|
On January 09 2012 01:50 eNVFroST wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2012 00:55 joopajoo wrote:On January 08 2012 05:57 eNVFroST wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I want to see a game that where if you don't scout every aspect of what hes doing you have a very large potential to suddenly lose the game, there needs to be more tells, units need to be better but more expensive.
This might do:
With that change it would balance the armies significantly and buff your ability to micro. It would allow zerg to get some an advantage before 5 bases when terran and protoss have 3. They need to keep the carrier and get rid of the colossus, the carrier brings a great role to the game as an air support unit, if they just nerfed carrier's armor and health and make it very weak but buff the damage it would be very fun to watch voidray carrier play along with a mothership. The thor should not be taken out, but rather made more of a giant metal shield for weak bio units.
How this would make the game more exciting:
It would be more risky to do 3-base mass stalker play, you could not afford nearly as much as can a huge zerg empire of bases would not be an even match at all. Workers would play a better role in the game. Harrassing mineral lines is much more exciting to watch. Air should be nerfed a little bit, the voidray is just a tad bit too good past about 20-30 of them. 15 if they get charged up.
How it would effect the cheese style of play:
Cheesy builds revolve around sitting in your base holed up not allowing scouting. This would make 1-base play after 5 minutes nearly impossible unless a large screw up came from the other player.
PvP - Not nearly as much 1-base play, as your army will be weakened quite a bit and a lot harder to attack the expanding player since a defenders advantage just means that much more in the early game.
ZvZ - No more 1-base roach rush play. Zerglings would multiply the effectiveness and roaches could only really be used in mid-late game ZvZ.
TvT - Don't have much to say as I don't really ever play terran.
Maps should be bigger:
In my opinion the maps are too small to support this change at all. the Mediumish maps should have as many expansions as Tal Darim. Needs a more complicated map, they need a map that isn't 100% symetrical, this makes for much more interesting play. With having a more entangled center part of the map makes different engagements fun to watch. Having 2 bridges, 3 platforms and other non-perfectly symetrical numbers and forms would allow for many more strategic elements in the game and have a higher skill ceiling that increases for more experience on each map.
Scouting should be harder for terran and protoss:
DRAMATICALLY alters the skill ceiling. By having to rely on your knowledge of the game you are FORCED to have to know more about the game. This I believe IdrA tries to express in the fact that zerg scouting is harder but so much less reliable. This makes zerg normally have a skill cap where you can play good, but you can't play flawlessly as nearly much as terran and protoss can because you have to know many tells and other good tricks to get your information and scouting. If terran and protoss had this it would help watching the game to be more interesting.
Diversity in unit compositons:
By making every unit a bit better but more expensive it exaggerates counters and bonus damages, almost forcing better unit compositions against the opponents, which is reflected on harder scouting by each race. For example: Stalkers would be made better against roaches. But zealots are dramatically worse against roaches. So the zerg would need zerglings and infestors to accompany some roaches to take out the zealots with the zerglings to counter the stalkers. The protoss would need to counter the infestors with immortals and if they wanted 1 or 2 carriers for extra damage and having the immortals keep the infestors at bay, that would be much more interesting to watch, and harder for players because it requires a lot more micro. (could also use high templar but I'm ignoring too many spellcasters as that makes the game more like WoW than a solid rts.)
The above example is really weird, probably because it's an example and just a half-done theory.
If you have any issues with my thinking please say so, and how you think the change would be hurtful.
If you like it, add to it.
TL;DR
Units need to be more expensive to make risky 1-base styles of play a lot more challenging. Harder scouting would mean even more coinflip situations, and bigger maps combined with more expensive units would just result in more games where all is decided by one huge 5 second fight. No ty. I meant harder scouting as in observers be removed. Terran should have scans be double cost. Zerg is fine, zerg already has all coinflip situations in the early game. If observers were removed it would atleast make hallucination be used more, i.e make the game more interesting because no protoss uses hallucination more than 3 times for scouting, but would make some cool things like hallucinating a colossus to get vision of the high ground, some things I've only seen a few times that are sorta brilliant.
You do know that obs are used for more than scouting right? And by the way your following points are way off.
|
I'm not so sure if the pros mentioned this. But why does it seem like every new unit that's coming out is targeted at Terran? Almost seems like blizzard is trying to eliminate terran altogether. Hell, even the new Terran unit is meant to counter tanks.
