|
Why does blizzard keep insisting to make their own maps?
you already have your fingers in all the pies in terms of money because all the tournaments are platformed on b.net.
you hide behind the argument that you cater your maps to meet the requests of players from every league (i.e rush maps for bronze players who wanna improve their rushes)
i see no evidence of this, as far as i am aware, everyone of all skill levels by the majority, watch GSL, MLG, DreamHack, and other tournaments of the like,
all these tournaments either use a map pool with maps NOT made by blizzard, or EDIT maps made by blizzard to balance it (e.g removing close positions)
sc2 players watch tournaments for entertainment, but also to LEARN, by watching their favourite players, and the best players in the world compete on these maps.
lower level players do not want your bad imbalanced maps to play on, they want to learn how to play like their idols, and play on the maps they play on.
why cant you at least consider hiring map makers to make your ladder maps for us if your greed is the issue? at least we dont have to put up with your horrible map designs that make the game less fun to play
|
Why is Xel'naga Caverns still in the ladder map pool?
Also what were the reasons behind using those maps for Blizzcon when you have said before in interviews that ladder maps are not necessarily designed for tournament play?
|
On October 20 2011 23:56 FreudianTrip wrote:Show nested quote +On October 20 2011 23:51 justiceknight wrote:
why stalker doesnt get +2 attk for each upgrade?
why transforming a gate to warpgate takes another 10 secs?
why zerg easily get to 170 food within 15 mins?
why terran anti air so suck? That last ones sarcastic right?
they're all sarcastic
right?
|
My question for Dustin Browder:
Why?
|
What do you think about unit current clumping and the effect it has vs AOE/Splash being too effective?
Are there any plans to change the space around units so they don't clump so damn tight?
In SC1 you could reasonably assalt a tank line without losing your entire army, but still taking losses. In SC2 units clump so poorly that if you charge a tank line, even when attempting to spread your units out, they clump back together only to get slaughtered, same vs AOE spells
Are there any projected changes(reduced time, increased energy cost, etc) to forcefield in the future?
|
On October 21 2011 08:36 Torte de Lini wrote:
Please explain the role of the Hydra and if you believe it's use is as intended and you think it should be.
Let's face it. Hydras are terrible, you'd think they'd be good for anti-air defense due to the creepspread not going very far and their speed on creep (and off of it is incredibly slow), but they die fast, are terrible against nearly all match-ups, even in high numbers and their intended use is shrouded by every other unit.
They don't compliment roaches because their mineral to gas cost is just an upgrade from the roach.
To be honest it isn't SC2's worst problem right now, I mean hydras have seen a resurgence in ZvP. Look at Idra going good ole hydra roach corrupter in iem and mlg games. I think Ive also seen losira do it in the gsl once.
|
On October 21 2011 10:47 xdividebyzerox wrote:Show nested quote +On October 20 2011 23:56 FreudianTrip wrote:On October 20 2011 23:51 justiceknight wrote:
why stalker doesnt get +2 attk for each upgrade?
why transforming a gate to warpgate takes another 10 secs?
why zerg easily get to 170 food within 15 mins?
why terran anti air so suck? That last ones sarcastic right? they're all sarcastic right?
First one could very well be serious, though +2 atk for each upgrade might make blink stalkers the only protoss build ^^
The second could also pass for a serious question I guess (nothing I'd want to lower though).
The third is definately sarcastic/troll.
The fourth is outright ridiculous xD
I think he's trying to hide his trolling/sarcasm by starting out with a semi-serious question and then go down hill from there.
|
With Terran's excelling in every aspect of game play such as defense, economy, offence and harassment, is this the desired game design? Will we see Zerg and Protos reach a point where they have no weakness or will we see Terran get scaled back along the lines of the other races?
|
Whats with the implementation of Micro Negating abilities: FG, FF, Conc?
