EPTprogamers really need to know patch date.. :( - Page 5
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Al Bundy
7257 Posts
| ||
|
AnachronisticAnarchy
United States2957 Posts
On January 16 2013 01:13 Al Bundy wrote: You are a pro, I'm sure you'll have no problem adapting. This patch is not exactly ground breaking, it's not like they overhauled the whole gameplay or something. Besides, basically every single progamer is in the same situation as you, so the field is leveled. Reminds me of these football players who complain that they couldn't play to the best of their ability because it was raining that day. The problem with this thought process is that different patches affect different races differently due to matchups. Allow me to provide examples. Mirror match up, one race nerfed: Minimal advantage, both sides affected equally. Different skills may be required to win, such as innovation, but that is not necessarily a bad thing. Mirror match up, one race buffed: same as above. Non-mirror match up, one race nerfed: Depending on the degree of the nerf: one side may have it's standard strategies affected adversely, thus requiring significant innovation on their part to reach their former glory quickly, with no such burden on the opposing team. Non-mirror match up, one race buffed: Same as the above, but with the added effect of the buffed side finding their own strategies easier to perform while the other side finds theirs harder. So you see, it is not like football players complaining about rain since a patch might have, say, significantly changed ZvT on the Zerg's side, thus significantly impairing the Zerg and not the Terran. Patches are not inherently fair in that regard. They screw different races over differently, not equally. | ||
|
Mariosatr
294 Posts
 I completely agree though, I know Blizzard didn't intend to time this with IEM Katowice but it's still not good, they should at least add a test map or slam a release date on it. However, it's not a huge change and it's not something massively needed to adapt to, but that's just my input. | ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
On January 16 2013 03:49 2muchSWAG wrote: Exactly why he hasn't won a tournament nor is he a top tier Zerg. He can't adapt as fast as a Leenock or Life would. I am not saying GOLDEN IS A BAD PLAYER by any means, just saying he is a slow thinking player. Just like how in school there are students who figure things out relatively fast, and there are students who are slow as hell, but that does not mean that THE SLOW STUDENTS ARE RETARDED FAILURES WITH NO FUTURE. Everyone is different, some take longer to adapt and some take less time. Golden is one of those who take forever to adapt to even the smallest changes. it doesnt matter on the pro's skill level. if patches come unnoticed, any pro would be "wtf!?" about it. golden decided to say that public via tl instead of complaining inhouse among teammates. your attempt at separating golden with other pros is fucking laughable when it is completely irrelevant, just like your student anology, wtf are you trying to prove? | ||
|
Godwrath
Spain10138 Posts
Sorry ! On January 16 2013 04:07 Al Bundy wrote: I don't understand why would some people believe that only Zerg players need to adapt to this patch. This change affects every single Z matchup, whether it be ZvZ, ZvP or ZvT. This patch modifies Zerg strategy in the 3 matchups; the Protoss & Terran players will have to react to this, and adapt to these modified strategies. Exactly, it would also make for better games for us to watch since progamers could have time to refine (maybe) slightly different strategies, specially when it comes to lategame, something that would be quite interesting right now. | ||
|
Talack
Canada2742 Posts
On January 16 2013 04:07 Al Bundy wrote: I don't understand why would some people believe that only Zerg players need to adapt to this patch. This change affects every single Z matchup, whether it be ZvZ, ZvP or ZvT. This patch modifies Zerg strategy in the 3 matchups; the Protoss & Terran players will have to react to this, and adapt to these modified strategies. This doesn't change TvZ beyond making BCs super slightly more effective in late-late game | ||
|
HelloSon
United States456 Posts
On January 16 2013 04:16 Talack wrote: This doesn't change TvZ beyond making BCs super slightly more effective in late-late game MECH?!?!? | ||
|
Albinoswordfish
United States108 Posts
Now if you want Blizzard to have two cycles of patches, one for bug fixing and one for balancing then that's a different issue however I really doubt they would want to do that. But the issue is that nowadays there are so many different tournaments that it's almost impossible to make everybody happy with a balance patch release date. I think it's just better not to announce it and they did say this was going to happen about a week ago. I can understand the frustration from a programer's perspective but I don't see anything wrong with what Blizzard is doing. | ||
|
ETisME
12683 Posts
The best solution is probably allowing the tournaments to play at the last balance patch if the new patch is released during/a few days before the tournament begins. | ||
|
Al Bundy
7257 Posts
| ||
|
lolmlg
619 Posts
| ||
|
Skytt
Scotland333 Posts
On January 16 2013 04:16 Talack wrote: This doesn't change TvZ beyond making BCs super slightly more effective in late-late game This doesn't change anything beyond making infested terrans marginally weaker. People are still going to spray them everywhere | ||
|
Taters_
Finland123 Posts
On January 16 2013 04:07 Al Bundy wrote: I don't understand why would some people believe that only Zerg players need to adapt to this patch. This change affects every single Z matchup, whether it be ZvZ, ZvP or ZvT. This patch modifies Zerg strategy in the 3 matchups; the Protoss & Terran players will have to react to this, and adapt to these modified strategies. Yeah, it affects zerg in every matchup yet it affects terran and protoss on only one matchup, and you don't understand how it's going to be a disadvantage for zerg? And as for your previous posts, what does it matter if you're a professional player or just like anyone else when a game you're playing changes? And it's quite unlikely that goldens first and only choice on getting some information on the matter has been to post it on a forum that uses a language he has only basic grasp of, the day before he heads out to a tournament that might or might not have the same game he has been practicing with. Why are you anyways so negative about this proposion? | ||
|
tuho12345
4482 Posts
