|
On July 27 2013 16:44 Schelim wrote:
so people can just sit in this thread and repeatedly call David Kim an "idiot", say he should be fired, etc. and it's np? i've experienced much harsher moderation on TL. that being said, i didn't gain much from this interview.
This.
The posts people are making in this thread are beyond elementary, and show the opposite of support and passion for eSports. Where is the moderation team here?
|
"It's a zerg expansion, so zerg must be the strongest race?" Most dumb question ever.
|
On July 27 2013 16:44 Schelim wrote:
so people can just sit in this thread and repeatedly call David Kim an "idiot", say he should be fired, etc. and it's np? i've experienced much harsher moderation on TL. that being said, i didn't gain much from this interview.
This is a privately owned and operated site and they can obviously moderate as they damn well please.
That said, let me disagree on Kim with an analogy.
American Football or Soccer, whatever. Team A beats Team B, some questionable - not necessarily wrong - decisions by the referee. After the game, the umpire answers a question of the press asking about his decisions saying "Team B sucks, they would have lost anyway and they better step up their game in the future."
That's unprofessionel, that's rude, that's stupid and that's 100% uncalled for. It also raises question if he is fit to be an referee. Exactly the same thing is happening here.
It would make a lot of sense if we had the same 'triple standard' we see in other professional sports:
The unwashed masses (esports consumers and hobby players) can complain about referees and rules all day long. They will not necessarily being taken serious however.
Pro players should remain silent about referees and rules unless they are sure they have an extremely good point.
Referees and sports officials don't comment on player performance ever. EVER. Just fucking don't do. You will have a hard time getting rid of that air, that assumption of bias.
|
Germany25657 Posts
On July 27 2013 17:05 Shinta) wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2013 16:44 Schelim wrote:
so people can just sit in this thread and repeatedly call David Kim an "idiot", say he should be fired, etc. and it's np? i've experienced much harsher moderation on TL. that being said, i didn't gain much from this interview. This. The posts people are making in this thread are beyond elementary, and show the opposite of support and passion for eSports. Where is the moderation team here?
If you see any posts that you deem worthy of our attention just report them or PM a moderator about it. Don't post about it in the thread please, it just leads to derailment. Carry on 
|
On July 28 2013 00:18 KadaverBB wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2013 17:05 Shinta) wrote:On July 27 2013 16:44 Schelim wrote:
so people can just sit in this thread and repeatedly call David Kim an "idiot", say he should be fired, etc. and it's np? i've experienced much harsher moderation on TL. that being said, i didn't gain much from this interview. This. The posts people are making in this thread are beyond elementary, and show the opposite of support and passion for eSports. Where is the moderation team here? If you see any posts that you deem worthy of our attention just report them or PM a moderator about it. Don't post about it in the thread please, it just leads to derailment. Carry on
Nice guy KadaverBB ruining my reporting stats...
On point, I dislike how the interviewer and the most vocal part of this community is begging Blizz to nerf terran while there is no evidence that TvZ or TvP is terran favoured. There especially has not been time to find out the real effect of the hellbat nerf. The running joke is that when a T or a P is losing a lot, they practice more. The Z clocks more forum time. Now, I know this isn't true of DRG, Life, Hyun, Soulkey and all the other brilliant Z players, but looking at this thread, I think this joke will live long and prosper.
|
On July 27 2013 22:47 Aiobhill wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2013 16:44 Schelim wrote:
so people can just sit in this thread and repeatedly call David Kim an "idiot", say he should be fired, etc. and it's np? i've experienced much harsher moderation on TL. that being said, i didn't gain much from this interview. This is a privately owned and operated site and they can obviously moderate as they damn well please. That said, let me disagree on Kim with an analogy. American Football or Soccer, whatever. Team A beats Team B, some questionable - not necessarily wrong - decisions by the referee. After the game, the umpire answers a question of the press asking about his decisions saying "Team B sucks, they would have lost anyway and they better step up their game in the future." That's unprofessionel, that's rude, that's stupid and that's 100% uncalled for. It also raises question if he is fit to be an referee. Exactly the same thing is happening here. It would make a lot of sense if we had the same 'triple standard' we see in other professional sports: The unwashed masses (esports consumers and hobby players) can complain about referees and rules all day long. They will not necessarily being taken serious however. Pro players should remain silent about referees and rules unless they are sure they have an extremely good point. Referees and sports officials don't comment on player performance ever. EVER. Just fucking don't do. You will have a hard time getting rid of that air, that assumption of bias.
its a pretty good analogy with some merit.
