|
On August 22 2012 18:30 Cabinet Sanchez wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2012 18:14 Grumbels wrote:On August 22 2012 18:10 Cabinet Sanchez wrote:On August 21 2012 19:19 regiment wrote:
* The Battle Cruisers speed boost will be removed, Battle Cruisers will have increased damage
Errr I,.. uhhhh well, ... you see... look ..ummmmmm.... well... oh :/ (Literally my reaction reading that line) BC's don't seem used very much but it seems to me when they come out they fucking stay out, those things are tough as fuck and kick some serious ass, I'm kind of lost here - can someone tell me how they are weak (except build time, cost) ? Very confused right here - I fear the shit out of those fucking things. They changed their damage from 8 to 6 in a patch a while ago, I think primarily because of concerns for team play and free for all. Ever since they have not been used as much, except as a late-game transition where they are weak until critical mass. If Battle Cruisers have serious weakness, but are stronger than they are now, a place opens up for more BC rushes, mixing in BCs with your late-game army, and so on. Of course, the danger is that mass BC is impossible to defeat, which is somewhat of an issue with the game in general. (ultimate compositions having so few weaknesses) That last sentence is my issue exactly. If you are too slow on upgrades as P and don't have enough stalkers / phoenix - a certain amount of BC's can utterly maul you - and my god do they seem hard to actually knock down - such a tough unit. I won't deny it's kind of cool - since the BC is such an iconic looking capital ship but it sucks as a mid skill player. (mind you it seems like pros have similar problems as me with the things if someone manages to sneak more than 3 or 4 out)
What are you talking about? If you didn't scout him at all, you deserve to lose to BCs. If you are slow on upgrades? The Protoss has always been the race that gets all of the upgrades the fastest because of Chronoboost. And Stalkers should be enough to deal with BCs, Phoenixes don't do anything vs. BCs because they don't damage them at all.. One Phoenix does 2x5 damage vs. non-light units, and BC has 2 armor when not upgraded, that is only 6 damage per Phoenix. The things that is really good vs. BCs are HTs and Void Rays, as seen in Mvp vs. Squirtle match.
And I think that mass BCs are far easier to beat than mass Carriers.
|
On August 22 2012 00:26 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2012 00:10 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 21 2012 23:49 Mauldo wrote:
Cloud just proves once again that he belongs on the battle.net forums. Blaming Blizzard for losing a game in an imbalanced HOTS alpha is plain sad. Add that to his long track record of shitting on other people for no reason, and (my personal favorite) constantly claiming that the skill ceiling is too low and anyone can win when the guy can't even qualify for WCS Italy or remain even kinda relevant and I'm starting to get annoyed with him even being there. He's about as bad as TT1 at his worst or avilo at his best. The shot at David Kim was really something special, and proved his maturity.
Of course Terran are being given two a-move units. There race is the hardest to play micro wise. Ever wonder why it's taken Terran as a whole (barring people like Taeja) longer than most would think to find a solution to their problems when they have people like QXC on the case? The race is just plain harder and more intensive. So they gave them a few units to maybe even out the odds while giving Zerg/Protoss more micro-centric/thought-provoking units to use. The Viper and Swarm Host, for example, are perfect examples of a anti-a-move unit. You have to think about how to use them, and they add a level of difficult up toward the Terran level, while Terran will hopefully be bumped down a smidge by the Warhound and Battle Hellion.
My favorite parts of this thread are the people who are still trying to shit on HOTS units before they're even in beta stage, and the people who are seriously taking Cloud as banner carrier to try and proclaim that the max skill level in SC2 is already almost met.
Are you kidding me guys? Seriously. You have to be. Maybe read the thread and the posts contained within before pre-judging. People are referencing the difference between a skill ceiling which isn't yet reached, but a skill floor where people with mediocre mechanics are still able to compete. Cloud was not fucking butthurt about losing a game in the alpha build, but is pointing out the direction that HoTS is going after having played the game, played around with the design etc. Also Cloud plays Terran, and is saying that the 1A mentality of which the warhound is the chief 'offender' is something that he doesn't want, even though it would improve his own race's ease of play. Why might that be? Despite this I'm sure he's just a butthurt balance whiner who wants easy results though...... I don’t think anyone is even attempting to argue that Cloud is upset that he lost a game in a test build of HotS. I personally don’t like that fact that he asserts that Blizzard is designing the game for bad player based off of that single experience. People, as a whole, are responding to the over all negative tone of his interview and his attitude toward the game designers. Calling someone an idiot because you don’t agree with them is pretty unprofessional. Also, its kind of lazy, since there are so many other words that could be used. But most I think people are getting tired of the complaining, negativity and over all bitchyness toward this expansion and the game. The game is so clearly in alpha and not even fully released in beta. Stuff will change and Blizzard is clearly willing to try things out and people really need to start treating the changes as such.
Reading that last bit.
What matters to me most of all is the extent to which Blizzard is willing to change the foundation of the game.
When people say, "stuff will change," how much stuff are we talking about? And to what extent will Blizzard be willing to change the concepts they have designed for HOTS?
See, tweaking the stats or delivery method of a unit concept is not the extent of change that I desire.
If Blizzard was truly willing to design this game as an esports title, then they would be willing to do things like:
1. Remove WG.
2. Nerf macro mechanics (income of mule, spawn larva to + 2 larva, slightly increase chronoboost cost (35))
3. Remove 1A units (roach, collosi, warhound, battlehellion).
4. Reduce the supply count of higher supply units (siege tanks, hydras, ultras).
5. Remove hero units (mothership, mothership core) and replace them with massable counterparts.
6. Reduce the power of stuns (make fungal slow by 60 percent rather than immobalize, change vortex).
7. Revert to 1 gas format (I believe this would improve several gameplay aspects, including: reducing the amount of workers required for 4 base saturation to 72, allowing for more tactical gas placements, better map design).