It seems that way because you are clearly a biased Terran who is apathetic of the other races concerns, therefore seeing everything they have in a negative "anti-Terran" light. How can anyone being objective see Tempets' as dominantly anti-Terran? How are Oracles disproportionally anti-Terran? Heck, Replicators are about as neutral as they come. Vipers and Swarm Hosts I can see where you may be coming from, but 2 units that allow Z to be supposedly at least evenly cost effective while attacking a defended position (when they currently have nothing that fills that roll), is hardly anti Terran. If anything it gives them options they should have had at release (options that due to gas cost will lock out other options, so don't think that it's current Zerg army strength + new shit).
|
Lalush's post was great, after that the whole thing went pretty fast (again) down the sc2 vs bw thing.
IMHO it's not possible to tell from what they ve shown how HOTS will play out, lets just wait and see.
|
Yeah I def agree with Bischu.
"I'm very sceptical towards heart of the swarm. All new units are really boring and it saddens me that they keep implementing units with set roles. Like the oracle "if you're going to harass we want you to build this unit" furthermore I think the other units are very boring. I wouldn't have been surprised if the day they presented the units was April first."
Pretty much says it all. I hope Blizzard gets its shit together before an aggravating imba beta period.
|
In my opinion, the new units are decent apart from the replicant and the thing that replaced the mothership (forgot its name). Both of these things are pretty poor in my opinion. But I love the Oracle so it'll do.  .
The post above mine raises some good points though.
|
everyone that hates on cloud should know that he was a top foreign BroodWar player- and he is pretty much right about the gamble aspect- in broodwar a lesser player could NEVER beat a greater player- in SC2 lesser players are constantly upsetting players who are better
|
On January 09 2012 01:50 eNVFroST wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2012 00:55 joopajoo wrote:On January 08 2012 05:57 eNVFroST wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I want to see a game that where if you don't scout every aspect of what hes doing you have a very large potential to suddenly lose the game, there needs to be more tells, units need to be better but more expensive.
This might do:
With that change it would balance the armies significantly and buff your ability to micro. It would allow zerg to get some an advantage before 5 bases when terran and protoss have 3. They need to keep the carrier and get rid of the colossus, the carrier brings a great role to the game as an air support unit, if they just nerfed carrier's armor and health and make it very weak but buff the damage it would be very fun to watch voidray carrier play along with a mothership. The thor should not be taken out, but rather made more of a giant metal shield for weak bio units.
How this would make the game more exciting:
It would be more risky to do 3-base mass stalker play, you could not afford nearly as much as can a huge zerg empire of bases would not be an even match at all. Workers would play a better role in the game. Harrassing mineral lines is much more exciting to watch. Air should be nerfed a little bit, the voidray is just a tad bit too good past about 20-30 of them. 15 if they get charged up.
How it would effect the cheese style of play:
Cheesy builds revolve around sitting in your base holed up not allowing scouting. This would make 1-base play after 5 minutes nearly impossible unless a large screw up came from the other player.
PvP - Not nearly as much 1-base play, as your army will be weakened quite a bit and a lot harder to attack the expanding player since a defenders advantage just means that much more in the early game.
ZvZ - No more 1-base roach rush play. Zerglings would multiply the effectiveness and roaches could only really be used in mid-late game ZvZ.
TvT - Don't have much to say as I don't really ever play terran.
Maps should be bigger:
In my opinion the maps are too small to support this change at all. the Mediumish maps should have as many expansions as Tal Darim. Needs a more complicated map, they need a map that isn't 100% symetrical, this makes for much more interesting play. With having a more entangled center part of the map makes different engagements fun to watch. Having 2 bridges, 3 platforms and other non-perfectly symetrical numbers and forms would allow for many more strategic elements in the game and have a higher skill ceiling that increases for more experience on each map.
Scouting should be harder for terran and protoss:
DRAMATICALLY alters the skill ceiling. By having to rely on your knowledge of the game you are FORCED to have to know more about the game. This I believe IdrA tries to express in the fact that zerg scouting is harder but so much less reliable. This makes zerg normally have a skill cap where you can play good, but you can't play flawlessly as nearly much as terran and protoss can because you have to know many tells and other good tricks to get your information and scouting. If terran and protoss had this it would help watching the game to be more interesting.
