|
On November 04 2012 12:41 archonOOid wrote:
Moba games do have a very dynamic meta game as the developers aren't afraid to buff/nerrf items and heroes. Moba games have more engagements/battles in relation to sc2 which contributes to the high entertainment factor. That's why the deathball syndrome have a negative impact on the entertainment factor as the battles tend to be very short.
At least we have TvT, ZvZ and TvZ to an extent.
|
destiny would be better off streaming lol with a smurf while keeping up sc2, then switch/stay based on viewer numbers .. poor guy. SC2 can be very entertaing if played decently .. just ignore the metagame 
|
Northern Ireland25071 Posts
On November 04 2012 17:47 MasterCynical wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 12:41 archonOOid wrote:
Moba games do have a very dynamic meta game as the developers aren't afraid to buff/nerrf items and heroes. Moba games have more engagements/battles in relation to sc2 which contributes to the high entertainment factor. That's why the deathball syndrome have a negative impact on the entertainment factor as the battles tend to be very short. At least we have TvT, ZvZ and TvZ to an extent.
TvZ is being ruined by the quick hive style, it used to be so, so much more dynamic and engaging to watch. Hopefully the old-style of TvZ returns, with the multipronged drop aggression, sick Zerg flanks and the like.
|
On November 04 2012 18:51 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 17:47 MasterCynical wrote:On November 04 2012 12:41 archonOOid wrote:
Moba games do have a very dynamic meta game as the developers aren't afraid to buff/nerrf items and heroes. Moba games have more engagements/battles in relation to sc2 which contributes to the high entertainment factor. That's why the deathball syndrome have a negative impact on the entertainment factor as the battles tend to be very short. At least we have TvT, ZvZ and TvZ to an extent. TvZ is being ruined by the quick hive style, it used to be so, so much more dynamic and engaging to watch. Hopefully the old-style of TvZ returns, with the multipronged drop aggression, sick Zerg flanks and the like.
It will never return as long as infestor stays unchanged..
|
On November 04 2012 18:51 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 17:47 MasterCynical wrote:On November 04 2012 12:41 archonOOid wrote:
Moba games do have a very dynamic meta game as the developers aren't afraid to buff/nerrf items and heroes. Moba games have more engagements/battles in relation to sc2 which contributes to the high entertainment factor. That's why the deathball syndrome have a negative impact on the entertainment factor as the battles tend to be very short. At least we have TvT, ZvZ and TvZ to an extent. TvZ is being ruined by the quick hive style, it used to be so, so much more dynamic and engaging to watch. Hopefully the old-style of TvZ returns, with the multipronged drop aggression, sick Zerg flanks and the like.
Need more st_life games then.
|
Northern Ireland25071 Posts
On November 04 2012 19:29 poorcloud wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 18:51 Wombat_NI wrote:On November 04 2012 17:47 MasterCynical wrote:On November 04 2012 12:41 archonOOid wrote:
Moba games do have a very dynamic meta game as the developers aren't afraid to buff/nerrf items and heroes. Moba games have more engagements/battles in relation to sc2 which contributes to the high entertainment factor. That's why the deathball syndrome have a negative impact on the entertainment factor as the battles tend to be very short. At least we have TvT, ZvZ and TvZ to an extent. TvZ is being ruined by the quick hive style, it used to be so, so much more dynamic and engaging to watch. Hopefully the old-style of TvZ returns, with the multipronged drop aggression, sick Zerg flanks and the like. Need more st_life games then.
Life games are painful for me because they show that Zergs can actually win playing in other ways. Really just makes all the other turtle Zergs seem all that more boring stylistically!
|
The issue with the balancing if I may chime in, seems to be the approach that Blizzard has taken to balance -after- the release.
When a race has been performing less well, or too well for that matter, the increase or decrease in power has often been placed upon one unit/build - instead of attempting to solve more than one issue at the same time. The best example I can give has been all the early-game shenanigans based on the marine throughout Starcraft 2's history. We're talking 6 rax allins, proxy 3 rax, 3rax marine/marauder vs Protoss, bunkerrushes vs Zerg. Yet, instead of finding an elegant solution to reduce the strenght of the marine in the early game, dealing with -all- of the problems at once, instead we've seen:
Changes to the bunker, MANY times. Consistent growth of maps to the point where we cannot POSSIBLY have somewhat balanced close positions. Changes to the Queen range ( albeit this was also to deal with hellions. )
If they had instead attempted something like a minor 5 hp nerf and added +5 to the combat shields upgrade, that would literally not affect much in the early game, except allowing races to more easily deal with marines prior to the upgrades kicking in. It could be something as simple as reducing the marines range by 1 and giving the Concussive shells a +1 to marines range. - I don't know what would be balanced, personally, but instead of having the Terrans capable of doing marine pressure, although weaker, its more or less been killed off or turned into an all-in, which makes for disheartening games and discourages any kind of early-game aggression as the risk never seems to be worth it, even with godlike control.