However, pro baseball players are constantly whining about umpiring. The great players with great talent are able to intimidate officials with this tactic. Proven veteran players get calls that unproven rookies do not get. A rookie like Bret Lawrie complains a lot and he is basically "labelled" by the umpires and rarely gets a borderline call.
In fact, right after Lawrie was suspended for throwing his batting helmet and striking an umpire.. the other umpires actively were seeking physical confrontations with him. Staring him down after borderline calls just daring him to say something. Basically, after 1 of their "bretheren" was hit with the batting helmet every MLB umpire "circled the wagons".
At this point... 1 wrong word from Lawrie and he is ejected from the game. Derek Jeter could yell at an umpire for 10 minutes and not get thrown out. Obviously, this impacts on the outcome of the game when you lose one of your starting players to an ejection.
You've illustrated the goal to strive for, and its a good goal,
I'm not so sure other sports have reached that goal though.
SC2 has not as you've noted.
|
On July 27 2013 12:41 Crankyhobo wrote:
what a joke, david kim needs to be fired. widow mine a micro unit? it requires zero micro for sub diamond/master to insta-destroy a zerg army with WM, forces zerg to carry a detector everywhere. It introduces more micro for the opponent than it does for terran, not to mention they're cheap as chips so it doesn't matter if you lose a bunch. Broken.
You fail to understand "Blizzard logic" ... it is inverse logic and the microing has to be done by the DEFENDER and not the ATTACKER. Defender in this case would be the Zerg horde ... which is the one needing to micro (spread out and send in advance units to soack up WM shots) just as the Terran Marines need to split to avoid Banelings. It is a stupid concept, but its the one we have to live with.
Thus DK was right in his comment about them being a "micro unit" ... just not in the way you expected it.
On July 27 2013 16:44 Schelim wrote:
so people can just sit in this thread and repeatedly call David Kim an "idiot", say he should be fired, etc. and it's np? i've experienced much harsher moderation on TL. that being said, i didn't gain much from this interview.
Calling someone an idiot is a direct insult and shouldnt happen.
Calling for someone to be fired is NOT a direct insult to the person and only questions his abilities and decisions. This is fine IMO because it isnt directed at the person and someone might be a great guy and still do extremely stupid stuff which he should never have done.
Example: IdrA did some really questionable things for example and yet he seems a nice guy when people are talking to him.
Well this is MY view of the matter and in no way representative of the mods view, I just feel that people need to look very closely when it comes to bad language and possible insults so I made this post.
Another important part is "can this insult be proven or not"? There is a relatively good definition for arrogance, but the same isnt true for idiocy. So calling someone arrogant could be "proven" while calling someone an idiot is "not provable" because it is closely related to just being stupid or other harmless traits.
Example: David Kim has stated that the dev team thinks mech - with sieged Tanks - is dull/boring (?? cant really remember which one exactly it was) and thus they would make sure that it would at most become as viable as bio, but you can practically hear from what he says that they will keep it less viable. To me this sounds a lot like arrogance, because "they" want to dictate how the game is played instead of giving the players the choice ... which is what I would expect from the developers of a "strategy" game.
