this website! Yes, great question. We should be more worried about increasing excitement over fairness. Fairness will come in time. | ||
|
setzer
United States3284 Posts
Does Blizzard ever intend to include custom ladders/clan support? | ||
|
LordOfDabu
United States394 Posts
Will unlocked WOL portraits be usable in HOTS?  (This is important!)Will SCII ever support automated tournaments like in Frozen Throne? I only glanced through the thread, so I don't know which of these were already asked. I saw a lot of loaded balance questions though. =( | ||
|
Postman
United States269 Posts
| ||
|
galivet
288 Posts
Here's a hypothetical example answer that doesn't necessarily have any basis in reality, but exemplifies what I mean: "Over the course of the last year it's become apparent that the unique terran ability to construct any building anywhere on the map has made balancing WoL very difficult. For example, we kept trying to tweak the build-time and cost of bunkers to keep them useful for defense but not too powerful for offense, but we've never been able to get it quite right. In HotS, we plan to change terran's building mechanics so that new terran buildings can only be constructed within a 30-square radius of a command center. It'll be much easier to balance bunkers now that we don't have to worry about their offensive use -- not to mention proxy barracks play!." | ||
|
Welmu
Finland3295 Posts
| ||
|
alwaid
United States96 Posts
| ||
|
seansye
United States1722 Posts
| ||
|
HyperLimen
United States278 Posts
| ||
|
Thebbeuttiffulland
Brazil288 Posts
| ||
|
Roxy
Canada753 Posts
On October 21 2011 03:34 alwaid wrote: Ask him if he reads TeamLiquid. Also interested in this They dont moderate their own forum Any input on this forum is much more valuable to any decisions they make based on community discussions. | ||
|
Osmoses
Sweden5302 Posts
| ||
|
Sighstorm
Netherlands116 Posts
Starcraft2 was designed to be an e-sport and the past year has shown that you've been successful. However there has been a lot of critique about balance and several patches have been released to fix the balance and satisfy players and spectators. It's said that in some cases units were over-buffed to put them in the spotlight, so players would start using them. Some changes have been reverted (or at least some of those units have been nerfed again) in more recent patches after people discovered how powerful those units had become. Question: Was it your goal to create a balanced game with static rules/unit stats? Or has it been your philosophy from the outset that it's impossible to create a perfect game when the metagame is constantly evoling? Simply put... did you plan to do balance patches? Looking at the future, is perfect balance a design goal or should it be ever evolving? Or is it simply impossible to balance it before the masses get their hands on the product? What is Blizzards strategy on balance? How do you think balance changes impact competative play? (People from the former Broodwar scene seems to love it having a static unit stats. On the other hand a game like Magic the Gathering embraces evolution of the game (obv. they make money off of it) and i think it's attractive to their players because it rewards strategic creativity.) ___ I'm personally undecided about static vs. evoling... just like to know Dustin Browder insights on this topic. | ||
| ||