Diversity in unit compositons:
By making every unit a bit better but more expensive it exaggerates counters and bonus damages, almost forcing better unit compositions against the opponents, which is reflected on harder scouting by each race. For example: Stalkers would be made better against roaches. But zealots are dramatically worse against roaches. So the zerg would need zerglings and infestors to accompany some roaches to take out the zealots with the zerglings to counter the stalkers. The protoss would need to counter the infestors with immortals and if they wanted 1 or 2 carriers for extra damage and having the immortals keep the infestors at bay, that would be much more interesting to watch, and harder for players because it requires a lot more micro. (could also use high templar but I'm ignoring too many spellcasters as that makes the game more like WoW than a solid rts.)
The above example is really weird, probably because it's an example and just a half-done theory.
If you have any issues with my thinking please say so, and how you think the change would be hurtful.
If you like it, add to it.
TL;DR
Units need to be more expensive to make risky 1-base styles of play a lot more challenging. Harder scouting would mean even more coinflip situations, and bigger maps combined with more expensive units would just result in more games where all is decided by one huge 5 second fight. No ty. I meant harder scouting as in observers be removed. Terran should have scans be double cost. Zerg is fine, zerg already has all coinflip situations in the early game. If observers were removed it would atleast make hallucination be used more, i.e make the game more interesting because no protoss uses hallucination more than 3 times for scouting, but would make some cool things like hallucinating a colossus to get vision of the high ground, some things I've only seen a few times that are sorta brilliant.
Why? Just because observer scouting and terran scanning is boring? I don't understand the reasoning behind these changes, i don't think the scouting department is unbalanced. And you are so obviously zerg, lol.
|
On January 07 2012 19:06 ixi.genocide wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2012 18:45 Humanfails wrote:On January 06 2012 13:56 Thugtronik wrote:On January 06 2012 12:06 0neder wrote:On December 08 2011 11:17 happyness wrote:On December 08 2011 11:01 LaLuSh wrote:
Honestly don't see any reason to whine or complain about these things. And I used to be the one leading the charge when it came to riling people up against Blizzard. It's impossible to draw conclusions about how HotS will turn out at this point. What's more: people's expectations of how HotS is supposed to somehow "save" SC2 are unrealistic.
I think this pretty much ends the thread. There is no point in theorizing what HotS will be and what SC2 could have been. I'm personally going to put little thought into what HotS will be. Blizzard can worry about that. I for one will enjoy SC2 for what it is. If you like BW better, go enjoy BW. It is a great point, but I don't think it ends the thread. We have every reason to suspect that SC2 will become a good, but not great e-Sport game. The HotS demo and repeated interviews have indicated many things: - The Blizzard design team may have accepted the Colossus as a unit that must remain in the game, in spite of community consensus that it is very boring and creating a mediocre unit dynamic that is holding the spot of what could be a better one. This is evident in that all the new units they proposed for protoss revolved around them having a single concentrated death ball of units including the colossus so there is little split action or excitement a la Hero (luckily Hero understands showmanship and is an explorative player). - Blizzard may be incapable of fundamental changes that could improve the game for spectating and excitement, such as unit spacing to make armies feel bigger, and moving shot micro that may not be possible given the game engine and the programming team's shortcomings (Phoenix moving shot, gross oversights in attack ranges, etc). - The design team is dead-set on preserving certain game dynamics even though it arguably negatively effects other game dynamics to a greater amount. EG Jinro and many in the community want to see more terran mech, but the insistence on strong bio for the sake of Bio being viable in TvT mean that bio is the strongest choice in all TvX matchups and the strongest choice for any player picking up SC2 looking to be the best in the world and win big money. You can't tell me it's impossible for a non-meching Terran to beat factory units given the strength of ghosts and Terran air. The new TvT could very well be Air Mech vs Ground Mech if bio were nerfed. That MVP Top game was pretty damn exciting to me, with ghosts and nothing but mech in the sky and air... - The suggestion that it's unrealistic for us to expect an expansion to 'save SC2' implies it's already failed on some level to live up to it's predecessor. - The Macro mechanics' effect on the