If Blizzard was truly willing, then they would try putting widow mines on the hellion, instead of giving the hellion a battle mode. That's my biggest beef. If they were willing, then they would stop trying to make Terran more 1A and increase the skill floor of the game.
+ Show Spoiler +And if they were willing, then they would put the lurker in the expansion over the swarm host (ok this is my biggest, PERSONAL beef, which is why I spoilered it.
|
On August 22 2012 18:54 Qwyn wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2012 00:26 Plansix wrote:On August 22 2012 00:10 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 21 2012 23:49 Mauldo wrote:
Cloud just proves once again that he belongs on the battle.net forums. Blaming Blizzard for losing a game in an imbalanced HOTS alpha is plain sad. Add that to his long track record of shitting on other people for no reason, and (my personal favorite) constantly claiming that the skill ceiling is too low and anyone can win when the guy can't even qualify for WCS Italy or remain even kinda relevant and I'm starting to get annoyed with him even being there. He's about as bad as TT1 at his worst or avilo at his best. The shot at David Kim was really something special, and proved his maturity.
Of course Terran are being given two a-move units. There race is the hardest to play micro wise. Ever wonder why it's taken Terran as a whole (barring people like Taeja) longer than most would think to find a solution to their problems when they have people like QXC on the case? The race is just plain harder and more intensive. So they gave them a few units to maybe even out the odds while giving Zerg/Protoss more micro-centric/thought-provoking units to use. The Viper and Swarm Host, for example, are perfect examples of a anti-a-move unit. You have to think about how to use them, and they add a level of difficult up toward the Terran level, while Terran will hopefully be bumped down a smidge by the Warhound and Battle Hellion.
My favorite parts of this thread are the people who are still trying to shit on HOTS units before they're even in beta stage, and the people who are seriously taking Cloud as banner carrier to try and proclaim that the max skill level in SC2 is already almost met.
Are you kidding me guys? Seriously. You have to be. Maybe read the thread and the posts contained within before pre-judging. People are referencing the difference between a skill ceiling which isn't yet reached, but a skill floor where people with mediocre mechanics are still able to compete. Cloud was not fucking butthurt about losing a game in the alpha build, but is pointing out the direction that HoTS is going after having played the game, played around with the design etc. Also Cloud plays Terran, and is saying that the 1A mentality of which the warhound is the chief 'offender' is something that he doesn't want, even though it would improve his own race's ease of play. Why might that be? Despite this I'm sure he's just a butthurt balance whiner who wants easy results though...... I don’t think anyone is even attempting to argue that Cloud is upset that he lost a game in a test build of HotS. I personally don’t like that fact that he asserts that Blizzard is designing the game for bad player based off of that single experience. People, as a whole, are responding to the over all negative tone of his interview and his attitude toward the game designers. Calling someone an idiot because you don’t agree with them is pretty unprofessional. Also, its kind of lazy, since there are so many other words that could be used. But most I think people are getting tired of the complaining, negativity and over all bitchyness toward this expansion and the game. The game is so clearly in alpha and not even fully released in beta. Stuff will change and Blizzard is clearly willing to try things out and people really need to start treating the changes as such. Reading that last bit. What matters to me most of all is the extent to which Blizzard is willing to change the foundation of the game. When people say, "stuff will change," how much stuff are we talking about? And to what extent will Blizzard be willing to change the concepts they have designed for HOTS? See, tweaking the stats or delivery method of a unit concept is not the extent of change that I desire. If Blizzard was truly willing to design this game as an esports title, then they would be willing to do things like: 1. Remove WG. 2. Nerf macro mechanics (income of mule, spawn larva to + 2 larva, slightly increase chronoboost cost (35)) 3. Remove 1A units (roach, collosi, warhound, battlehellion). 4. Reduce the supply count of higher supply units (siege tanks, hydras, ultras). 5. Remove hero units (mothership, mothership core) and replace them with massable counterparts. 6. Reduce the power of stuns (make fungal slow by 60 percent rather than immobalize, change vortex). 7. Revert to 1 gas format (I believe this would improve several gameplay aspects, including: reducing the amount of workers required for 4 base saturation to 72, allowing for more tactical gas placements, better map design). If Blizzard was truly willing, then they would try putting widow mines on the hellion, instead of giving the hellion a battle mode. That's my biggest beef. If they were willing, then they would stop trying to make Terran more 1A and increase the skill floor of the game. + Show Spoiler +And if they were willing, then they would put the lurker in the expansion over the swarm host (ok this is my biggest, PERSONAL beef, which is why I spoilered it. .