Why do you hate TvP Mech so much? Are their plans to make it viable in HOTs?
|
when will you implement clan support, clan ladder, and in-bnet clan tags?
|
A balance whine thread disguised as a questions to Dustin Browder thread. How cute.
When you ask a question, you should be interested in the answer the person can give you, you don't want to make a full statement and turn it into an unanswerable sarcastic arrogant "Why don't you respond to this criticism ?"
You guys sounds like children having their parents make a press conference after christmas to be able to trap them into admiting how bad their gifts were.
|
How many destructible rocks is too many?
1) But more seriously, this: On October 20 2011 23:48 Predguin wrote:
Do you have any thoughts on the Marine's attack animation? They are incredibly easy to animation cancel/stutter-step, and even more so when stim-packed. (The muzzle flash is still visible on their guns when they kite!)
It makes them incredibly efficient DPS dealers and melee-kiters, much more so than in SC1 or Brood War. Do you think a slight adjustment should be made to their animation to make them harder to stutter-step? Because it seems that a lot of their use and cost-efficiency comes from their ability to be easily micro'd. A slight nerf to marine attack animation would be the perfect way to take a little potency from terran's early game, which seems to be a problem for Protoss, and a huge problem for zerg, especially considering close positions on ladder.
Edit: a couple more.
2) Have you considered removing or significantly delaying Protoss warpgate tech? The current balance situation with warpgates requires gateway units to be balanced around possible mass-warpgate timings attacks (4-gate, 6-gate, etc) yet if one is not doing such a timing (and thus will necessarily have less units) Protoss has a very slim defenders advantage to rely on (forcefields and cannons, though cannons are sometimes not an option, as forge is off the normal tech-path early game). This issue could be alleviated with the removal/delay of warpgates so that Protoss also has a reinforcement proximity defenders advantage. Overall this could lead to much less death-ball style play, as gateway units could be stronger, tech units could be weaker and the need to keep the army grouped (relying on the DPS of tech units) would lessen.
3) Why is the hydra so bad? I have no problem with some units being absent from standard play in some matchups, but the hydra is absent from standard play in every matchup. the gas to mineral ratio seems high for a unit that is extremely fragile and has limited mobility. Have you considered re-adding the speed upgrade?
Edit 2: and this one!
4) Have you heard this joke?: A marine walks into a bar and asks, "where's the counter?"
|
Wow, so many passive-aggressive "questions" that aren't questions (ie: looking for actual answers) so much as bitching disguised as questions. I doubt TL's going to ask Browder that sort of stuff.
Here's are my questions:
1: Looking at the publicly available information on SC2's development, we see that some units had pretty substantial changes. Most notably, the Colossus went from dealing damage to a single unit to having an AoE attack. This particular change gave Protoss an AoE unit, but it also gave us something new: an AoE unit with lots of mobility and high Hp. Granted, it could be attacked by air.
Usually, one might think that radically altering the nature of a unit would mean scrapping the unit and building a new one for that specific purpose. Was this ever considered for the Colossus? Did Blizzard think to create a new AoE unit for the Protoss rather than grafting AoE to a mobile unit like the Colossus?
2: Terran Bio-play in TvP is centered primarily around mobility and harassment. It typically ends in a single, large clash of two armies, where one wins and the other loses. The match tends to be over at this point: the one who won the engagement wins the match, though it might linger on for 5+ minutes after.
This is primarily due to a lack of units on both sides that become stronger when immobile (or are simply not very mobile but are powerful). The common refrain from the community is to buff Mech play for Terrans and/or drop the Colossus in favor of the Reaver. Has Blizzard considered giving Bio play options, such as a Barracks unit that becomes stronger while sacrificing mobility? Not as potent as a Siege Tank or some such, but something that is more positional than Marauders.
3: The current latency in multiplayer reduces some of the possible precision for the players involved and overall lowers the effective skill ceiling. Has Blizzard investigated networking models and/or code that would allow them to reduce latency further? After all, SC1 networking was viable over long distances even with so-called "LAN-latency". Is Blizzard making steps to improve this issue?