game may be negative for SC2 in the long-term for achieving the chaos of contemporary macro BW excitement, but we have no indication that these will ever change. - Blizzard's omission or removal of high-level micro (EG instead of a buff, the Carrier is scrapped for a slow strong AoE air unit with unexciting micro/speed potential) - only one example... it's been said far too many times but i'll say it again. SC2 =/= BW also similar to policy making. There was a vide ofloating around that was anti-SOPA by some proponent of net neutrality who actually went on about policy makers in washington and comparing it to the war on drugs. They 1; cant admit it was a failure, and 2; cant admit all their policies were bad implementations, so they just keep trying to add on more and modify existing ones so it fixed the problem, with the end result being a bloated load of policies that may have some impact but bring more negative than positive solution to the problem. This is the same with dustijn browder, his ego, and blizzard/activision's control over blizz. Seriously, people can create their own units and their own mechanics with sc2 maps, they made brood war 2.0. There's nothing stopping the community from making a better game, and voting it better than the current blizz dev team's compilation, and thus proving that they are making an inherently flawed game by working more with the ego of not being wrong than with the ego of wanting to actually correct their mistakes. Such egos are status quo for celebrity figures and policy makers, which the head guys over at ActiBlizz are. I find that to be an interesting take on sc2 development. Because the map editor is so good in sc2 we can create and showcase the game we think is appropriate and point out the flaws in the shipped game. While I have considered this before, you just pointed out something that should be obvious, we don't have to build the game in the editor to come to the conclusion that blizzard is not doing this game justice. While you can take both bw and sc2 at face value and make an appropriate judgement, with the addition of using the map editor we get something almost tangible instead of a feeling. While this is probably not going to matter ever, The simple fact that we can make a better game with less tools using the in game map editor and have it voted by popular consensus (probably) and rated higher in competitive merit means that you can't argue that blizzard is doing the best job they can do. I hope that blizzard rearranges some of the units from WoL in HotS. I would really like to see the hydra at the roach spot and the roach either moved to tier 2 and changed appropriately or removed. Obviously the hydra would have to be tweaked to not be op but still. There are other units that could probably benefit from this change like the observer just requiring 1 of the 3 tech paths, not robo in particular or removing the reaper speed requiring factory etc.
There is so far no evidence that the community can make a better SC2 than Blizzard. Someone suggested DotA was an example of this, but that is entirely subjective since DoTa and standard WC3:TFT are completely different games, it would be suggesting Nexus Wars is better than SC2 multiplayer.
Fact: Blizzard has far more tools than the community. Blizzard originally aimed for 1 expansion a year, but due to their quality assurance is likely only going to release HotS once they are reasonably satisfied it actually improves the gameplay (HotS may not do everything YOU want it to do, but you can reasonably expect it to improve SC2 multiplayer once post-patching has fixed major issues).
If someone thinks they can redesign SC2 better than Blizzard I would love to see their efforts. Who knows, maybe someone can make a better HotS than Blizzard but I certainly do not expect it to happen.
|
On January 09 2012 03:11 mrRoflpwn wrote:
everyone that hates on cloud should know that he was a top foreign BroodWar player- and he is pretty much right about the gamble aspect- in broodwar a lesser player could NEVER beat a greater player- in SC2 lesser players are constantly upsetting players who are better
cloud is part of those lesser players, so what he says does not matter.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On January 09 2012 03:37 jinixxx123 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2012 03:11 mrRoflpwn wrote:
everyone that hates on cloud should know that he was a top foreign BroodWar player- and he is pretty much right about the gamble aspect- in broodwar a lesser player could NEVER beat a greater player- in SC2 lesser players are constantly upsetting players who are better cloud is part of those lesser players, so what he says does not matter.
okay so when is someone right and we dont like it we will discredit him right ? Wake up man...
|
I'm just wondering, what will be the counter for broodlord/infestor for toss with no Mothership/archon toilet, or the newer carrier deathball? They are removing the 2 counters to the broodlord/infestor combo. Surely they must realize this problem...