And add moving shot!!!!!!! Reason - http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=121769
Also Cloud is a legend :D
|
On August 22 2012 03:46 MavivaM wrote:Always nice to hear progamers opinions, they have way more insight than us. And Cloud, as usual, brings up valid points in the worst possible PR manner  I think that there are basically three problems in the balance situation: the first is the warp-in mechanic, since it completely nullifies the concept of map distance and makes PvP what it is. The second is the existence of spells who are able to change the flow of a battle despite whatever your opponent does. Forcefields, fungals, the infamous vortex, EMPs... one could argue that somehow your opponent can prevent some of them like the vortex by splitting everywhere, or luring FFs all day long... but personally I think it relies too much on a single player to make a mistake rather than his opponent doing something geniusThe third one is Blizzard's tendency to never punish a player who makes bad decisions when building his army since they tend to make the some units as well-rounded as possible. Pre-nerf ghost is the epitome of this tendecy, since it was NEVER a bad idea to make ghosts. Not that now making a ghost in TvP can be stupid, since they still hurt any kind of army composition the Protoss has, but they are not the only one. -Infestors are so well rounded that they can answer to absolutely EVERYTHING the opponent makes in all the matchups. -Colossi as well, as long as the opponent doesn't go completely anti-collossi (no... actually it's even better since in the next warp-in cycle the Toss will completely swap the army wherever he wants). -3/3 marines are perfect in every army against every kind of threat. -Broodlors, as long as supported by infestors, are NEVER a bad choice. And it looks like the Warhound will fit in this category as well. Generally a player is punished only because of bad decision making in a battle or due to huge errors with scouting, but the game is pretty generous with army compositions errors at every level of play that isn't the real top. It looks like HoTS won't change this aspect, sadly. That's the current state, I wonder how will it be in a couple of years...
Really appreciate your post, seems very insightful to me.
I play P but reading what you said does make sense to be honest regarding warpgate. I've never understood the hate but I see how it negates map size.
Perhaps the solution here is to make GW units build times faster than their warp in cooldown - reverse the effect so to speak? The convienience of warpgate is somewhat negated in a tradeoff by a longer cooldown?
Sorry to theorycraft, especially as a low skill player but it seems to make some sense to me. (obviously in the early game this could be an issue, solved by perhaps longer build times on the gates themselves?)
As for the comment(s) regarding 'never a bad idea to build x" (example infestors) very much agree with you and great point also. I always thought the colossus was a cool looking unit with an interesting skill (the wall walking) but having watched probably hundreds of hours of progames now and read this site I begin to see why people complain about these kind of units. A single 'smart choice' isn't really a good thing. If a unit has a cool skill like cliff walking, I'd like to see some kind of handicap - I don't think an obscenely long range is a handicap (and the lack of attacking air - while a partial handicap isn't the end of the world)
I won't begin to theorycraft the infestor, ghost, colossus or the marine but your point is really striking as someone who watches a lot of games - that kind of insight is smart and what blizzard should be sitting down and thinking about when designing units for HoTS - not as Dustin said many years ago "we just add cool units and balance the numbers around them"
Also on a sidenote, SC2 vs SC1 (non BW) - the quantity of units is much more in SC2 - I feel as if Blizzard penned themselves into a bloody corner with SC2 having so much variety. Just how many units will each side have to choose from, come the Protoss expansion? I know we want value for money in our game but more numbers of units isn't always the best.
Thanks for the good post.
|
awesome didn't know that violet knows english.
Violet: "Swarm host is pretty suck"
|
On August 22 2012 19:18 Disastorm wrote:
awesome didn't know that violet knows english.
Violet: "Swarm host is pretty suck"
You should definately check out the interviews with djWHEAT, SaSe and DRG he did for CSN. They are absolutely great. viOLet is such an awesome guy! I still can't believe I talked to him. 
|
On August 22 2012 18:59 Gben592 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2012 18:54 Qwyn wrote:On August 22 2012 00:26 Plansix wrote:On August 22 2012 00:10 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 21 2012 23:49 Mauldo wrote:
Cloud just proves once again that he belongs on the battle.net forums. Blaming Blizzard for losing a game in an imbalanced HOTS alpha is plain sad. Add that to his long track record of shitting on other people for no reason, and (my personal favorite) constantly claiming that the skill ceiling is too low and anyone can win when the guy can't even qualify for WCS Italy or remain even kinda relevant and I'm starting to get annoyed with him even being there. He's about as bad as TT1 at his worst or avilo at his best. The shot at David Kim was really something special, and proved his maturity.
Of course Terran are being given two a-move units. There race is the hardest to play micro wise. Ever wonder why it's taken Terran as a whole (barring people like Taeja) longer than most would think to find a solution to their problems when they have people like QXC on the case? The race is just plain harder and more intensive. So they gave them a few units to maybe even out the odds while giving Zerg/Protoss more micro-centric/thought-provoking units to use. The Viper and Swarm Host, for example, are perfect examples of a anti-a-move unit. You have to think about how to use them, and they add a level of difficult up toward the Terran level, while Terran will hopefully be bumped down a smidge by the Warhound and Battle Hellion.
My favorite parts of this thread are the people who are still trying to shit on HOTS units before they're even in beta stage, and the people who are seriously taking Cloud as banner carrier to try and proclaim that the max skill level in SC2 is already almost met.
