|
I agree with cloud, but then the units arent finalized. so I just hope blizzard create more interesting units. The replicant is the one that really annoys me, looks like they couldnt think of anything and hence put it in there.
I agree the smart casting, anti clumping and mbs took a lot of the challenge and the fun out of the game, but then it's understandable why blizzard would do that. The pathing had many issues, and was probably not intended to do the many weird things it would make units do. So do you fix the bugs or do you let it be? As a company, you'd probably want to fix it, but then thats leaves us with a lack of challenge. If they add more micro-intensive spells/units (like the siege tank, reaver, vulture).
Some of the new units they put in there do have the potential, but still feels a little bit bland.
|
On December 03 2011 10:10 MadJack wrote:
tbh cloud is right, blizzard has released so many patch for this game already, youve got to realise how badly design the game is.
StarCraft 2 is currently on patch 1.4.something.
A year and a half after release, Brood War was on patch 1.5.
'Course, a year and a half after release, the expansion was already out for the original. Still, this argument is pretty nonsensical, Brood War was still releasing major balance patches three years after release.
|
On December 03 2011 12:31 dartoo wrote:
I agree with cloud, but then the units arent finalized. so I just hope blizzard create more interesting units. The replicant is the one that really annoys me, looks like they couldnt think of anything and hence put it in there.
I agree the smart casting, anti clumping and mbs took a lot of the challenge and the fun out of the game, but then it's understandable why blizzard would do that. The pathing had many issues, and was probably not intended to do the many weird things it would make units do. So do you fix the bugs or do you let it be? As a company, you'd probably want to fix it, but then thats leaves us with a lack of challenge. If they add more micro-intensive spells/units (like the siege tank, reaver, vulture).
Some of the new units they put in there do have the potential, but still feels a little bit bland.
The whole bug thing is an excuse. Other games with bugs had them integrated into the sequel especially competitive games where said bugs were used often.
I don't mind the path fighting but I would like removal of Smart Cast + MBS (to a certain extent) and other things. In BW it always amazes me when pro gamers use their spell casters so efficiently due to lack of smart cast and other stuff. In SC2 not so much. I want that back for SC2 Blizzard  .
I do wish they would have used the Corsair with Disruption Web + Optic Flare-like ability(for DT + Corsair combination) rather than the what appears to be a-move Tempest (keep the Carrier, add Corsair to deal with Mutalisks and other AA that Phoenix alone can't do so well against).
(Phoenix are good against Mutalisks but I still miss the Corsair; Corsair can be really effective against larger numbers of Mutalisks thanks to splash.)
Really though the Corsair would add new options for Protoss. It would require skill and well other tactics. Not every unit needs a capital ship (just keep Carriers and call it a day. Even if no one uses it, Corsair can fill in the role of Tempest).
Only new Protoss unit I really like is the Oracle.
The replicant is okay. The problem is the fact that why are the Protoss relying on other race's units instead of using their own >.<. Should bring back Dark Archon instead.
Honestly I don't see why Blizzard is going out of their way to not bring back any BW units.
Sure I like the new units for map making (any new SC2 assets I welcome gladly) but in terms of non-modded normal SC2 games, it doesn't make sense.
The Warhound for example might as well be a Goliath with splash damage.
Tempest might as well be a bigger Corsair with ground attack.
IDK about others but I really want the Corsair back instead of Tempest >.>.
|
On December 03 2011 13:49 Goldfish wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2011 12:31 dartoo wrote:
I agree with cloud, but then the units arent finalized. so I just hope blizzard create more interesting units. The replicant is the one that really annoys me, looks like they couldnt think of anything and hence put it in there.
I agree the smart casting, anti clumping and mbs took a lot of the challenge and the fun out of the game, but then it's understandable why blizzard would do that. The pathing had many issues, and was probably not intended to do the many weird things it would make units do. So do you fix the bugs or do you let it be? As a company, you'd probably want to fix it, but then thats leaves us with a lack of challenge. If they add more micro-intensive spells/units (like the siege tank, reaver, vulture).