[Just watch the interview of David Kim with Apollo to see what I mean, but this interview pretty much underlines the whole thing.]
|
|
|
On July 26 2013 22:00 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2013 20:41 saddaromma wrote:On July 26 2013 20:34 Sapphire.lux wrote:On July 26 2013 20:21 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2013 20:18 Sapphire.lux wrote:
Why are people blaming DK on the state of Protoss, mech, design etc? Isn't he responsible mostly for balance? It's Dustin Terrible Terrible Go Play BW Browder that should get that sort of hate. Why do blame them for anything? They make themselves available. Thats why I like Valve and Icefrog. You can't yell at them, they don't ever take an interview. They just patch stuff and you deal with it. Oh man you got good with those heroes. Well fuck that, you will learn these guys now and like it. Don't like the changes, what? I can't hear you, to busy counting money It is my impression that Browder and co. just failed to learn and replicate the parts that made BW such a great game. Whether due to arrogance or incompetence doesn't matter, but Valve proved you can do right by a classic game. They don't look arrogant at all. I think they're more of CoD or Mass Effect type of developers, who are good for feeding average gamers but not good for true starcraft fans. Designing a good "Starcraft game" isnt that hard ... really. You just have to START AT BW and then improve on that slowly and steadily. That isnt how they did it ... they just too a few core units and then built an entirely new thing around those and ended up with an ACTION FOCUSED game (emphasized by David Kim in his Interview with Apollo when he said that mech was "dull" and they didnt like the playstyle). How can they NOT BE arrogant when they - David Kim - basically say "we will tell you how to play and because of this we wont make Siege Tank based mech viable anymore"? They should try their utmost to make EVERY unit which is in the game viable and let the players figure out the rest, but instead they "enforce" an action based playstyle and deliberately keep a more strategically focused playstyle less than viable. How can they NOT BE arrogant when certain problems with the general game design have become obvious throughout WoL and they do add new units which make the situation even worse? The unit density is a problem, because it is the reason for the existence of critical numbers. For them that term is just another catch phrase to throw out in a discussion, but I would describe that as a huge problem instead due to the "boost in efficiency" you gain from reaching a critical number and thus "breaking the balance". Arrogance includes the inability to admit mistakes and they made quite a lot of them which haunt the game as persistent problems and will continue to do so.
well said. I would also suggest bringing the people who designed BW and make them balance the races and give the best opportunity for exciting and strategic play. I never understood what was with the Terran nerfs, or severe nerfs there of to THors, Hellions, and the deletion of the Warhound. I definitely think that SC2 could have surpassed BW, potentially, had the developers utilized their wits and exercise passion.
|
On July 26 2013 22:22 Irre wrote:
I really hate how people just assume the best protoss players based on if they get 3 bases and deathball it or "defend well". Guess what? Protoss is SUPER STRONG on 1 base or 2 base timings. Who have been the most successful protoss players so far? MC, Seed, SoS, Parting, Rain, Creator. Only 2 of those play a sit there and play a "MACRO STYLE" that is acceptable to what foreigners ideal of good play is, and those 2 (Rain and Creator) haven't had the same level of success as the others. Maybe you should just face the facts that the optimal way to play protoss is to use all ins or exploit their early/mid game timings (OMG MC WON ~400k like this). I know its disappointing to people that like NR15 games or whatever, or think that all races should play the same macro style, but thats just not how the race was designed. Protoss needs a complete redesign that isnt going to happen in order to play competitively on the same level of "MACRO GAMES" as zerg and terran do in a long series while still being balanced in the early/mid game. The MSC is a bandaid fix that works fairly well to this style of play, but you still are not nearly playing the optimal way if you aren't killing kids with all ins or timings when you are the strongest. Protoss has an incredibly strong end game. Its just unfortunate that the end game play is based around turtling to it, and the timing play is not to the liking of the community because it doesnt take as much skill or finesse as the other races. EMBRACE IT or stop whining that the protoss players are losing because of imbalance.
This interview was horrible. Probably bad translating, really biased questioning, and despite David Kim giving statistics and facts about the state of both ladder and pro play, we get 12 pages of people ignoring that and proclaiming DK some moron....really sad.