Are you kidding me guys? Seriously. You have to be. Maybe read the thread and the posts contained within before pre-judging. People are referencing the difference between a skill ceiling which isn't yet reached, but a skill floor where people with mediocre mechanics are still able to compete. Cloud was not fucking butthurt about losing a game in the alpha build, but is pointing out the direction that HoTS is going after having played the game, played around with the design etc. Also Cloud plays Terran, and is saying that the 1A mentality of which the warhound is the chief 'offender' is something that he doesn't want, even though it would improve his own race's ease of play. Why might that be? Despite this I'm sure he's just a butthurt balance whiner who wants easy results though...... I don’t think anyone is even attempting to argue that Cloud is upset that he lost a game in a test build of HotS. I personally don’t like that fact that he asserts that Blizzard is designing the game for bad player based off of that single experience. People, as a whole, are responding to the over all negative tone of his interview and his attitude toward the game designers. Calling someone an idiot because you don’t agree with them is pretty unprofessional. Also, its kind of lazy, since there are so many other words that could be used. But most I think people are getting tired of the complaining, negativity and over all bitchyness toward this expansion and the game. The game is so clearly in alpha and not even fully released in beta. Stuff will change and Blizzard is clearly willing to try things out and people really need to start treating the changes as such. Reading that last bit. What matters to me most of all is the extent to which Blizzard is willing to change the foundation of the game. When people say, "stuff will change," how much stuff are we talking about? And to what extent will Blizzard be willing to change the concepts they have designed for HOTS? See, tweaking the stats or delivery method of a unit concept is not the extent of change that I desire. If Blizzard was truly willing to design this game as an esports title, then they would be willing to do things like: 1. Remove WG. 2. Nerf macro mechanics (income of mule, spawn larva to + 2 larva, slightly increase chronoboost cost (35)) 3. Remove 1A units (roach, collosi, warhound, battlehellion). 4. Reduce the supply count of higher supply units (siege tanks, hydras, ultras). 5. Remove hero units (mothership, mothership core) and replace them with massable counterparts. 6. Reduce the power of stuns (make fungal slow by 60 percent rather than immobalize, change vortex). 7. Revert to 1 gas format (I believe this would improve several gameplay aspects, including: reducing the amount of workers required for 4 base saturation to 72, allowing for more tactical gas placements, better map design). If Blizzard was truly willing, then they would try putting widow mines on the hellion, instead of giving the hellion a battle mode. That's my biggest beef. If they were willing, then they would stop trying to make Terran more 1A and increase the skill floor of the game. + Show Spoiler +And if they were willing, then they would put the lurker in the expansion over the swarm host (ok this is my biggest, PERSONAL beef, which is why I spoilered it. . And add moving shot!!!!!!! Reason - http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=121769Also Cloud is a legend :D
this link right here is a gem, even tough Lalush is a rager :D
|
On August 22 2012 18:54 Qwyn wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2012 00:26 Plansix wrote:On August 22 2012 00:10 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 21 2012 23:49 Mauldo wrote:
Cloud just proves once again that he belongs on the battle.net forums. Blaming Blizzard for losing a game in an imbalanced HOTS alpha is plain sad. Add that to his long track record of shitting on other people for no reason, and (my personal favorite) constantly claiming that the skill ceiling is too low and anyone can win when the guy can't even qualify for WCS Italy or remain even kinda relevant and I'm starting to get annoyed with him even being there. He's about as bad as TT1 at his worst or avilo at his best. The shot at David Kim was really something special, and proved his maturity.
Of course Terran are being given two a-move units. There race is the hardest to play micro wise. Ever wonder why it's taken Terran as a whole (barring people like Taeja) longer than most would think to find a solution to their problems when they have people like QXC on the case? The race is just plain harder and more intensive. So they gave them a few units to maybe even out the odds while giving Zerg/Protoss more micro-centric/thought-provoking units to use. The Viper and Swarm Host, for example, are perfect examples of a anti-a-move unit. You have to think about how to use them, and they add a level of difficult up toward the Terran level, while Terran will hopefully be bumped down a smidge by the Warhound and Battle Hellion.
My favorite parts of this thread are the people who are still trying to shit on HOTS units before they're even in beta stage, and the people who are seriously taking Cloud as banner carrier to try and proclaim that the max skill level in SC2 is already almost met.
Are you kidding me guys? Seriously. You have to be. Maybe read the thread and the posts contained within before pre-judging. People are referencing the difference between a skill ceiling which isn't yet reached, but a skill floor where people with mediocre mechanics are still able to compete. Cloud was not fucking butthurt about losing a game in the alpha build, but is pointing out the direction that HoTS is going after having played the game, played around with the design etc. Also Cloud plays Terran, and is saying that the 1A mentality of which the warhound is the chief 'offender' is something that he doesn't want, even though it would improve his own race's ease of play. Why might that be? Despite this I'm sure he's just a butthurt balance whiner who wants easy results though...... I don’t think anyone is even attempting to argue that Cloud is upset that he lost a game in a test build of HotS. I personally don’t like that fact that he asserts that Blizzard is designing the game for bad player based off of that single experience. People, as a whole, are responding to the over all negative tone of his interview and his attitude toward the game designers. Calling someone an idiot because you don’t agree with them is pretty unprofessional. Also, its kind of lazy, since there are so many other words that could be used. But most I think people are getting tired of the complaining, negativity and over all bitchyness toward this expansion and the game. The game is so clearly in alpha and not even fully released in beta. Stuff will change and Blizzard is clearly willing to try things out and people really need to start treating the changes as such. Reading that last bit. What matters to me most of all is the extent to which Blizzard is willing to change the foundation of the game. When people say, "stuff will change," how much stuff are we talking about? And to what extent will Blizzard be willing to change the concepts they have designed for HOTS? See, tweaking the stats or delivery method of a unit concept is not the extent of change that I desire. If Blizzard was truly willing to design this game as an esports title, then they would be willing to do things like: 1. Remove WG. 2. Nerf macro mechanics (income of mule, spawn larva to + 2 larva, slightly increase chronoboost cost (35)) 3. Remove 1A units (roach, collosi, warhound, battlehellion). 4. Reduce the supply count of higher supply units (siege tanks, hydras, ultras). 5. Remove hero units (mothership, mothership core) and replace them with massable counterparts. 6. Reduce the power of stuns (make fungal slow by 60 percent rather than immobalize, change vortex). 7. Revert to 1 gas format (I believe this would improve several gameplay aspects, including: reducing the amount of workers required for 4 base saturation to 72, allowing for more tactical gas placements, better map design). If Blizzard was truly willing, then they would try putting widow mines on the hellion, instead of giving the hellion a battle mode. That's my biggest beef. If they were willing, then they would stop trying to make Terran more 1A and increase the skill floor of the game. + Show Spoiler +And if they were willing, then they would put the lurker in the expansion over the swarm host (ok this is my biggest, PERSONAL beef, which is why I spoilered it. .
