|
On November 24 2012 23:01 shangul wrote:
I have a great Idea for Balancing the game better, and making the games more fun to play.
What I think is the biggest problem is the clustering up of Units. Why don't they design the units in a way that they can't cluster up that much. No more ball of death. no more one battle decides the hole game.
It would also be more similar to BW.
what do you guys think?
This has been tried already in a community mod, but simply increasing the radius of the units is a terrible solution, because it prevents clumping. The game should FORCE SPREAD while moving and allow clustering through micro. Add to this an increase in AoE damage and you get flexibility AND choice for the players (and viewers) AND you have a potential gain through clumping which is balanced by the potentially deadly AoE damage.
Anything less would be a terrible compsomise which makes the game worse.
|
It's okay. Make some infestor changes, but then just make lings have speed without an upgrade.
- moxie
|
On November 26 2012 08:21 moxie wrote:
It's okay. Make some infestor changes, but then just make lings have speed without an upgrade.
- moxie You didn't think that one through. That would completely break the entire game. Protoss would actually just die to 6pools every single game (since they can't completely wall off without having to sacrifice a structure later on and a zealot wouldn't be out in time to block off speedlings unless you did something crazy like a 10 gate), as would most Terrans unless they cut a worker to wall off fast.
|
On November 26 2012 08:27 Ben... wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2012 08:21 moxie wrote:
It's okay. Make some infestor changes, but then just make lings have speed without an upgrade.
- moxie You didn't think that one through. That would completely break the entire game. Protoss would actually just die to 6pools every single game (since they can't completely wall off without having to sacrifice a structure later on and a zealot wouldn't be out in time to block off speedlings unless you did something crazy like a 10 gate), as would most Terrans unless they cut a worker to wall off fast.
You know, I'd almost like to see that go through just to laugh at it. Provided I get +1 weapons for free as well.
|
Believes there’s cultural differences between countries that makes Korean Terrans and foreigner Terrans different
Great, so they put a lot of stake in foreigner concerns for P and Z for 2 years, but turn around and essentially claim the only Terran feedback they care about are from Koreans. No wonder mech is still awful in HotS.
|
I died today to a well executed all in for the first time, day break vs a random toss
I realized that the random toss was off racing and playing protoss perfectly anyway at diamond level
I also realized that although i scouted this gimmicky trash early i made an extra 5 drones and died
I was out of position, so about 1/4thof hatchery was dead before i engaged, then i realised that his 1 1 is stronger then mine
so it didn't matter to begin with
I ALSO realized that now with these alleged infestor nerfs we might be fucked late game to.
I also realized i was shedding a silly amount of tears, especially when he proceeded to bad manner me and call me bad even though i only made an extra 4 drones.
I forgot about the rules, let's just call this a cry for help and not a balance whine. for god sakes these people have a history of making terrible decisions and considering a large portion of the community, obviously more then 50%, is protoss or terran we might end up being screwed. perhaps a slow would be better than a projectile? i don't mind a projectile OR slow, but if they make it useless vs psionic zergs might as well just stop playing.
|
On November 27 2012 06:04 starchosengirl wrote:
I died today to a well executed all in for the first time, day break vs a random toss
I realized that the random toss was off racing and playing protoss perfectly anyway at diamond level
I also realized that although i scouted this gimmicky trash early i made an extra 5 drones and died
I was out of position, so about 1/4thof hatchery was dead before i engaged, then i realised that his 1 1 is stronger then mine
so it didn't matter to begin with
I ALSO realized that now with these alleged infestor nerfs we might be fucked late game to.
I also realized i was shedding a silly amount of tears, especially when he proceeded to bad manner me and call me bad even though i only made an extra 4 drones.