Bigger maps would help. DOn't know why they made the maps smaller in SC2. well, actually I do. I hope KEspa can get even bigger maps for Proleague and OSL>
|
On July 28 2013 02:43 chatuka wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2013 22:22 Irre wrote:
I really hate how people just assume the best protoss players based on if they get 3 bases and deathball it or "defend well". Guess what? Protoss is SUPER STRONG on 1 base or 2 base timings. Who have been the most successful protoss players so far? MC, Seed, SoS, Parting, Rain, Creator. Only 2 of those play a sit there and play a "MACRO STYLE" that is acceptable to what foreigners ideal of good play is, and those 2 (Rain and Creator) haven't had the same level of success as the others. Maybe you should just face the facts that the optimal way to play protoss is to use all ins or exploit their early/mid game timings (OMG MC WON ~400k like this). I know its disappointing to people that like NR15 games or whatever, or think that all races should play the same macro style, but thats just not how the race was designed. Protoss needs a complete redesign that isnt going to happen in order to play competitively on the same level of "MACRO GAMES" as zerg and terran do in a long series while still being balanced in the early/mid game. The MSC is a bandaid fix that works fairly well to this style of play, but you still are not nearly playing the optimal way if you aren't killing kids with all ins or timings when you are the strongest. Protoss has an incredibly strong end game. Its just unfortunate that the end game play is based around turtling to it, and the timing play is not to the liking of the community because it doesnt take as much skill or finesse as the other races. EMBRACE IT or stop whining that the protoss players are losing because of imbalance.
This interview was horrible. Probably bad translating, really biased questioning, and despite David Kim giving statistics and facts about the state of both ladder and pro play, we get 12 pages of people ignoring that and proclaiming DK some moron....really sad. Bigger maps would help. DOn't know why they made the maps smaller in SC2. well, actually I do. I hope KEspa can get even bigger maps for Proleague and OSL>
Big maps make boring games with no action until 15 min in. Big maps arent a problem.
|
On July 26 2013 20:44 QNdie wrote:
All I can hear from this interview is "winrates are ok --> balance is ok" which is complete bullshit. Players want the game to be balanced all around and not have moments in the game where certain things are uncounterable. An example is hellbat drops before the patch which killed everything and nobody payed attention to the fact they were very strong until winrates natrually shifted in favour of terran. Players want to see all units being used, the fact that protoss late game in every matchup is so stale annoys not only their opponents but the protoss themselves... The case is similar with the game still being a deathball fest for every race but terran where multi-pronged harassment is not actually all that useful (see WCS NA Ro32 DeMuslim vs. Crank g1) and you are encouraged to make an expensive army and attack, rather than make 3 warp prisms and try harassing. The game has so many problems and I'm baffled that David Kim fails to see the fact that "balance" is just the tip of the iceberg.
I concur exactly. I think this is part of the reason that SC2 is starting to get bypassed by other games like Dota and LoL. Yes, LoL is a great game in of itself. but SC2 started the whole e-sports craze no doubt about it. and Koreans aren't flocking to Sc2 for several reasons. Price to play online. and the game is just not as fun as what BW was. I had a few Korean friends who play after work, at PC bangs in New JErsey. THey would get their coffee and play BW for like 2-3 hours every night. it was so much fun to watch. That has all but disappeared.
|
On July 28 2013 02:47 Faster69 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 02:43 chatuka wrote:On July 26 2013 22:22 Irre wrote:
I really hate how people just assume the best protoss players based on if they get 3 bases and deathball it or "defend well". Guess what? Protoss is SUPER STRONG on 1 base or 2 base timings. Who have been the most successful protoss players so far? MC, Seed, SoS, Parting, Rain, Creator. Only 2 of those play a sit there and play a "MACRO STYLE" that is acceptable to what foreigners ideal of good play is, and those 2 (Rain and Creator) haven't had the same level of success as the others. Maybe you should just face the facts that the optimal way to play protoss is to use all ins or exploit their early/mid game timings (OMG MC WON ~400k like this). I know its disappointing to people that like NR15 games or whatever, or think that all races should play the same macro style, but thats just not how the race was designed. Protoss needs a complete redesign that isnt going to happen in order to play competitively on the same level of "MACRO GAMES" as zerg and terran do in a long series while still being balanced in the early/mid game. The MSC is a bandaid fix that works fairly well to this style of play, but you still are not nearly playing the optimal way if you aren't killing kids with all ins or timings when you are the strongest. Protoss has an incredibly strong end game. Its just unfortunate that the end game play is based around turtling to it, and the timing play is not to the liking of the community because it doesnt take as much skill or finesse as the other races. EMBRACE IT or stop whining that the protoss players are losing because of imbalance.