But that would be admitting Dustin "innovation" Browder is wrong. The guy would rather slash the Carrier than admit what a bad design Mothership is. Now he's taking the Defiler and doing a flip (ground --> air, unit consumption --> building) and calling it his own invention.
I agree wholeheartedly with your and Clouds post. I think Blizzard is suffering from the corporate political correctness disease where everyone is too afraid to tell their superiors they suck. Go around smiling and saying everything is great. They really need someone to tell them, in no uncertain terms, how much they suck.
I still say the worst thing that could've happened to the SC franchise is Dustin Browder. What an idiot.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
cloud staying classy, as always
|
Cloud saying what any sensible person has wanted to shout in David Kim's face for a year now.
|
On August 22 2012 18:54 Qwyn wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2012 00:26 Plansix wrote:On August 22 2012 00:10 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 21 2012 23:49 Mauldo wrote:
Cloud just proves once again that he belongs on the battle.net forums. Blaming Blizzard for losing a game in an imbalanced HOTS alpha is plain sad. Add that to his long track record of shitting on other people for no reason, and (my personal favorite) constantly claiming that the skill ceiling is too low and anyone can win when the guy can't even qualify for WCS Italy or remain even kinda relevant and I'm starting to get annoyed with him even being there. He's about as bad as TT1 at his worst or avilo at his best. The shot at David Kim was really something special, and proved his maturity.
Of course Terran are being given two a-move units. There race is the hardest to play micro wise. Ever wonder why it's taken Terran as a whole (barring people like Taeja) longer than most would think to find a solution to their problems when they have people like QXC on the case? The race is just plain harder and more intensive. So they gave them a few units to maybe even out the odds while giving Zerg/Protoss more micro-centric/thought-provoking units to use. The Viper and Swarm Host, for example, are perfect examples of a anti-a-move unit. You have to think about how to use them, and they add a level of difficult up toward the Terran level, while Terran will hopefully be bumped down a smidge by the Warhound and Battle Hellion.
My favorite parts of this thread are the people who are still trying to shit on HOTS units before they're even in beta stage, and the people who are seriously taking Cloud as banner carrier to try and proclaim that the max skill level in SC2 is already almost met.
Are you kidding me guys? Seriously. You have to be. Maybe read the thread and the posts contained within before pre-judging. People are referencing the difference between a skill ceiling which isn't yet reached, but a skill floor where people with mediocre mechanics are still able to compete. Cloud was not fucking butthurt about losing a game in the alpha build, but is pointing out the direction that HoTS is going after having played the game, played around with the design etc. Also Cloud plays Terran, and is saying that the 1A mentality of which the warhound is the chief 'offender' is something that he doesn't want, even though it would improve his own race's ease of play. Why might that be? Despite this I'm sure he's just a butthurt balance whiner who wants easy results though...... I don’t think anyone is even attempting to argue that Cloud is upset that he lost a game in a test build of HotS. I personally don’t like that fact that he asserts that Blizzard is designing the game for bad player based off of that single experience. People, as a whole, are responding to the over all negative tone of his interview and his attitude toward the game designers. Calling someone an idiot because you don’t agree with them is pretty unprofessional. Also, its kind of lazy, since there are so many other words that could be used. But most I think people are getting tired of the complaining, negativity and over all bitchyness toward this expansion and the game. The game is so clearly in alpha and not even fully released in beta. Stuff will change and Blizzard is clearly willing to try things out and people really need to start treating the changes as such. Reading that last bit. What matters to me most of all is the extent to which Blizzard is willing to change the foundation of the game. When people say, "stuff will change," how much stuff are we talking about? And to what extent will Blizzard be willing to change the concepts they have designed for HOTS? See, tweaking the stats or delivery method of a unit concept is not the extent of change that I desire. If Blizzard was truly willing to design this game as an esports title, then they would be willing to do things like: 1. Remove WG. 2. Nerf macro mechanics (income of mule, spawn larva to + 2 larva, slightly increase chronoboost cost (35)) 3. Remove 1A units (roach, collosi, warhound, battlehellion). 4. Reduce the supply count of higher supply units (siege tanks, hydras, ultras). 5. Remove hero units (mothership, mothership core) and replace them with massable counterparts. 6. Reduce the power of stuns (make fungal slow by 60 percent rather than immobalize, change vortex). 7. Revert to 1 gas format (I believe this would improve several gameplay aspects, including: reducing the amount of workers required for 4 base saturation to 72, allowing for more tactical gas placements, better map design). If Blizzard was truly willing, then they would try putting widow mines on the hellion, instead of giving the hellion a battle mode. That's my biggest beef. If they were willing, then they would stop trying to make Terran more 1A and increase the skill floor of the game. + Show Spoiler +And if they were willing, then they would put the lurker in the expansion over the swarm host (ok this is my biggest, PERSONAL beef, which is why I spoilered it. .