|
On December 04 2011 23:08 PlosionCornu wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2011 04:36 aTnClouD wrote:
Day9 gets an insane amount of money because he got famous with his dailies and other activities. If anything I noticed that the more time passed the more he catered to mainstream public and less to a strict elitist rts group of people. I don't know Day9 well enough to say what he really thinks (and even if I did I wouldn't out of respect for him) but I know for sure many progamers and casters are just not speaking honestly their mind when they talk about the game in public. Why won't they? Are they afraid it would hurt esports or all of that ciclejerk? Are people that weakminded? Being honest is such an hard thing to do? Blizzard won't change shit (implying there's stuff to change of course) if relevant people in the community don't drop this thin veil of hypocrity, highlight stuff etc, bring issues to the table, give out advices out and loud, since an expansion is coming in 2012. I'm sick, soo sick by this, I cannot stand hypocrites. If something's SHITTY, if something's BAD or CAN BE IMPROVED, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD TALK ABOUT IT. Things WON'T get better magically or whatever, blizzard cannot figure out everything by themselves (as much as they would love to, arrogants as they are). You know what? The very fact you are bringing up this issue, shows that deep down you actually CARE about the game, (ofc you do, it's your job lol). Remember guys, being blind fanboys is BAD for everything in the world, criticizing and judging shows that you actually care/like something enough to spend portions of your time improving it.
I know I'm late with this quoting but this was a really good comment, you have to be critical and not just fanboying sc2 "because it's such an awesome game". But I also have to say that people like artosis have fought so much for sc2 being an e-sport, he can't really say "it's a shitty game", that would destroy so much. Even if he sees the problems he thinks the best is to say "it's such an awesome game" instead of hating on it, because blizzard doesn't really listen so much to the community anyway (clantags, lan support, change names, ladder map pool, etc etc etc etc). Artosis wants to hype the game up so much that he is like on every cast he's doing he's saying "THIS SERIES IS THE BEST SERIES EVER", just to hype the people up.
I understand artosis position though and won't blame him for not attacking sc2, but I really agree with you on that people have to stop being fanboys on everything. Remember at sc2 release when like tons of people said "the game is close to balanced" when maps like steppes, kulas, lost temple, delta quad was in the map pool etc? The ignorance and saying "everything is fine, stop QQ" is everywhere unfortunately, so I just had to quote you because you are so right about what you said. Oh I just changed my signature so i will look really whiny now lol
|
On January 09 2012 03:37 jinixxx123 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2012 03:11 mrRoflpwn wrote:
everyone that hates on cloud should know that he was a top foreign BroodWar player- and he is pretty much right about the gamble aspect- in broodwar a lesser player could NEVER beat a greater player- in SC2 lesser players are constantly upsetting players who are better cloud is part of those lesser players, so what he says does not matter.
What's your response to when guys like Idra and other top pros say the exact same thing?
Get over yourselves, Cloud is 1000% more knowledgeable about the game than you are, regardless of whether you consider him a lower class foreigner or a higher class one, and his opinion has a lot of good points in it, that at the very least you should be willing to look at and decipher instead of spewing this "he's bad so he doesn't know" crap, because under that pretense you shouldn't even be posting.
|
On January 09 2012 01:50 eNVFroST wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2012 00:55 joopajoo wrote:On January 08 2012 05:57 eNVFroST wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I want to see a game that where if you don't scout every aspect of what hes doing you have a very large potential to suddenly lose the game, there needs to be more tells, units need to be better but more expensive.
This might do:
With that change it would balance the armies significantly and buff your ability to micro. It would allow zerg to get some an advantage before 5 bases when terran and protoss have 3. They need to keep the carrier and get rid of the colossus, the carrier brings a great role to the game as an air support unit, if they just nerfed carrier's armor and health and make it very weak but buff the damage it would be very fun to watch voidray carrier play along with a mothership. The thor should not be taken out, but rather made more of a giant metal shield for weak bio units.
How this would make the game more exciting:
It would be more risky to do 3-base mass stalker play, you could not afford nearly as much as can a huge zerg empire of bases would not be an even match at all. Workers would play a better role in the game. Harrassing mineral lines is much more exciting to watch. Air should be nerfed a little bit, the voidray is just a tad bit too good past about 20-30 of them. 15 if they get charged up.
How it would effect the cheese style of play:
Cheesy builds revolve around sitting in your base holed up not allowing scouting. This would make 1-base play after 5 minutes nearly impossible unless a large screw up came from the other player.
PvP - Not nearly as much 1-base play, as your army will be weakened quite a bit and a lot harder to attack the expanding player since a defenders advantage just means that much more in the early game.
ZvZ - No more 1-base roach rush play. Zerglings would multiply the effectiveness and roaches could only really be used in mid-late game ZvZ.
TvT - Don't have much to say as I don't really ever play terran.