On January 16 2013 01:13 Al Bundy wrote: You are a pro, I'm sure you'll have no problem adapting. This patch is not exactly ground breaking, it's not like they overhauled the whole gameplay or something. Besides, basically every single progamer is in the same situation as you, so the field is leveled. Reminds me of these football players who complain that they couldn't play to the best of their ability because it was raining that day. bullshit, all he asks for is just a specific day. At least if Blizz wanted to apply the patch today, why couldn't they just announced it 1-2 days earlier? Or are they just apply the patch whenever they have free time? | ||
|
ikh
United Kingdom251 Posts
On January 16 2013 04:17 Albinoswordfish wrote: I don't think people realize how difficult it is to put release dates on patches. Patches are typically bug fixes rather than new features and if your a developer you know fixing a bug can range anywhere from 1 day to 1 month. If you look at the patch notes there were a number of bug fixes put into place. i actually have a fair idea. it's not very difficult at all, this release date was all but set in stone well before it got released. blizzard is a company that works very slow and methodically through lots of bureaucracy and red tape to the point that it needs four different servants to tie its shoelaces before it can get up, stumble and fall. with which i mean they need a clear game plan. not a metaphor for the patching process which is neither technically demanding nor unpredictable, which i'm sure most people would agree when trying to remember how often sc2 patches have caused issues (much less gamebreaking issues) requiring hotfixes or unreasonable downtime, regional or global. if someone inside the company capable of making a decision wanted it to happen, it would be no trouble at all to tell people when a goddamn game is being patched. it's something managed effortlessly by many, many gaming companies, and the reason blizzard isn't one of them is partly rooted in them being a company that doesn't really indulge in communicating with their customers. which i guess they're trying to improve on in recent years in a two steps forward one step back sort of way. | ||
|
sparklyresidue
United States5523 Posts
| ||
|
Godwrath
Spain10138 Posts
On January 16 2013 04:13 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote: The problem with this thought process is that different patches affect different races differently due to matchups. Allow me to provide examples. Mirror match up, one race nerfed: Minimal advantage, both sides affected equally. Different skills may be required to win, such as innovation, but that is not necessarily a bad thing. Mirror match up, one race buffed: same as above. Non-mirror match up, one race nerfed: Depending on the degree of the nerf: one side may have it's standard strategies affected adversely, thus requiring significant innovation on their part to reach their former glory quickly, with no such burden on the opposing team. Non-mirror match up, one race buffed: Same as the above, but with the added effect of the buffed side finding their own strategies easier to perform while the other side finds theirs harder. So you see, it is not like football players complaining about rain since a patch might have, say, significantly changed ZvT on the Zerg's side, thus significantly impairing the Zerg and not the Terran. Patches are not inherently fair in that regard. They screw different races over differently, not equally. You should tell that to Creator  Anyways, yes Zergs will have to adapt on 3 matchups, while other races on 1. Nobody can argue that the disadvantadge is bigger for zergs, but that doesn't mean that the other races don't have to adapt neither. On January 16 2013 04:17 Albinoswordfish wrote: I don't think people realize how difficult it is to put release dates on patches. Patches are typically bug fixes rather than new features and if your a developer you know fixing a bug can range anywhere from 1 day to 1 month. If you look at the patch notes there were a number of bug fixes put into place. Now if you want Blizzard to have two cycles of patches, one for bug fixing and one for balancing then that's a different issue however I really doubt they would want to do that. But the issue is that nowadays there are so many different tournaments that it's almost impossible to make everybody happy with a balance patch release date. I think it's just better not to announce it and they did say this was going to happen about a week ago. I can understand the frustration from a programer's perspective but I don't see anything wrong with what Blizzard is doing. This is complete bullcrap. The patch had been already implemented on SEA, and they SHOULD do this since they focused this game to be an esports and you need to announce when the changes are going to be done so they will be able to see if they will have to adapt for their next match or not, specially if we are talking of leagues like GSL. | ||
|
mratel
Poland3 Posts
| ||
|
Albinoswordfish
United States108 Posts
On January 16 2013 04:35 ikh wrote: i actually have a fair idea. it's not very difficult at all, this release date was all but set in stone well before it got released. blizzard is a company that works very slow and methodically through lots of bureaucracy and red tape to the point that it needs four different servants to tie its shoelaces before it can get up, stumble and fall. with which i mean they need a clear game plan. not a metaphor for the patching process which is neither technically demanding nor unpredictable, which i'm sure most people would agree when trying to remember how often sc2 patches have caused issues (much less gamebreaking issues) requiring hotfixes or unreasonable downtime, regional or global. if someone inside the company capable of making a decision wanted it to happen, it would be no trouble at all to tell people when a goddamn game is being patched. it's something managed effortlessly by many, many gaming companies, and the reason blizzard isn't one of them is partly rooted in them being a company that doesn't really indulge in communicating with their customers. which i guess they're trying to improve on in recent years in a two steps forward one step back sort of way. Yes you said it yourself Blizzard is a big company with lots of bureaucracy, that's not gonna change. If this were a small company then yes it would be more feasible but the number of steps it takes to release a patch is probably ridiculous. I'm just saying with big software companies it's really hard to release a patch and not trivial. | ||
|
AnachronisticAnarchy
United States2957 Posts
On January 16 2013 04:44 Godwrath wrote: You should tell that to Creator Anyways, yes Zergs will have to adapt on 3 matchups, while other races on 1. Nobody can argue that the disadvantadge is bigger for zergs, but that doesn't mean that the other races don't have to adapt neither. In most circumstances, they don't have to adapt though. The onus is on the nerfed race to overcome their disadvantage, the other race just has to use their standard play to crush their opponents' half-assed and futile attempts at innovation. | ||
| ||