Yup, With most of those points, particularly the ones about 1A units and units that eliminate micro such as Infestors and forcefields, if all those were eliminated/ the game would be a FAR better viewing product. I'm a Terran player and this expansion will probably benefit me greatly as it'll be easier to play terran with amoving hellions and warhounds, but I love this as a spectator sport more than playing it, and I want to be able to see the pros micro their asses off with all races, but dumbing down terran just doesn't appeal to me at all. ClouD is totally correct, I don't see how this can be argued.. I mean David Kim even freely stated he wanted to give terran a "1 A" option :S Really doesn't make a great spectacle.
|
On August 22 2012 18:54 Qwyn wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2012 00:26 Plansix wrote:On August 22 2012 00:10 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 21 2012 23:49 Mauldo wrote:
Cloud just proves once again that he belongs on the battle.net forums. Blaming Blizzard for losing a game in an imbalanced HOTS alpha is plain sad. Add that to his long track record of shitting on other people for no reason, and (my personal favorite) constantly claiming that the skill ceiling is too low and anyone can win when the guy can't even qualify for WCS Italy or remain even kinda relevant and I'm starting to get annoyed with him even being there. He's about as bad as TT1 at his worst or avilo at his best. The shot at David Kim was really something special, and proved his maturity.
Of course Terran are being given two a-move units. There race is the hardest to play micro wise. Ever wonder why it's taken Terran as a whole (barring people like Taeja) longer than most would think to find a solution to their problems when they have people like QXC on the case? The race is just plain harder and more intensive. So they gave them a few units to maybe even out the odds while giving Zerg/Protoss more micro-centric/thought-provoking units to use. The Viper and Swarm Host, for example, are perfect examples of a anti-a-move unit. You have to think about how to use them, and they add a level of difficult up toward the Terran level, while Terran will hopefully be bumped down a smidge by the Warhound and Battle Hellion.
My favorite parts of this thread are the people who are still trying to shit on HOTS units before they're even in beta stage, and the people who are seriously taking Cloud as banner carrier to try and proclaim that the max skill level in SC2 is already almost met.
Are you kidding me guys? Seriously. You have to be. Maybe read the thread and the posts contained within before pre-judging. People are referencing the difference between a skill ceiling which isn't yet reached, but a skill floor where people with mediocre mechanics are still able to compete. Cloud was not fucking butthurt about losing a game in the alpha build, but is pointing out the direction that HoTS is going after having played the game, played around with the design etc. Also Cloud plays Terran, and is saying that the 1A mentality of which the warhound is the chief 'offender' is something that he doesn't want, even though it would improve his own race's ease of play. Why might that be? Despite this I'm sure he's just a butthurt balance whiner who wants easy results though...... I don’t think anyone is even attempting to argue that Cloud is upset that he lost a game in a test build of HotS. I personally don’t like that fact that he asserts that Blizzard is designing the game for bad player based off of that single experience. People, as a whole, are responding to the over all negative tone of his interview and his attitude toward the game designers. Calling someone an idiot because you don’t agree with them is pretty unprofessional. Also, its kind of lazy, since there are so many other words that could be used. But most I think people are getting tired of the complaining, negativity and over all bitchyness toward this expansion and the game. The game is so clearly in alpha and not even fully released in beta. Stuff will change and Blizzard is clearly willing to try things out and people really need to start treating the changes as such. Reading that last bit. What matters to me most of all is the extent to which Blizzard is willing to change the foundation of the game. When people say, "stuff will change," how much stuff are we talking about? And to what extent will Blizzard be willing to change the concepts they have designed for HOTS? See, tweaking the stats or delivery method of a unit concept is not the extent of change that I desire. If Blizzard was truly willing to design this game as an esports title, then they would be willing to do things like: 1. Remove WG. 2. Nerf macro mechanics (income of mule, spawn larva to + 2 larva, slightly increase chronoboost cost (35)) 3. Remove 1A units (roach, collosi, warhound, battlehellion). 4. Reduce the supply count of higher supply units (siege tanks, hydras, ultras). 5. Remove hero units (mothership, mothership core) and replace them with massable counterparts. 6. Reduce the power of stuns (make fungal slow by 60 percent rather than immobalize, change vortex). 7. Revert to 1 gas format (I believe this would improve several gameplay aspects, including: reducing the amount of workers required for 4 base saturation to 72, allowing for more tactical gas placements, better map design). If Blizzard was truly willing, then they would try putting widow mines on the hellion, instead of giving the hellion a battle mode. That's my biggest beef. If they were willing, then they would stop trying to make Terran more 1A and increase the skill floor of the game. + Show Spoiler +And if they were willing, then they would put the lurker in the expansion over the swarm host (ok this is my biggest, PERSONAL beef, which is why I spoilered it. .
best post i read in a long time on TL! :-)
|
Cloud just gained a new fan. Telling it like it is, I wish more progamers would be like him.
|
On August 22 2012 18:10 Cabinet Sanchez wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2012 19:19 regiment wrote:
* The Battle Cruisers speed boost will be removed, Battle Cruisers will have increased damage
Errr I,.. uhhhh well, ... you see... look ..ummmmmm.... well... oh :/ (Literally my reaction reading that line) BC's don't seem used very much but it seems to me when they come out they fucking stay out, those things are tough as fuck and kick some serious ass, I'm kind of lost here - can someone tell me how they are weak (except build time, cost) ? Very confused right here - I fear the shit out of those fucking things.