Maps should be bigger:
In my opinion the maps are too small to support this change at all. the Mediumish maps should have as many expansions as Tal Darim. Needs a more complicated map, they need a map that isn't 100% symetrical, this makes for much more interesting play. With having a more entangled center part of the map makes different engagements fun to watch. Having 2 bridges, 3 platforms and other non-perfectly symetrical numbers and forms would allow for many more strategic elements in the game and have a higher skill ceiling that increases for more experience on each map.
Scouting should be harder for terran and protoss:
DRAMATICALLY alters the skill ceiling. By having to rely on your knowledge of the game you are FORCED to have to know more about the game. This I believe IdrA tries to express in the fact that zerg scouting is harder but so much less reliable. This makes zerg normally have a skill cap where you can play good, but you can't play flawlessly as nearly much as terran and protoss can because you have to know many tells and other good tricks to get your information and scouting. If terran and protoss had this it would help watching the game to be more interesting.
Diversity in unit compositons:
By making every unit a bit better but more expensive it exaggerates counters and bonus damages, almost forcing better unit compositions against the opponents, which is reflected on harder scouting by each race. For example: Stalkers would be made better against roaches. But zealots are dramatically worse against roaches. So the zerg would need zerglings and infestors to accompany some roaches to take out the zealots with the zerglings to counter the stalkers. The protoss would need to counter the infestors with immortals and if they wanted 1 or 2 carriers for extra damage and having the immortals keep the infestors at bay, that would be much more interesting to watch, and harder for players because it requires a lot more micro. (could also use high templar but I'm ignoring too many spellcasters as that makes the game more like WoW than a solid rts.)
The above example is really weird, probably because it's an example and just a half-done theory.
If you have any issues with my thinking please say so, and how you think the change would be hurtful.
If you like it, add to it.
TL;DR
Units need to be more expensive to make risky 1-base styles of play a lot more challenging. Harder scouting would mean even more coinflip situations, and bigger maps combined with more expensive units would just result in more games where all is decided by one huge 5 second fight. No ty. I meant harder scouting as in observers be removed. Terran should have scans be double cost. Zerg is fine, zerg already has all coinflip situations in the early game. If observers were removed it would atleast make hallucination be used more, i.e make the game more interesting because no protoss uses hallucination more than 3 times for scouting, but would make some cool things like hallucinating a colossus to get vision of the high ground, some things I've only seen a few times that are sorta brilliant.
You actually think the game would benefit from MORE coinflips? Don't you see the problem with all the zerg coinflips? Do you want terran and protoss to have the same problems? Why not just buff zerg scouting if you think there's an imbalance?
Nobody would scan anymore and it would be much harder to scout as protoss (and what about observer detection, do you think protoss should place cannons everywhere instead? I would go cloak banshees every game against protoss if they removed observer)
This would only lead to that there would be more coinflips, less skilled players winning and every noob would go holy shit i can allin every game and win now. BW was a good game because a ton of builds/timings got figured out and it became more of a chess game, but you actually want to make SC2 MORE like a game where everybody can win, it's more a matter of randomness?
If there was a vote on which was the worst post on tl.net I would vote your post. Sorry but it's true.
|
On January 09 2012 06:35 1Eris1 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2012 03:37 jinixxx123 wrote:On January 09 2012 03:11 mrRoflpwn wrote:
everyone that hates on cloud should know that he was a top foreign BroodWar player- and he is pretty much right about the gamble aspect- in broodwar a lesser player could NEVER beat a greater player- in SC2 lesser players are constantly upsetting players who are better cloud is part of those lesser players, so what he says does not matter. What's your response to when guys like Idra and other top pros say the exact same thing? Get over yourselves, Cloud is 1000% more knowledgeable about the game than you are, regardless of whether you consider him a lower class foreigner or a higher class one, and his opinion has a lot of good points in it, that at the very least you should be willing to look at and decipher instead of spewing this "he's bad so he doesn't know" crap, because under that pretense you shouldn't even be posting.
Idra is also not a top pro. Maybe if someone like Mvp, Fin (due to BW background), or someone like that says something it might mean something... but 'top' foreigner pro opinions are no more valid than any random GM/high Masters.
|
On January 09 2012 03:24 Tor wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2012 19:06 ixi.genocide wrote:On January 07 2012 18:45 Humanfails wrote:On January 06 2012 13:56 Thugtronik wrote:On January 06 2012 12:06 0neder wrote:On December 08 2011 11:17 happyness wrote:On December 08 2011 11:01 LaLuSh wrote:
Honestly don't see any reason to whine or complain about these things. And I used to be the one leading the charge when it came to riling people up against Blizzard. It's impossible to draw conclusions about how HotS will turn out at this point. What's more: people's expectations of how HotS is supposed to somehow "save" SC2 are unrealistic.