Some of the new units they put in there do have the potential, but still feels a little bit bland. The whole bug thing is an excuse. Other games with bugs had them integrated into the sequel especially competitive games where said bugs were used often.
Hmm.. thats interesting, which games did that? Keeping the bugs would've been tougher for blizzard, cause they just didnt improve it, they changed the whole system, I think they went from A* in broodwar to swarm AI,thats a massive change, building in bugs is not quite the right way of doing things (from a development persepctive).
|
On December 03 2011 14:18 dartoo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2011 13:49 Goldfish wrote:On December 03 2011 12:31 dartoo wrote:
I agree with cloud, but then the units arent finalized. so I just hope blizzard create more interesting units. The replicant is the one that really annoys me, looks like they couldnt think of anything and hence put it in there.
I agree the smart casting, anti clumping and mbs took a lot of the challenge and the fun out of the game, but then it's understandable why blizzard would do that. The pathing had many issues, and was probably not intended to do the many weird things it would make units do. So do you fix the bugs or do you let it be? As a company, you'd probably want to fix it, but then thats leaves us with a lack of challenge. If they add more micro-intensive spells/units (like the siege tank, reaver, vulture).
Some of the new units they put in there do have the potential, but still feels a little bit bland. The whole bug thing is an excuse. Other games with bugs had them integrated into the sequel especially competitive games where said bugs were used often. Hmm.. thats interesting, which games did that? Keeping the bugs would've been tougher for blizzard, cause they just didnt improve it, they changed the whole system, I think they went from A* in broodwar to swarm AI,thats a massive change, building in bugs is not quite the right way of doing things (from a development persepctive).
Previously when blizzard hyped sc2 with the statement that the engine can do ANYTHING , Well it can do almost everything except simulate broodwar.
|
On December 03 2011 09:31 aTnClouD wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2011 09:19 D_K_night wrote:On December 03 2011 09:06 aTnClouD wrote:On December 03 2011 08:52 D_K_night wrote:On December 03 2011 08:40 aTnClouD wrote:On December 03 2011 08:32 VanGarde wrote:On December 03 2011 07:35 noxn wrote:On December 03 2011 07:12 VanGarde wrote:
No offense to Cloud but it is getting silly how all of the mid tier foreign players are the ones who whine that the game is too random and the skill cap is too low so there is no point in competing. Unless you are beating mvp or nestea in gsl finals arguments like that are completely irrelevant when it comes to actually competing in the game. Seriously stop using how "flawed the game is" to explain away a lack of results. These kinds of comments always only come from the players who play seriously but who are never seen in the top of tournaments. Sure, but I've seen the same thing before in other games. When someone "at the top" complains, then someone will say "if the game is so bad, then how come nestea and mvp have won so many championships? seems pretty consistent/balanced to me". it's a bit of a catch 22. anyway, there's nothing wrong with what cloud said. you don't have to be amongst the top 5 players in the world to have a valid opinion on the game. plus, as someone who came from wow - I can see why he's concerned. Blizzard is known for having killed the competitive aspect of WoW back in wotlk when they added all kinds of new jazz, realized how broken it was half a year later, and failed to balance it. I think you and several others are vastly missing the point, whether it is true or not that sc2 is really random and bad players can get good results by "throwing the dice" is a different question. Still one I would argue against with passion. Clouds statement puts it like he stopped playing because it is not worth it, you don't have to be good to get good results, which is just sulking when you have not gotten the results you want and saying "whatever this game is stupid, you can win stuff with random shit so I am not going to bother playing anymore". And yes your results actually do matter. If any of the very top players were to go out and say that the game is too random, I could lose to anyone because in every game I have to throw a dice then that would be a huge statement. There is a vast difference between saying there is randomness in the game and suggesting that there is no point competing because the game is so random that anyone can win. By giving up on sc2 I just meant I gave up on my hopes for