Battlecruisers have the weakness that they need good numbers and good upgrades before they can be effective. And even then, it's a bit of a time race against the counter. In lower leagues, few people have the skill/experience/insight to start making vikings (or some other applicable counter) in several different places on the map plus the micro skill to kite efficiently. In higher leagues, I guess it's a given that a player can make vikings in several expos or proxy locations, join up anywhere, kite the vikings into oblivion. I used Skyterran strategies a lot in silver and gold, but for BCs it required pulling some shenanigans like early turtling (need 3 well-defended bases) or mass banshee with double upgrades for an easy BC transition when they already have 2/2 and can be made like 3-5 at a time. Then yamato-ing vikings if the opponent attempts to kite (because plenty of BCs with yamato are actually better than a BC/viking mix). This said, 0/0 BCs are pretty bad (up to downright horrible), while 3/3 BCs are monsters (especially visible vs marines), one 3/3 battlecruiser can beat three 0/0 battlecruisers attacking at the same time. If you get discovered early, you can pretty much forget it. And against a good player, I guess you can't count on much secrecy unless you keep him occupied with some gosu harass and he somehow doesn't scout you successfully.
On August 22 2012 18:22 Pinski wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2012 18:14 Grumbels wrote:On August 22 2012 18:10 Cabinet Sanchez wrote:On August 21 2012 19:19 regiment wrote:
* The Battle Cruisers speed boost will be removed, Battle Cruisers will have increased damage
Errr I,.. uhhhh well, ... you see... look ..ummmmmm.... well... oh :/ (Literally my reaction reading that line) BC's don't seem used very much but it seems to me when they come out they fucking stay out, those things are tough as fuck and kick some serious ass, I'm kind of lost here - can someone tell me how they are weak (except build time, cost) ? Very confused right here - I fear the shit out of those fucking things. They changed their damage from 8 to 6 in a patch a while ago, I think primarily because of concerns for team play and free for all. Ever since they have not been used as much, except as a late-game transition where they are weak until critical mass. If Battle Cruisers have serious weakness, but are stronger than they are now, a place opens up for more BC rushes, mixing in BCs with your late-game army, and so on. Of course, the danger is that mass BC is impossible to defeat, which is somewhat of an issue with the game in general. (ultimate compositions having so few weaknesses) No. BCs were nerfed because of the 1-base BC all-in was a bit too strong.
What league did that 1-base BC all-in work in?
On August 22 2012 18:49 Cabinet Sanchez wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2012 02:05 Evangelist wrote:
Single target A move units (hi Warhound) are crazy easy to balance. It's a game of numbers and since there's no multiplication implicit to a Warhound deathball they scale linearly with the only limits being the quantized number of shots required to destroy a particular unit. If the problem with the Warhound is that it's too easy to A move, is the problem the Warhound itself (ie taking too many shots to kill and thus absorbing fire for higher DPS units) or is it the time of availability? Is it the sheer damage output? Does it fill a niche other units don't fill? Does it have a reason for being there?
Congratulations on not getting it *at all* This paragraph you wrote is a perfect example of Blizzard thinking, forget the *design* of the unit and focus on the numbers. It's how the unit is used, what it's abilities are, how and what it attacks. The Warhound is the very definition of a mindless unit which auto-targets what it's intended to disperse. It requires no thinking, at all - it's only weakness is air units (of which Protoss doesn't have a huge quantity of good air to ground units) Fiddling with numbers is meaningless when the design is wrong. I never even played more than a few hours of BW and over 2 years of watching pro games, reading this site - it's very easy to understand why some pros are disillusioned with the game. The design needs to be clever - not just even.
Yeah. Plus, I don't like that whole idea that balance can be determined by looking at race vs race winning statistics or numerical properties of units. That ignores a lot of skill thresholds, synergy, versatility etc. plus a heckload of situational factors.
|
I just dont understand, removing things maybe can fix an issue, but surely there will be another generated from the removing. Sure, remove warp, and then reinvent from 0 the harass\map control capabilities of protoss, we're all pretty sure the final product will be better. Or not? and if not? mm.. maybe we can try to remove an another thing, maybe from other races..and then what we will remove? With the "remove" logic, this game can become only more poor and issues (different ) will still there. Also, i believe cloud speaks the truth about the skillcap, but you know, the warhound can be a cloacked duck with six spells at the release.
|
On August 22 2012 22:50 InVerno wrote:
I just dont understand, removing things maybe can fix an issue, but surely there will be another generated from the removing. Sure, remove warp, and then reinvent from 0 the harass\map control capabilities of protoss, we're all pretty sure the final product will be better. Or not? and if not? mm.. maybe we can try to remove an another thing, maybe from other races..and then what we will remove? With the "remove" logic, this game can become only more poor and issues (different ) will still there. Also, i believe cloud speaks the truth about the skillcap, but you know, the warhound can be a cloacked duck with six spells at the release.
Frankly, you're correct. HotS is just a bandaid for the poor decisions in WoL. Things like blink, warpgate and forcefield should never be in an RTS. They're too easy to abuse and impossible to balance.
I hate corporate political games, but one I wouldn't mind in this case is to fire Dustin Browder and his minion David Kim. Blame it all on them and do LotV properly. If not, hope the franchise doesn't die a Diablo3 death by the time SC3 comes out.
|
Ah the internet - finally a place where people can complain about everything, call people who disagree with them names, and come to a group consensus that suggestions like the 1-supply hydralisk would make the game way better (maybe I was the only person who read that part).