I forgot about the rules, let's just call this a cry for help and not a balance whine. for god sakes these people have a history of making terrible decisions and considering a large portion of the community, obviously more then 50%, is protoss or terran we might end up being screwed. perhaps a slow would be better than a projectile? i don't mind a projectile OR slow, but if they make it useless vs psionic zergs might as well just stop playing.
must be a cultural thing...if you lived in europe you could be good with zerg. if you lived in korea you could be good with all three races.
have you tried switching to protoss? australians have a strong history with protoss llike Legionnaire.
i hope db terran comments get used in LR and interview threads like partings soul reference.
honestly blizzrard wont nerf zerg, this is just a test map but they wont do anything, only trying to quell the complaints.
random foreign zergs winning things is good for them cause korean domination kills the international scene.
i heard koreans have been smashing heads recently vs top eu/na teams and that scene could start to see a decline. with nexon distributing dota2 to korea who knows whats gonna happen.
|
So, it's been a while now, when will blizzard balance WOL? When do they balance TvZ/PvZ lategame? Or are they going to play it off now that everything is OK? These are questions we all should be asking right now. Blizzard seems quite quiet after WCS.
|
On November 24 2012 23:53 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 23:01 shangul wrote:
I have a great Idea for Balancing the game better, and making the games more fun to play.
What I think is the biggest problem is the clustering up of Units. Why don't they design the units in a way that they can't cluster up that much. No more ball of death. no more one battle decides the hole game.
It would also be more similar to BW.
what do you guys think? This has been tried already in a community mod, but simply increasing the radius of the units is a terrible solution, because it prevents clumping. The game should FORCE SPREAD while moving and allow clustering through micro. Add to this an increase in AoE damage and you get flexibility AND choice for the players (and viewers) AND you have a potential gain through clumping which is balanced by the potentially deadly AoE damage. Anything less would be a terrible compsomise which makes the game worse.
But the Dev Team has been reducing AoE damage since day 1, they reduced tank damage, collosus dmg,emp radius,fungal radius, etc,etc.
High damage worked in BW because the clumping wasnt so hardcore as in SC2.
Im just saying AoE damage and cumpling are tied together.
IMHO, they will never fix the death ball issue until they drop the mentality: "but what about bronze leaguers?, we need to make easy for them", its a shame how after 2 years bronze leaguers are still top priority.
|
On November 27 2012 11:05 avilo wrote:
So, it's been a while now, when will blizzard balance WOL? When do they balance TvZ/PvZ lategame? Or are they going to play it off now that everything is OK? These are questions we all should be asking right now. Blizzard seems quite quiet after WCS.
They will stop balancing WoL in order to push everyone into HotS.
Its pretty obvious.
|
Good to see he mentioned medivacs, i believe restoring medivac speed to its original state would be a reasonable buff that would help terran out.
|
On November 26 2012 08:36 Acritter wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2012 08:27 Ben... wrote:On November 26 2012 08:21 moxie wrote:
It's okay. Make some infestor changes, but then just make lings have speed without an upgrade.
- moxie You didn't think that one through. That would completely break the entire game. Protoss would actually just die to 6pools every single game (since they can't completely wall off without having to sacrifice a structure later on and a zealot wouldn't be out in time to block off speedlings unless you did something crazy like a 10 gate), as would most Terrans unless they cut a worker to wall off fast. You know, I'd almost like to see that go through just to laugh at it. Provided I get +1 weapons for free as well.
Sorta interesting. It would certainly exaggerate the units' traits.
|
didn't the queen range and overlord buff take like 3 days of ptr before they implemented it? realistically nobody is playing this test map anyway so any data they get from it is trivial at best
|
On November 27 2012 13:39 artosismermaid wrote:
didn't the queen range and overlord buff take like 3 days of ptr before they implemented it? realistically nobody is playing this test map anyway so any data they get from it is trivial at best
People are complaining that Protoss are simply rushing the Zerg on the test map now without fear of Fungals for their Sentries, so the data is useless anyways or rather: It tells us what you could have known after some mediocre amount of thinking: that the change to Fungal is stupid.
Seeker Missile not requiring an upgrade is not a real change either, since that spell takes soooooooooo much energy that you can get the research done in time anyways. The spell endangers the caster - unlike the 9 range Fungal - and thats the problem, not the research.