an exciting sequel of SCBW. I didn't give up playing actually I'm playing more than I ever did in the past 2 months. Still, at least from my level of competence, I can see so many worse players winning by making random moves with no logics behind it, even in big tournaments, against players who actually are overall much better and just got unlucky, didn't watch the right screen for a split second cause any aoe in the game is too strong or they simply couldn't scout what was going on so they had to take a game changing blind decision. This happened in SCBW too but to a much, much, much smaller degree, and the fact the game also required to have good mechanics and multitasking allowed the pro scene to weed out many players that couldn't get at the level of the best ones. Thanks, sorry - my last post just came too late before I saw your response here. Your concern comes from - AoE damage is just too high. That makes sense, and does sound like a valid complaint to take back to Blizz. I recall seeing some very nice templar/shuttle play in BW, where drone lines are devastated. Would you say that templar/infestor/ghost type units in SC2 are just too devastating for their cost? By how much would you say their AOE should be toned down(percentage-wise)? Also a question around your "randomness" complaint. These "worse" players getting lucky due to a blind decision. Also your comment about the "couldn't scout" as well. Was this a factor in BW as well, or does SC2 simply have just too many tech paths that, if not scouted, could spell your doom just too easily? Templars, infestors and ghosts are way too cost efficient and easy to use. These 2 factors together make these units totally dictate how games go in conjunction to the fact everything clumps too much in sc2. They are gonna add more of this so I am not sure where they plan to take the game from the aoe a-move slugfest that is now. About scouting, the main problems in early game are mostly the fact stalkers and zerglings outrun workers and marine has such a strong moving shot against them. The worst part though is that all the new early units and mechanics (roach, baneling, larva inject, marauder, hellion, sentry, warpgates) can make such powerful all ins at times where one of the players simply can't have map control or any kind of scouting informaton that many games just end up being a result of one the players taking a big blind risk early game and somebody got randomly rewarded for it. I am not sure if blizzard even think these are issues but it wouldn't be the first time they just put too much stuff without caring/fixing the rest and it ends up being a total mess afterwards. Would an early baneling bust vs a Terran depot wall-in qualify for your above comments? How about a sudden roach build vs reactor-fac hellions? I can definitely say I've lost outright many a time against those as Terran, in many ways I blame myself for not having scouted better or scanned, but I see even pros lose to those, soooo.... Both are not very effective all ins and they are not the issue I'm talking about. The best example I can find is in PvT fast nexus into 6 gate aggression. Can beat even 4+ bunkers on most maps due to forcefields preventing repair, so terrans have to be prepared for it even if they don't scout, but if protoss goes for fast upgrades and zealots archons he will win easily later cause terran had to invest into defence rather than upgrades, tech and eco. So basically terran has to take a blind decision, either counter 6 gate or double forge, if they are wrong they lose if they get it right they will most likely win a bit later into mid game or be in a really good position. It's a bit simplified but it's pretty much what happens in the matchup right now. I guess it can be entertaining from a watcher perspective to see the unpredictability of a match, but still sucks for a player who invests a lot of time into getting better.
I know I'm not top-tier in SC2, but I don't understand how you can say defending against a 6 gate or double forge is a toss up (pun intended) when you are playing a race that has a unit that can jump cliffs to scout, go 1-1-1 and use air to scout, or scan. Aside from that, moving a single marine out to see the army. How are you going to get hit with a two base timing and not have scouted it. And I'm not just being sassy, as I Terran player I would like to know the answer to that question.
|
On December 03 2011 14:18 dartoo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2011 13:49 Goldfish wrote:On December 03 2011 12:31 dartoo wrote:
I agree with cloud, but then the units arent finalized. so I just hope blizzard create more interesting units. The replicant is the one that really annoys me, looks like they couldnt think of anything and hence put it in there.