I think this pretty much ends the thread. There is no point in theorizing what HotS will be and what SC2 could have been. I'm personally going to put little thought into what HotS will be. Blizzard can worry about that. I for one will enjoy SC2 for what it is. If you like BW better, go enjoy BW. It is a great point, but I don't think it ends the thread. We have every reason to suspect that SC2 will become a good, but not great e-Sport game. The HotS demo and repeated interviews have indicated many things: - The Blizzard design team may have accepted the Colossus as a unit that must remain in the game, in spite of community consensus that it is very boring and creating a mediocre unit dynamic that is holding the spot of what could be a better one. This is evident in that all the new units they proposed for protoss revolved around them having a single concentrated death ball of units including the colossus so there is little split action or excitement a la Hero (luckily Hero understands showmanship and is an explorative player). - Blizzard may be incapable of fundamental changes that could improve the game for spectating and excitement, such as unit spacing to make armies feel bigger, and moving shot micro that may not be possible given the game engine and the programming team's shortcomings (Phoenix moving shot, gross oversights in attack ranges, etc). - The design team is dead-set on preserving certain game dynamics even though it arguably negatively effects other game dynamics to a greater amount. EG Jinro and many in the community want to see more terran mech, but the insistence on strong bio for the sake of Bio being viable in TvT mean that bio is the strongest choice in all TvX matchups and the strongest choice for any player picking up SC2 looking to be the best in the world and win big money. You can't tell me it's impossible for a non-meching Terran to beat factory units given the strength of ghosts and Terran air. The new TvT could very well be Air Mech vs Ground Mech if bio were nerfed. That MVP Top game was pretty damn exciting to me, with ghosts and nothing but mech in the sky and air... - The suggestion that it's unrealistic for us to expect an expansion to 'save SC2' implies it's already failed on some level to live up to it's predecessor. - The Macro mechanics' effect on the game may be negative for SC2 in the long-term for achieving the chaos of contemporary macro BW excitement, but we have no indication that these will ever change. - Blizzard's omission or removal of high-level micro (EG instead of a buff, the Carrier is scrapped for a slow strong AoE air unit with unexciting micro/speed potential) - only one example... it's been said far too many times but i'll say it again. SC2 =/= BW also similar to policy making. There was a vide ofloating around that was anti-SOPA by some proponent of net neutrality who actually went on about policy makers in washington and comparing it to the war on drugs. They 1; cant admit it was a failure, and 2; cant admit all their policies were bad implementations, so they just keep trying to add on more and modify existing ones so it fixed the problem, with the end result being a bloated load of policies that may have some impact but bring more negative than positive solution to the problem. This is the same with dustijn browder, his ego, and blizzard/activision's control over blizz. Seriously, people can create their own units and their own mechanics with sc2 maps, they made brood war 2.0. There's nothing stopping the community from making a better game, and voting it better than the current blizz dev team's compilation, and thus proving that they are making an inherently flawed game by working more with the ego of not being wrong than with the ego of wanting to actually correct their mistakes. Such egos are status quo for celebrity figures and policy makers, which the head guys over at ActiBlizz are. I find that to be an interesting take on sc2 development. Because the map editor is so good in sc2 we can create and showcase the game we think is appropriate and point out the flaws in the shipped game. While I have considered this before, you just pointed out something that should be obvious, we don't have to build the game in the editor to come to the conclusion that blizzard is not doing this game justice. While you can take both bw and sc2 at face value and make an appropriate judgement, with the addition of using the map editor we get something almost tangible instead of a feeling. While this is probably not going to matter ever, The simple fact that we can make a better game with less tools using the in game map editor and have it voted by popular consensus (probably) and rated higher in competitive merit means that you can't argue that blizzard is doing the best job they can do. I hope that blizzard rearranges some of the units from WoL in HotS. I would really like to see the hydra at the roach spot and the roach either moved to tier 2 and changed appropriately or removed. Obviously the hydra would have to be tweaked to not be op but still. There are other units that could probably benefit from this change like the observer just requiring 1 of the 3 tech paths, not robo in particular or removing the reaper speed requiring factory etc. There is so far no evidence that the community can make a better SC2 than Blizzard. Someone suggested DotA was an example of this, but that is entirely subjective since DoTa and standard WC3:TFT are completely different games, it would be suggesting Nexus Wars is better than SC2 multiplayer. Fact: Blizzard has far more tools than the community. Blizzard originally aimed for 1 expansion a year, but due to their quality assurance is likely only going to release HotS once they are reasonably satisfied it actually improves the gameplay (HotS may not do everything YOU want it to do, but you can reasonably expect it to improve SC2 multiplayer once post-patching has fixed major issues). If someone thinks they can redesign SC2 better than Blizzard I would love to see their efforts. Who knows, maybe someone can make a better HotS than Blizzard but I certainly do not expect it to happen.