Oh, and just in case it gets lost in the shuffle:
On October 21 2011 00:00 Ribbon wrote:
What would you consider your biggest mistake in designing SC2? What would you consider your greatest success?
This.
|
- Why Charge is so ridiculously expensive compared to upgrades for similar tier units on top of requiring a 150/100 building that does nothing by itself except open tech routes.
- Why banshees have cloak when the other 2 races require drops/high ground vision to circumvent terrain chokes reinforced with detection to make their cloaked units pay off in the early game. If a terran wants to be sneaky early game why not force him down the ghost route just like protoss and zerg are forced to?
- Why haven't you moved warp gate research to twilight council? It would fix so many of the problems you keep trying to band aid in PvP, it would allow you to buff gateway units for the early game without breaking the other race's defenses, or reduce the need for protoss aoe that keeps delivering games of 200/200 stalemates until that AoE is removed by ghosts or anti air or the AoE goes off and the other army is wiped out.
|
Ask him what they plan on doing with the casters for hots i.e will they leave the Templar the same with no energy upgrade, will infestor still have np as it's other spell and will ghost still have ez pz emp
|
why does 1v1 cater to a 'large' variation of styles, small and big maps whatever. but every team game map ever has only catered to rushing. the maps are never big enough doubling or tripling the effectiveness of a timing push and theres never enough bases for anyone to get beyond 3 base.
is there any chance of adjusting the terran tech tree in regard to the helion? it crushes all other tier 1 units so soundly that it forces the t+z comp in every game.
will you ever bring in the 'overlays' in to team games. to show the work supply in pretty bars and stuff, its just a nice bonus. you could break it down by player then use a larger divider in the middle to show the seperation of teams, its not so hard 
will there ever be grandmaster for team leagues? either you support them competitively (theres a ranked ladder) or you dont. all the arguments against XvX grandmaster leagues also hold true for 1v1
can guardian shield be looked at? it makes such an insane difference in early game tvp that balancing the units is a lot harder, and adds even more value to the already expensive sentry.
are blizzard bothered at all by the vulnerability of zerg and protoss detection? mothership plays that involving targetting overseers or just vortexing them, 1/1/1s just removing the obs then trolling with banshees isnt fun gameplay. its too easy to cripple them against stealth.
i could go on
|
why close spawns at blizzcon shattered temple??
when will we get name changes?
|
If you guys hate the marauder, ask "So far, are you satisfied with the usage and role of the Marauder ? If you could step back, what would you change about it ?"
Instead of : "OMG Marauder so imba, cost nothing, lots of HP, lots of damage, stim, why you don't nerf it and how can you sleep at night !?!?"
Most of you would make terrible journalists.
|
GRAND OLD AMERICA16375 Posts
On October 21 2011 11:18 drcatellino wrote:
If you guys hate the marauder, ask "So far, are you satisfied with the usage and role of the Marauder ? If you could step back, what would you change about it ?"
Instead of : "OMG Marauder so imba, cost nothing, lots of HP, lots of damage, stim, why you don't nerf it and how can you sleep at night !?!?"
Most of you would make terrible journalists.
Were not here to be journalists, we are here because stuff is wrong with the game, esp no LAN and unit clumping
|
Probably been asked, but whatever:
As far as I understand you have a deal with GOM, that makes them the only company to Broadcast SC2 in Korea in the near future(maybe I'm wrong since OGN broadcasts the WCG qualifiers, but my point still kinda stands). What do you think about GOM being the only entity with the approval to broadcast SC2? Do you think it hurts the Starcraft 2 scene in Korea, and would you like to make Kespa a part of SC2 in Korea somehow (you know, competition makes both companies want to do better and such)? Or would you rather GOM being the sole broadcasters for the years forward. Also, thanks for making the game!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