I agree the smart casting, anti clumping and mbs took a lot of the challenge and the fun out of the game, but then it's understandable why blizzard would do that. The pathing had many issues, and was probably not intended to do the many weird things it would make units do. So do you fix the bugs or do you let it be? As a company, you'd probably want to fix it, but then thats leaves us with a lack of challenge. If they add more micro-intensive spells/units (like the siege tank, reaver, vulture).
Some of the new units they put in there do have the potential, but still feels a little bit bland. The whole bug thing is an excuse. Other games with bugs had them integrated into the sequel especially competitive games where said bugs were used often. Hmm.. thats interesting, which games did that? Keeping the bugs would've been tougher for blizzard, cause they just didnt improve it, they changed the whole system, I think they went from A* in broodwar to swarm AI,thats a massive change, building in bugs is not quite the right way of doing things (from a development persepctive).
The only games that I know that this happens is in Capcom fighting games. Street Fighter 2 vanilla didn't have a combo system, and linking multiple moves together with perfect timing so that they couldn't be blocked was unintended. They turned that bug into the combo system that pretty much every 2d fighter ever has used. In Capcom Vs Snk 2 there was a way to roll and then cancel it into super moves or something, so you could avoid a fireball and then 0frame a super out of it and punish haaaard. That was definitely a bug but the level of skill required to execute it was so high that it was unreliable and it became part of the game, some tournies banned it, some didn't. I don't know of any other competitive game that embraced any bugs or glitches like that.
|
On December 03 2011 06:45 Megatronn wrote:
Cloud's opinion is.. interesting.
Well I agree with him. There are many strategies that if Flash himself did, would auto-lose to another strat (and not like a cannon rush or bunker rush or whatever).
|
On December 03 2011 12:41 Fanatic-Templar wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2011 10:10 MadJack wrote:
tbh cloud is right, blizzard has released so many patch for this game already, youve got to realise how badly design the game is. StarCraft 2 is currently on patch 1.4.something. A year and a half after release, Brood War was on patch 1.5. 'Course, a year and a half after release, the expansion was already out for the original. Still, this argument is pretty nonsensical, Brood War was still releasing major balance patches three years after release.
SC1+BW had a grand total of 4 balance patches. Your argument is invalid.
|
On December 03 2011 13:49 Goldfish wrote:
The Warhound for example might as well be a Goliath with splash damage.
Tempest might as well be a bigger Corsair with ground attack.
IDK about others but I really want the Corsair back instead of Tempest >.>.
Well about the bugs and the BW units, Dustin Browder made it very clear that they were not trying to remake BW. "If you want BW, go play BW" (That was what he said).
Having said that, I gotta agree with ClouD. New units will require a lot of balancing. And as if this wasn't hard enough, most of the units have very specific goals. I fear that the fact of having so many spellcasters in the game will make the game too micro oriented and less strategy/understanding-the-AI oriented. It's like moving away from Starcraft towards Warcraft.
|
On December 03 2011 15:35 InvXXVII wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2011 13:49 Goldfish wrote:
The Warhound for example might as well be a Goliath with splash damage.
Tempest might as well be a bigger Corsair with ground attack.
IDK about others but I really want the Corsair back instead of Tempest >.>. Well about the bugs and the BW units, Dustin Browder made it very clear that they were not trying to remake BW. "If you want BW, go play BW" (That was what he said). Having said that, I gotta agree with ClouD. New units will require a lot of balancing. And as if this wasn't hard enough, most of the units have very specific goals. I fear that the fact of having so many spellcasters in the game will make the game too micro oriented and less strategy/understanding-the-AI oriented. It's like moving away from Starcraft towards Warcraft.
The bigger, more powerful, one-only Thor is the first step towards hero units in Warcraft: Legacy of the Void. :S
But I think the point of micro in BW or SC2 have always been about making the most of basic units. I'm less impressed by someone going crazy with Blademaster than I am with 12 mnms surviving and killing Lurkers. Most of the new units are just very gimmicky and one-dimensional and will probably make SC2 an even bigger game of hard-counters.
|
I woulda thought no one could argue with cloud on his concerns, which are shared by far more people than this thread makes it look like.