I'd say this is another example of "we just change things randomly here at Blizzard".
|
On November 27 2012 15:57 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2012 13:39 artosismermaid wrote:
didn't the queen range and overlord buff take like 3 days of ptr before they implemented it? realistically nobody is playing this test map anyway so any data they get from it is trivial at best People are complaining that Protoss are simply rushing the Zerg on the test map now without fear of Fungals for their Sentries, so the data is useless anyways or rather: It tells us what you could have known after some mediocre amount of thinking: that the change to Fungal is stupid.
Yes, i am very curious as to how they actually "collect data" on this map. It seems very placebo and that they cannot possibly be able to collect on these unit.. What will they do? Parse the data for the replays to see if and when people made ravens? I feel that this isn't data, and that if they really wanted to know i feel they would get better results by not making the map public and instead inviting pros to discuss with their team
I asked people on TL and on bnet, why they will make no PTR for this patch, we only get to play it on a broken version of antiga only? The majority response was that "no one would play it if it was on the PTR," but if no one is playing this test map as well, what is the difference? I feel that if they do it in this way, they should have TEN maps, each with different balance changes. Something like that. The community would then be able to "give feedback" by playing the map with "better" changes more . The problem is, when i queue for the games there, all of the master players do not play this. So i end up facing against noobs (no friends really on my current server) and its hard to tell if the changes are smart. Not only that, the map is antiga, which has a totally different metagame than the other maps :/
|
I quite enjoyed this, I think it needs to be a regular thing like once a month or once a quarter to keep us updated on what they're listening too in the community and how they're going about addressing it.
|
On November 27 2012 22:08 c0sm0naut wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2012 15:57 Rabiator wrote:On November 27 2012 13:39 artosismermaid wrote:
didn't the queen range and overlord buff take like 3 days of ptr before they implemented it? realistically nobody is playing this test map anyway so any data they get from it is trivial at best People are complaining that Protoss are simply rushing the Zerg on the test map now without fear of Fungals for their Sentries, so the data is useless anyways or rather: It tells us what you could have known after some mediocre amount of thinking: that the change to Fungal is stupid. Yes, i am very curious as to how they actually "collect data" on this map. It seems very placebo and that they cannot possibly be able to collect on these unit.. What will they do? Parse the data for the replays to see if and when people made ravens? I feel that this isn't data, and that if they really wanted to know i feel they would get better results by not making the map public and instead inviting pros to discuss with their team I asked people on TL and on bnet, why they will make no PTR for this patch, we only get to play it on a broken version of antiga only? The majority response was that "no one would play it if it was on the PTR," but if no one is playing this test map as well, what is the difference? I feel that if they do it in this way, they should have TEN maps, each with different balance changes. Something like that. The community would then be able to "give feedback" by playing the map with "better" changes more . The problem is, when i queue for the games there, all of the master players do not play this. So i end up facing against noobs (no friends really on my current server) and its hard to tell if the changes are smart. Not only that, the map is antiga, which has a totally different metagame than the other maps :/
"Placebo" is exactly what I would describe the introduction and swift and unchanged removal of the Warhound as. How they figure out any "data" from ladder maps is beyond me. You HAVE TO judge any game as "interesting and worthy to remember" or "boring and a waste of time". Finding the right way to balance and fix the game has far less to do with actual data than it has with thinking about it and making the right decisions. Only after this general decision - such as "keep the deathball or try to get rid of it" - has been made are specific adjustments for/against builds necessary ... which could use the data collected from Blizzards ladder-data-gathering.