Feel free to disregard this post, because after all there are far easier posts here to rage about - but while you're at it, can we go a bit more extreme to make things in this thread a little more entertaining? Like could someone link "easier" video games to brain cancer? Or maybe come up with a leetspeak spelling of "Dustin Browder" that converts to "Joseph Stalin" backwards when you convert it to hexadecimal?
|
On August 21 2012 19:48 syllogism wrote:
Cloud always has the eloquence of a b.net forum poster
Have you ever been to b.net forum? Cloud is telling like it is and you can't disagree with him. It is stupid that they lower the skill cap in HotS and mainly David Kim is in charge of this decision.
|
On August 22 2012 18:54 Qwyn wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2012 00:26 Plansix wrote:On August 22 2012 00:10 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 21 2012 23:49 Mauldo wrote:
Cloud just proves once again that he belongs on the battle.net forums. Blaming Blizzard for losing a game in an imbalanced HOTS alpha is plain sad. Add that to his long track record of shitting on other people for no reason, and (my personal favorite) constantly claiming that the skill ceiling is too low and anyone can win when the guy can't even qualify for WCS Italy or remain even kinda relevant and I'm starting to get annoyed with him even being there. He's about as bad as TT1 at his worst or avilo at his best. The shot at David Kim was really something special, and proved his maturity.
Of course Terran are being given two a-move units. There race is the hardest to play micro wise. Ever wonder why it's taken Terran as a whole (barring people like Taeja) longer than most would think to find a solution to their problems when they have people like QXC on the case? The race is just plain harder and more intensive. So they gave them a few units to maybe even out the odds while giving Zerg/Protoss more micro-centric/thought-provoking units to use. The Viper and Swarm Host, for example, are perfect examples of a anti-a-move unit. You have to think about how to use them, and they add a level of difficult up toward the Terran level, while Terran will hopefully be bumped down a smidge by the Warhound and Battle Hellion.
My favorite parts of this thread are the people who are still trying to shit on HOTS units before they're even in beta stage, and the people who are seriously taking Cloud as banner carrier to try and proclaim that the max skill level in SC2 is already almost met.
Are you kidding me guys? Seriously. You have to be. Maybe read the thread and the posts contained within before pre-judging. People are referencing the difference between a skill ceiling which isn't yet reached, but a skill floor where people with mediocre mechanics are still able to compete. Cloud was not fucking butthurt about losing a game in the alpha build, but is pointing out the direction that HoTS is going after having played the game, played around with the design etc. Also Cloud plays Terran, and is saying that the 1A mentality of which the warhound is the chief 'offender' is something that he doesn't want, even though it would improve his own race's ease of play. Why might that be? Despite this I'm sure he's just a butthurt balance whiner who wants easy results though...... I don’t think anyone is even attempting to argue that Cloud is upset that he lost a game in a test build of HotS. I personally don’t like that fact that he asserts that Blizzard is designing the game for bad player based off of that single experience. People, as a whole, are responding to the over all negative tone of his interview and his attitude toward the game designers. Calling someone an idiot because you don’t agree with them is pretty unprofessional. Also, its kind of lazy, since there are so many other words that could be used. But most I think people are getting tired of the complaining, negativity and over all bitchyness toward this expansion and the game. The game is so clearly in alpha and not even fully released in beta. Stuff will change and Blizzard is clearly willing to try things out and people really need to start treating the changes as such. Reading that last bit. What matters to me most of all is the extent to which Blizzard is willing to change the foundation of the game. When people say, "stuff will change," how much stuff are we talking about? And to what extent will Blizzard be willing to change the concepts they have designed for HOTS? See, tweaking the stats or delivery method of a unit concept is not the extent of change that I desire. If Blizzard was truly willing to design this game as an esports title, then they would be willing to do things like: 1. Remove WG. 2. Nerf macro mechanics (income of mule, spawn larva to + 2 larva, slightly increase chronoboost cost (35)) 3. Remove 1A units (roach, collosi, warhound, battlehellion). 4. Reduce the supply count of higher supply units (siege tanks, hydras, ultras). 5. Remove hero units (mothership, mothership core) and replace them with massable counterparts. 6. Reduce the power of stuns (make fungal slow by 60 percent rather than immobalize, change vortex). 7. Revert to 1 gas format (I believe this would improve several gameplay aspects, including: reducing the amount of workers required for 4 base saturation to 72, allowing for more tactical gas placements, better map design). If Blizzard was truly willing, then they would try putting widow mines on the hellion, instead of giving the hellion a battle mode. That's my biggest beef. If they were willing, then they would stop trying to make Terran more 1A and increase the skill floor of the game. + Show Spoiler +And if they were willing, then they would put the lurker in the expansion over the swarm host (ok this is my biggest, PERSONAL beef, which is why I spoilered it. .
You're missing something. This would probably make the most enjoyable esports game now, but it would work for just a short amount at time.
Making a harder game increases considerably the learning curve and skill ceiling. But it kills the incoming of new players. All this hard stuff just make the game more frustrating for anyone that doesn't have the APM and mechanics to keep up.
It worked with Brood War, but it didn't have a LoL or a Dota 2 to compete. At its time, BW were one of the most acessible games to play.
Just look to the actual Pro scene, just WC3 and SCBW ex-pros are playing SC2 competitvly (probably Babyknight it's the only exception, he came from DotA scene). All new possible new RTS players (all these causal players that you hate so much) are playing LoL and injecting the game with new life.
What i love about Blizz, it's they are still trying to make the ideal esports game even if guys like you just shit on them. A easy to entry, but hard to master, game. It can be impossible, but they're still trying.
There's some cool stuff on carmac's blog and other interviews about these points. After seeing that, you probably will understand why LoL is more near to being a ideal esport than SC2 and even SCBW (even if LoL is so boring to watch).
|
People that want to play an RTS play RTS.
People that want to play a MOBA play Dota 2.
People that want to play with friends while putting in minimal effort play LoL (or some MMO).
The groups are not in direct concurrence with each other.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