In video games as a general rule, if something is more powerful, it's harder to pull off than less powerful ones. You can find a infinite amount of examples to this. However this is not the case in SC2. Everything has almost the same difficulty of execution. This means if you have something in your arsenal, you can mostly use it. When this something happens to counter what your opponent has to offer, you simply win.
TL,DR: If things were harder to execute, this would give the opponent room for reaction, which would leave more space for skill which makes Cloud right.
|
WhiteRa wants moar speshul taktiks
|
I don't think we can ever agree with how the game should play.
Either you keep the old limitations of BW (only 12 units per control group, clunky unit AI, no smart casting, etc), or you start moving forward with innovation.
The more I read this thread, the more it sounds like people just want BW. There is BW mod for SC2 but not sure how far along the author is - but if it's near done and has some good polish, is there any reason why people can't just gravitate to that?
|
On December 03 2011 17:12 D_K_night wrote:
I don't think we can ever agree with how the game should play.
Either you keep the old limitations of BW (only 12 units per control group, clunky unit AI, no smart casting, etc), or you start moving forward with innovation.
The more I read this thread, the more it sounds like people just want BW. There is BW mod for SC2 but not sure how far along the author is - but if it's near done and has some good polish, is there any reason why people can't just gravitate to that?
Well let me give you a quote from midas, and what he thinks about sc2 "I think the trend nowadays is to make things easy and accessible. In terms of cartoons, the popular trend is to draw things in very simple, basic styles. It makes it easy for the reader to engage. I'm going to confess that in the off-season, I tried out StarCraft 2 and League of Legends. I was so surprised when I first played StarCraft 2. I couldn't believe that such an easy game exists. Same with League of Legends. I guess the best way to attract people these days is to make things easy and simple."
|
On December 03 2011 07:12 VanGarde wrote:
No offense to Cloud but it is getting silly how all of the mid tier foreign players are the ones who whine that the game is too random and the skill cap is too low so there is no point in competing. Unless you are beating mvp or nestea in gsl finals arguments like that are completely irrelevant when it comes to actually competing in the game. Seriously stop using how "flawed the game is" to explain away a lack of results. These kinds of comments always only come from the players who play seriously but who are never seen in the top of tournaments.
I second that!
You do not hear any Korean Pros (particularly the good ones) whining about so much randomness etc. in the game, only foreign pros who lack results!
I mean if it' sooo random, why the hell the guys who are doing good overall are a handfull?
|
On December 03 2011 07:29 aTnClouD wrote:
Sc2 is already bad enough with all those aoe super powerful no brainer easy to use units (ghost, templar, colo, infestor). Let's add more spellcasting bs on the field so the game gets... worse. This is my opinion and I'm not being a crybaby. If you don't like it don't assume I'm just whining randomly. I'm not blaming my "lack of results" (?!?results that anyway most people who play sc2 all day would love to have) on a bad game since I know it was obviously due to the fact I never liked SC2 for the reasons I stated before so I was never able to enjoy and practice as much as many other tournament winning players. Even if the game is super gamblish and bad players can win against good ones it doesn't mean the very best players in the world are not able to put the results they deserve (and they can still lose to incomparably worse players - watch mlg orlando). Thing is they are gonna add stuff in hots that will probably be sick hard to balance with everything else already and I really wonder if there is any way for units like the oracle or the shredder to not fuck up totally the game. Don't get me wrong, I obviously hope I am just pessimistic and it won't be like this, still it looks pretty grim to me.
edit: and dont call me mid tier foreign player, cause i'm not. thanks.
Wow dude, you first claim that you have great results and then go on to say that your lack of results is attributed ti the fact that you didn't like the game in the first place?
It's perfectly fine to not like the game and think that HOTS will be bullshit but judging by tournament results overall the game is not as random as you make it out to be. MLG Orlando which you use as an example i would say is the exception that makes the rule.