Are you talking about the same Blizzard that helped to design 5rax reaper?
|
Protoss doesn't need a mothership replacement that's only good for countering mutalisks.
Make Phoenix range longer by 1. Right now, Phoenix is just slightly too hard to kite against Mutas in larger numbers, but +1 range should make it much more viable. That is also better because the Phoenix has more than 1 purpose, unlike the AOE air unit they are proposing.
There is precedence for this too. Roaches were supposed to counter Hellions like Phoenix were supposed to counter Mutas, but they didn't work correctly until they got +1 range. They've also added +1 range to Immortals to make them more useful against Tanks for the 1/1/1 in particular. Since they have plenty of precedence for a +1 range balance change, why don't they at least try it for the Phoenix?
It won't break PvP since Phoenix won't suddenly smash Colo from far away, they'll still get hit by Stalkers.
It won't break PvT, since Vikings will still far out range them.
It might help PvZ to deal with Mutas.
|
On January 09 2012 10:38 oxxo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2012 06:35 1Eris1 wrote:On January 09 2012 03:37 jinixxx123 wrote:On January 09 2012 03:11 mrRoflpwn wrote:
everyone that hates on cloud should know that he was a top foreign BroodWar player- and he is pretty much right about the gamble aspect- in broodwar a lesser player could NEVER beat a greater player- in SC2 lesser players are constantly upsetting players who are better cloud is part of those lesser players, so what he says does not matter. What's your response to when guys like Idra and other top pros say the exact same thing? Get over yourselves, Cloud is 1000% more knowledgeable about the game than you are, regardless of whether you consider him a lower class foreigner or a higher class one, and his opinion has a lot of good points in it, that at the very least you should be willing to look at and decipher instead of spewing this "he's bad so he doesn't know" crap, because under that pretense you shouldn't even be posting. Idra is also not a top pro. Maybe if someone like Mvp, Fin (due to BW background), or someone like that says something it might mean something... but 'top' foreigner pro opinions are no more valid than any random GM/high Masters.
Idra says a lot of stupid things but this is actually one of the things that is true.
Koreans would never say that the game isn't balanced, they would say they need to practice more, but I'm sure they feel the same way at least until the game gets more figured out
|
I am just taking a wait and see approach for now. Hope for the best.
|
On January 09 2012 10:38 oxxo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2012 06:35 1Eris1 wrote:On January 09 2012 03:37 jinixxx123 wrote:On January 09 2012 03:11 mrRoflpwn wrote:
everyone that hates on cloud should know that he was a top foreign BroodWar player- and he is pretty much right about the gamble aspect- in broodwar a lesser player could NEVER beat a greater player- in SC2 lesser players are constantly upsetting players who are better cloud is part of those lesser players, so what he says does not matter. What's your response to when guys like Idra and other top pros say the exact same thing? Get over yourselves, Cloud is 1000% more knowledgeable about the game than you are, regardless of whether you consider him a lower class foreigner or a higher class one, and his opinion has a lot of good points in it, that at the very least you should be willing to look at and decipher instead of spewing this "he's bad so he doesn't know" crap, because under that pretense you shouldn't even be posting. Idra is also not a top pro. Maybe if someone like Mvp, Fin (due to BW background), or someone like that says something it might mean something... but 'top' foreigner pro opinions are no more valid than any random GM/high Masters.
MVP even said he switched over because SC2 is a lot easier, I don't even see how this is an arguement. But whatever, keep making excuses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