The change to the Infestor suffers from the exact same issue. Zerg is doing terrible in ZvT and ZvP? How about we buff -one- unit to make up for the all of the deficits? Does it seem balanced overall? Great, lets call it a day!
...and now Zerg is more or less forced to make infestors to have a reasonable shot at winning games. There had been plenty of room to make the speed-baneling more reliable in combination with infestors, while also dealing with the ling/baneling allins that were so over-populated in ZvZ. Instead, now we desperately need ramps to be able to play a ZvZ versus allins. Protoss players also desperately need ramps in PvP...
Goodbye variety in maps, it was good having you around while it lasted.
Then comes all the mechanical issues there's been with attempting to get custom-game support, LAN-support, chat functions, clan support, name changes and everything else that falls into this category.
I don't believe Starcraft 2 is currently dead in the water, yet the fact that the balance issues have skewered gameplay into a very one-dimensional pidgeon-hole makes me worried. How long will it be interesting...?
|
On November 04 2012 20:31 Keilkan wrote:
The issue with the balancing if I may chime in, seems to be the approach that Blizzard has taken to balance -after- the release.
The change to the Infestor suffers from the exact same issue. Zerg is doing terrible in ZvT and ZvP? How about we buff -one- unit to make up for the all of the deficits?
Well the design of some of the spells Blizzard put into the game has been absolutely stupid and one of the reasons why several units are basically useless in certain matchups.
- Having your big, tough and expensive units taken over by an Infestor without any downside - like losing all your shields which the Dark Archon in BW did - is pretty bad. The Dark Archon didnt have any damaging spells either, so you didnt build tons of them either, but the Infestor has two awesome combat spells and there are tons of them running around the battlefield usually.
- Having a big technological unit with a "spell" get damaged by a psionic energy drain from a cheaper and lower tier unit is kinda terrible.
- Having spells which "modify the battlefield" (Forcefield, Fungal) is actually terrible due to the abuse potential these offer.
The new spells for the expansion dont really look promising either and the many full changes to the design of the Mothership core and the Oracle show how the Blizzard developers have no clue what is acceptable in a game and what isnt.
|
i don't understand all the QQ, there are a lot of entertaining TvZ played each day. The turtle style is present mostly at semi-high level. At the top level you see a lot of harrass and early game action. Same applies for ZvP. ZvP is boring mostly when played by overly standardish-metagaming (foreign) players. Yes, infestor is strong, so are immortals, colossi, tanks, marines and hellions. The main weakness of infestors is their lack of mobility, and this is exploited frequently by applying multi pronged attacks. Agree that the infestor is somewhat too one-size-fits-it-all, however it is not _that_ bad.
Since Zerg has no units besides blords to actually finish his opponent he will always transform his midgame advantage into this composition to finally overwhelm his opponent. However in 90% of games the the game has been lost before and the Zerg was massively ahead.
Its just like telling carriers are OP because i can't beat a protoss army with 10+ carriers. The game has been lost before when i let the protoss macro and tech up to create a mass carrier army.
|
On November 04 2012 21:08 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:
i don't understand all the QQ, there are a lot of entertaining TvZ played each day. The turtle style is present mostly at semi-high level. At the top level you see a lot of harrass and early game action. Same applies for ZvP. ZvP is boring mostly when played by overly standardish-metagaming (foreign) players. Yes, infestor is strong, so are immortals, colossi, tanks, marines and hellions. The main weakness of infestors is their lack of mobility, and this is exploited frequently by applying multi pronged attacks. Agree that the infestor is somewhat too one-size-fits-it-all, however it is not _that_ bad.
Since Zerg has no units besides blords to actually finish his opponent he will always transform his midgame advantage into this composition to finally overwhelm his opponent. However in 90% of games the the game has been lost before and the Zerg was massively ahead.
Its just like telling carriers are OP because i can't beat a protoss army with 10+ carriers. The game has been lost before when i let the protoss macro and tech up to create a mass carrier army.
The difference is that is gets years to get to 10+ carriers, and in the transitioning period you are really vulnerable, while Infestors are produced anyway(they help in almost every situation), and as long as they have enough energy, they just wont die with the gazillion infested terrans.