Anyway, glhf
|
Pro's can be replaced, the game is what will be permanent, hopefully Blizzard gets it right one day and stops patching everything.
I know the scene is much bigger than Foreign BW was, and a few of the pro's from the BW period and on cannot handle such a big scene. They are no longer the big fish in the small pond. Just a fish in a large pond.
|
On December 03 2011 08:32 VanGarde wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2011 07:35 noxn wrote:On December 03 2011 07:12 VanGarde wrote:
No offense to Cloud but it is getting silly how all of the mid tier foreign players are the ones who whine that the game is too random and the skill cap is too low so there is no point in competing. Unless you are beating mvp or nestea in gsl finals arguments like that are completely irrelevant when it comes to actually competing in the game. Seriously stop using how "flawed the game is" to explain away a lack of results. These kinds of comments always only come from the players who play seriously but who are never seen in the top of tournaments. Sure, but I've seen the same thing before in other games. When someone "at the top" complains, then someone will say "if the game is so bad, then how come nestea and mvp have won so many championships? seems pretty consistent/balanced to me". it's a bit of a catch 22. anyway, there's nothing wrong with what cloud said. you don't have to be amongst the top 5 players in the world to have a valid opinion on the game. plus, as someone who came from wow - I can see why he's concerned. Blizzard is known for having killed the competitive aspect of WoW back in wotlk when they added all kinds of new jazz, realized how broken it was half a year later, and failed to balance it. I think you and several others are vastly missing the point, whether it is true or not that sc2 is really random and bad players can get good results by "throwing the dice" is a different question. Still one I would argue against with passion. Clouds statement puts it like he stopped playing because it is not worth it, you don't have to be good to get good results, which is just sulking when you have not gotten the results you want and saying "whatever this game is stupid, you can win stuff with random shit so I am not going to bother playing anymore". And yes your results actually do matter. If any of the very top players were to go out and say that the game is too random, I could lose to anyone because in every game I have to throw a dice then that would be a huge statement. There is a vast difference between saying there is randomness in the game and suggesting that there is no point competing because the game is so random that anyone can win.
Exactly, and correct me if i am wrong but most games use randomness a mechanism for enhancing the play and i don't mean jsut computer games. What about all ball games, board games, card games etc. We all know that luck may play a huge role in football sometimes (greece 2004 euro cup?) but most of the time the better team will win.
|
On December 03 2011 17:38 nvrs wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2011 07:29 aTnClouD wrote:
Sc2 is already bad enough with all those aoe super powerful no brainer easy to use units (ghost, templar, colo, infestor). Let's add more spellcasting bs on the field so the game gets... worse. This is my opinion and I'm not being a crybaby. If you don't like it don't assume I'm just whining randomly. I'm not blaming my "lack of results" (?!?results that anyway most people who play sc2 all day would love to have) on a bad game since I know it was obviously due to the fact I never liked SC2 for the reasons I stated before so I was never able to enjoy and practice as much as many other tournament winning players. Even if the game is super gamblish and bad players can win against good ones it doesn't mean the very best players in the world are not able to put the results they deserve (and they can still lose to incomparably worse players - watch mlg orlando). Thing is they are gonna add stuff in hots that will probably be sick hard to balance with everything else already and I really wonder if there is any way for units like the oracle or the shredder to not fuck up totally the game. Don't get me wrong, I obviously hope I am just pessimistic and it won't be like this, still it looks pretty grim to me.
edit: and dont call me mid tier foreign player, cause i'm not. thanks. Wow dude, you first claim that you have great results and then go on to say that your lack of results is attributed ti the fact that you didn't like the game in the first place? It's perfectly fine to not like the game and think that HOTS will be bullshit but judging by tournament results overall the game is not as random as you make it out to be. MLG Orlando which you use as an example i would say is the exception that makes the rule. Anyway, glhf
he never said he had lack of results....he said "lack of results" just to use the other guys wording. He went on to say he thinks he has results any foreigner would want.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