This interview was horrible. Probably bad translating, really biased questioning, and despite David Kim giving statistics and facts about the state of both ladder and pro play, we get 12 pages of people ignoring that and proclaiming DK some moron....really sad. Bigger maps would help. DOn't know why they made the maps smaller in SC2. well, actually I do. I hope KEspa can get even bigger maps for Proleague and OSL> Big maps make boring games with no action until 15 min in. Big maps arent a problem.
with 6 wokers at the start, there should be more action. The bigger map would allow for more strategic play across various spectrums and terrain. more fights in locations at bridges like in BW or at chokes were great to witness. Bigger maps allowed it. Smaller maps are just so claustophobic IMO. I think the game wouldn't be such a dragging game if the maps were a bit bigger.
|
Kinda off-topic:
but, at my job (java programming) its worst thing when you let the things go by their own. For example, there is a possible chance that user may not understand some function, but you'll suppose he will learn through some trial&error. It will usually backfire pretty hard.
My guess is blizzard is doing same mistake.
|
On July 28 2013 02:41 chatuka wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2013 22:00 Rabiator wrote:On July 26 2013 20:41 saddaromma wrote:On July 26 2013 20:34 Sapphire.lux wrote:On July 26 2013 20:21 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2013 20:18 Sapphire.lux wrote:
Why are people blaming DK on the state of Protoss, mech, design etc? Isn't he responsible mostly for balance? It's Dustin Terrible Terrible Go Play BW Browder that should get that sort of hate. Why do blame them for anything? They make themselves available. Thats why I like Valve and Icefrog. You can't yell at them, they don't ever take an interview. They just patch stuff and you deal with it. Oh man you got good with those heroes. Well fuck that, you will learn these guys now and like it. Don't like the changes, what? I can't hear you, to busy counting money It is my impression that Browder and co. just failed to learn and replicate the parts that made BW such a great game. Whether due to arrogance or incompetence doesn't matter, but Valve proved you can do right by a classic game. They don't look arrogant at all. I think they're more of CoD or Mass Effect type of developers, who are good for feeding average gamers but not good for true starcraft fans. Designing a good "Starcraft game" isnt that hard ... really. You just have to START AT BW and then improve on that slowly and steadily. That isnt how they did it ... they just too a few core units and then built an entirely new thing around those and ended up with an ACTION FOCUSED game (emphasized by David Kim in his Interview with Apollo when he said that mech was "dull" and they didnt like the playstyle). How can they NOT BE arrogant when they - David Kim - basically say "we will tell you how to play and because of this we wont make Siege Tank based mech viable anymore"? They should try their utmost to make EVERY unit which is in the game viable and let the players figure out the rest, but instead they "enforce" an action based playstyle and deliberately keep a more strategically focused playstyle less than viable. How can they NOT BE arrogant when certain problems with the general game design have become obvious throughout WoL and they do add new units which make the situation even worse? The unit density is a problem, because it is the reason for the existence of critical numbers. For them that term is just another catch phrase to throw out in a discussion, but I would describe that as a huge problem instead due to the "boost in efficiency" you gain from reaching a critical number and thus "breaking the balance". Arrogance includes the inability to admit mistakes and they made quite a lot of them which haunt the game as persistent problems and will continue to do so. well said. I would also suggest bringing the people who designed BW and make them balance the races and give the best opportunity for exciting and strategic play. I never understood what was with the Terran nerfs, or severe nerfs there of to THors, Hellions, and the deletion of the Warhound. I definitely think that SC2 could have surpassed BW, potentially, had the developers utilized their wits and exercise passion.
The problem isnt really their wits ... the problem is that they fail to look at the state of the game objectively.
- Does the unlimited unit selection REALLY improve gameplay or cause problems?
- Does smart cast REALLY improve gameplay or cause problems?
- Do the increased economy and asymmetric production boosts REALLY improve gameplay or cause problems?
- Are "critical number" and "deathball" good or bad?