Then they go back and meet up with even more infestors, making the problem even bigger in which eventually zerg can just trade energy for army( of resources ), and they can back up and do it again some time after that.
Although I agree that there still are some fun games being played at high level, just the moment when 15+ infestors enter the field, fun is completely over for me(and my main is Zerg...).
|
On November 04 2012 18:51 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 17:47 MasterCynical wrote:On November 04 2012 12:41 archonOOid wrote:
Moba games do have a very dynamic meta game as the developers aren't afraid to buff/nerrf items and heroes. Moba games have more engagements/battles in relation to sc2 which contributes to the high entertainment factor. That's why the deathball syndrome have a negative impact on the entertainment factor as the battles tend to be very short. At least we have TvT, ZvZ and TvZ to an extent. TvZ is being ruined by the quick hive style, it used to be so, so much more dynamic and engaging to watch. Hopefully the old-style of TvZ returns, with the multipronged drop aggression, sick Zerg flanks and the like.
Zergs stopped going Mutaling and play the Terran at his own game. When the going gets tough, what do Zergs do? Turtle up with Infestors into fast Hive. Its insanely irritating how lazy players are ("pros" included) in this game. WC3 never had this, EVERY SINGLE PLAYER used everything at their disposal to win, even if it was apparently a sub-optimal strat.
Zergs need to go back to Mutaling into Ultraling/Infestor for a more dynamic game.
|
On November 05 2012 01:37 NarAliya wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 18:51 Wombat_NI wrote:On November 04 2012 17:47 MasterCynical wrote:On November 04 2012 12:41 archonOOid wrote:
Moba games do have a very dynamic meta game as the developers aren't afraid to buff/nerrf items and heroes. Moba games have more engagements/battles in relation to sc2 which contributes to the high entertainment factor. That's why the deathball syndrome have a negative impact on the entertainment factor as the battles tend to be very short. At least we have TvT, ZvZ and TvZ to an extent. TvZ is being ruined by the quick hive style, it used to be so, so much more dynamic and engaging to watch. Hopefully the old-style of TvZ returns, with the multipronged drop aggression, sick Zerg flanks and the like. Zergs stopped going Mutaling and play the Terran at his own game. When the going gets tough, what do Zergs do? Turtle up with Infestors into fast Hive. Its insanely irritating how lazy players are ("pros" included) in this game. WC3 never had this, EVERY SINGLE PLAYER used everything at their disposal to win, even if it was apparently a sub-optimal strat. Zergs need to go back to Mutaling into Ultraling/Infestor for a more dynamic game.
The problem is that with the micro terran pros have right now, muta ling isn't nearly as efficient as it was. You are much more reluctant on the Terran to fuck up.
|
Mutaling is supposed to buy time for Hive whilst keeping the Terran on 2-base with constant harrass and cost-efficient trades. With Swarm mechanics much more stronger with the combined Zerg buffs (Queendralisks for instance), I don't see how Terran micro would stop Mutaling (A strat designed for harass and cost-efficient trading) right in its tracks. Maybe Zergs need stop A-moving banelings and hoping they get a money detonation?
How did it become acceptable to skip all the tier 2 stuff and fast tech to Hive?
|
On November 05 2012 02:33 NarAliya wrote:
How did it become acceptable to skip all the tier 2 stuff and fast tech to Hive?
Since Blizzard patched out tier 2... Why would you go for the transition when queen and infestor can carry you straight to hive without the need for a midgame.
|
If SC2 is dying, that must mean LoL is too...
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/q5DHf.jpg)
|
On November 05 2012 04:47 jexxto wrote:+ Show Spoiler +If SC2 is dying, that must mean LoL is too...
101k now 
|
On November 05 2012 02:44 VanGarde wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2012 02:33 NarAliya wrote:
How did it become acceptable to skip all the tier 2 stuff and fast tech to Hive? Since Blizzard patched out tier 2... Why would you go for the transition when queen and infestor can carry you straight to hive without the need for a midgame.
after flash 2;0 ing st_life all i can say is: L2P
|
yo destiny , saw this in the LR thread.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/LgJ2H.png)
|
Starcraft 2 has 2 streams and most people are watching both. I'd bet that SC2 is only at around 60-70k (still impressive) viewers atm.
|
On November 05 2012 05:10 Dujek wrote:
Starcraft 2 has 2 streams and most people are watching both. I'd bet that SC2 is only at around 60-70k (still impressive) viewers atm.
Uhm not really.
MLG red had 77k during Flash vs Life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