The big question is: Can the game be balanced by adjusting units alone OR is it necessary to tackle it by changing the general mechanics to make balancing by units easier. Personally I believe they need to severely change the general game mechanics to make it more interesting, but sadly the propaganda of "everything new is automatically better" and "everything that makes the game easier to play" has to be good" is hard to overcome.
|
Although people dont want to admit it, Dustin knows a lot more about this game than anyone gives him credit for. People think they have all the answers but they havent put near the time thinking about this game as the developers have. Have a little faith. WoL was a success imho (I've been playing for 2.5 years and it still isnt boring) and I would be really surprised if HotS did anything but elevate the game.
|
On November 28 2012 00:30 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2012 22:08 c0sm0naut wrote:On November 27 2012 15:57 Rabiator wrote:On November 27 2012 13:39 artosismermaid wrote:
didn't the queen range and overlord buff take like 3 days of ptr before they implemented it? realistically nobody is playing this test map anyway so any data they get from it is trivial at best People are complaining that Protoss are simply rushing the Zerg on the test map now without fear of Fungals for their Sentries, so the data is useless anyways or rather: It tells us what you could have known after some mediocre amount of thinking: that the change to Fungal is stupid. Yes, i am very curious as to how they actually "collect data" on this map. It seems very placebo and that they cannot possibly be able to collect on these unit.. What will they do? Parse the data for the replays to see if and when people made ravens? I feel that this isn't data, and that if they really wanted to know i feel they would get better results by not making the map public and instead inviting pros to discuss with their team I asked people on TL and on bnet, why they will make no PTR for this patch, we only get to play it on a broken version of antiga only? The majority response was that "no one would play it if it was on the PTR," but if no one is playing this test map as well, what is the difference? I feel that if they do it in this way, they should have TEN maps, each with different balance changes. Something like that. The community would then be able to "give feedback" by playing the map with "better" changes more . The problem is, when i queue for the games there, all of the master players do not play this. So i end up facing against noobs (no friends really on my current server) and its hard to tell if the changes are smart. Not only that, the map is antiga, which has a totally different metagame than the other maps :/ "Placebo" is exactly what I would describe the introduction and swift and unchanged removal of the Warhound as. How they figure out any "data" from ladder maps is beyond me. You HAVE TO judge any game as "interesting and worthy to remember" or "boring and a waste of time". Finding the right way to balance and fix the game has far less to do with actual data than it has with thinking about it and making the right decisions. Only after this general decision - such as "keep the deathball or try to get rid of it" - has been made are specific adjustments for/against builds necessary ... which could use the data collected from Blizzards ladder-data-gathering. The big question is: Can the game be balanced by adjusting units alone OR is it necessary to tackle it by changing the general mechanics to make balancing by units easier. Personally I believe they need to severely change the general game mechanics to make it more interesting, but sadly the propaganda of "everything new is automatically better" and "everything that makes the game easier to play" has to be good" is hard to overcome.
I think we can safely assume the Warhound was on the chopping block well before the beta was started and the feedback was the nail in the coffin. The unit was a pile of trash and making it intresting did not seem worth anyones time. Personally, I much happier that Blizzard seems open to revamping units like the voidray, carrier, BC and raven. Players as a whole already know how these units "could be useful" but some feature is holding them back. Making those units is a better course for Blizzard and the game.
As for the test maps, I don't know how they collect data off of those maps. I feel Blizzard has a reasonable idea how a specific change will alter the metagame, but they release the test map to make sure it will not destroy the metagame or break something.
|
On November 28 2012 02:02 arcHoniC wrote:
Although people dont want to admit it, Dustin knows a lot more about this game than anyone gives him credit for. People think they have all the answers but they havent put near the time thinking about this game as the developers have. Have a little faith. WoL was a success imho (I've been playing for 2.5 years and it still isnt boring) and I would be really surprised if HotS did anything but elevate the game.
If he knows that much, he should show it more in interviews (David Kim as well). His answers are just complete bullshit. And that they didn't think of sentries being a little too strong if fungal doesn't hit them tells us the whole story: They have know idea of what they are actually doing. (I didn't think of that too, because I didn't know Sentry was psionic since it never was relevant until now, but as a game designer of this game you should know!).
And the comment about needing more data of terran being weak.
No Zergs in Ro8 of one single tournament (GSL Season 2 Code S) -> immediate buff (queen range/overlord speed)
No Protoss in Ro8 of one single tournament (GSL October 2011 Code S) -> immediate buff (immortal range/upgrade costs)
Well now that terrans get smashed all over the place? Wait and see!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