To me it feels as if they started with a blank sheet of paper and a lot of good intentions (and some bad ones like Facebook integration and so on) and have stuck to that initial draft of how they think the game should work while ignoring some possible solutions which could have solved problems we have encountered so far.
Example: The Fungal Growth nerf might not have been necessary in this form (the missile) IF they had taken smartcast out for that spell. They could also have tuned down the economy to reduce the number of Infestors you can easily build and so on ... If you look at these "alternative ways of nerfing" you might notice that some would get rid of several issues at the same time without the need to adjust the units at all. The one exception is AoE attacks if you introduce limited unit selection and forced unit spreading instead of forced unit clumping.
The people who designed BW arent really needed to improve the game ... just a more "open minded" attitude towards the general mechanics of the game and their impact on problems within the game.
On July 28 2013 02:52 saddaromma wrote:
Kinda off-topic:
but, at my job (java programming) its worst thing when you let the things go by their own. For example, there is a possible chance that user may not understand some function, but you'll suppose he will learn through some trial&error. It will usually backfire pretty hard.
My guess is blizzard is doing same mistake.
I would say they are doing the opposite and try to handhold the players and dictate their playstyle by not giving alternative choices. You need "unit X" to counter / defend against "unit Y". Going for "air" isnt really a viable option due to Fungal Growth and the super clumped up ground forces which take down a small air force rather easily; the only somewhat viable air force - Void Ray / Phoenix / Tempest - only works if you get a "critical number" (i.e. enough Void Rays and stuff to kill any incoming AA defense without losses). That is a bad concept but the reason lies entirely in that one spell AND the clumped up ground units ...
|
On July 26 2013 15:52 fezvez wrote:
Amusing how half the people around here think david kim is an idiot (and has been hurting eSport for three years now).
The game is closer to balance than it has ever been. Just look at the monthly statistics.
The game is overall much better. Hydras are indeed a success, they are now a staple of ZvZ and ZvP.
People want to hear what they want to hear, no matter what he would have said, he'd still be an idiot.
the problem is that he nerfed units into oblivion. The who point of the game is to make units useful, without making the game imbalanced. Look at chess, every unit is useful. If the rook was useless, the game would be flawed severely.
The Thor was nerfed to futility. The hellion is not a strong balanced unit. The reaper was finally buffed,and we are starting to see Reaper play more, finally. I still think the reaper could use a speed buff. The Banshee should be more late game unit and should start dealing more devastating attacks. I don't agree with the cloak of the Banshee TBH should it does add a dynamic to the game. I'd like to see the vulture come back into play because the widow mines are a strange unit. The vulture mine added a dynamic to the game vs every race due to its ability create a minefield that could drag and splash units. THe Tanks were of course a great unit and perhaps the tank needs to increase its range just every so slightly. And of course the Warhound added a dynamic to the gameplay with Terran, but it has been erased unjustifiably. Though the unit was OP, they could have nerfed the stats of the warhound so that there was a balance to the unit vs the rest of the races or opponents. That is the point of balance. make a unit on the fine line between over powered/underpowered
|
Northern Ireland25177 Posts
What dynamic did the Warhound add to Terran exactly?
|
On July 28 2013 03:13 Wombat_NI wrote:
What dynamic did the Warhound add to Terran exactly?
warhounds were the best unit in the game. Its dynamic enough for some folks.
|
On July 28 2013 03:13 Wombat_NI wrote:
What dynamic did the Warhound add to Terran exactly?
IMO, the warhound were good counters to the late game army or Zergs and Protosses. think of it as super marines that could mass against late game zergs and protoss. Just the damage was way too high at 23. perhaps the hit points could have lowered to 175-190 range. I also liked the hellions that morfed into hellbats idea too.
|
Northern Ireland25177 Posts
Counter-units are not particularly dynamic. Ideally massing any unit would be sup-optimal or have huge drawbacks.
The Warhound just raped Immortals, which rape tanks, but in doing this (and thus dropping the Warhound) Blizzard also somewhat killed their chances of making Mech more viable.
Marines are dynamic units because of their microability, their synergy with dropships, their high DPS and low cost, but low HP and thus weakness to AoE.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
