|
OP has a good point. Who would want to watch or play same game over and over again?
Making little changes and trying to keep the game "as it is" will kill the game eventually.
|
Maybe Blizzard could copy a feature from MMOs and implement a ''Test Server'' to experiment on.
A parallel ladder would be more convenient than the custom maps I believe.
I'd jump on it from time to time, I never try those custom maps due to lack of partners/interest.
|
On September 06 2013 22:38 Plansix wrote:
League of Legends does patches between seasons called “quality of life” patches, where they buff underused heroes and try to get them back into play. They don’t change or push out the current meta, but try to add in more factors by bring underused champions and items into use. Of course, after they do that, the game settles down to a new meta, but there is always this period of invention and creativity that comes with each of those patches. Dota 2 also has been patching in a similar fashion, trying to avoid nerfing heroes into the ground.
I feel SC2 could use this after the first WCS season. There is not reason to nerf dominant styles. Rather it would be more productive to buff units and buildings that are undersused in the current meta and try to get people to add them into the current match ups:
Thinks like:
Carriers
Tempest
Thors
BC
Tanks,
Hellion transformation
Nydus
Broodlords(I know, but they have fallen off and they were pretty cool when there were like 3 of them)
Banshees
Reapers(yeah, I know, but I think their “jump down” animation could be made a bit snappier)
You don’t break anything that is working, you just push forward stuff that isn’t. It’s a better, more interesting and exciting way to balance.
This is probably the best thing that Blizzard can do. Unfortunately, they need to be extremely careful due to the way units synergize which is why they don't strictly follow this path. For instance if you buff Tanks or Banshees without doing anything about unupgraded Marines, and then the 1-1-1 becomes unstoppable.
Still, I'd really like to see them buff Battle Cruisers and Carriers. I really think it is foolish, and MC recently noted this too, that the counter to high tech units is often low tech unit. Marines countering Immortals, Marauders countering Ultralisks, Vikings countering Carrier/Broods/Battle Cruisers ect... Terran in particular suffers from this issue, and it is why everyone goes Marine/Marauder/Medivac, because it can handle nearly everything, and all their tech units suffer from it too.
Basic units should hard counter nothing.
|
On September 07 2013 03:06 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2013 22:38 Plansix wrote:
League of Legends does patches between seasons called “quality of life” patches, where they buff underused heroes and try to get them back into play. They don’t change or push out the current meta, but try to add in more factors by bring underused champions and items into use. Of course, after they do that, the game settles down to a new meta, but there is always this period of invention and creativity that comes with each of those patches. Dota 2 also has been patching in a similar fashion, trying to avoid nerfing heroes into the ground.
I feel SC2 could use this after the first WCS season. There is not reason to nerf dominant styles. Rather it would be more productive to buff units and buildings that are undersused in the current meta and try to get people to add them into the current match ups:
Thinks like:
Carriers
Tempest
Thors
BC
Tanks,
Hellion transformation
Nydus
Broodlords(I know, but they have fallen off and they were pretty cool when there were like 3 of them)
Banshees
Reapers(yeah, I know, but I think their “jump down” animation could be made a bit snappier)
You don’t break anything that is working, you just push forward stuff that isn’t. It’s a better, more interesting and exciting way to balance.
This is probably the best thing that Blizzard can do. Unfortunately, they need to be extremely careful due to the way units synergize which is why they don't strictly follow this path. For instance if you buff Tanks or Banshees without doing anything about unupgraded Marines, and then the 1-1-1 becomes unstoppable. Still, I'd really like to see them buff Battle Cruisers and Carriers. I really think it is foolish, and MC recently noted this too, that the counter to high tech units is often low tech unit. Marines countering Immortals, Marauders countering Ultralisks, Vikings countering Carrier/Broods/Battle Cruisers ect... Terran in particular suffers from this issue, and it is why everyone goes Marine/Marauder/Medivac, because it can handle nearly everything.
I think the most critical issue is that air units counter other air units. It is one of the largest problems in SC2 and they low cost ground units are so valuable. If terran had better ground anti air to deal with the colossi, then the viking could be a more well rounded unit and we would see carriers and BCs.
|
On September 07 2013 03:09 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2013 03:06 BronzeKnee wrote:On September 06 2013 22:38 Plansix wrote:
League of Legends does patches between seasons called “quality of life” patches, where they buff underused heroes and try to get them back into play. They don’t change or push out the current meta, but try to add in more factors by bring underused champions and items into use. Of course, after they do that, the game settles down to a new meta, but there is always this period of invention and creativity that comes with each of those patches. Dota 2 also has been patching in a similar fashion, trying to avoid nerfing heroes into the ground.
I feel SC2 could use this after the first WCS season. There is not reason to nerf dominant styles. Rather it would be more productive to buff units and buildings that are undersused in the current meta and try to get people to add them into the current match ups:
Thinks like:
Carriers
Tempest
Thors
BC
Tanks,
Hellion transformation
Nydus
Broodlords(I know, but they have fallen off and they were pretty cool when there were like 3 of them)
Banshees
Reapers(yeah, I know, but I think their “jump down” animation could be made a bit snappier)
You don’t break anything that is working, you just push forward stuff that isn’t. It’s a better, more interesting and exciting way to balance.
This is probably the best thing that Blizzard can do. Unfortunately, they need to be extremely careful due to the way units synergize which is why they don't strictly follow this path. For instance if you buff Tanks or Banshees without doing anything about unupgraded Marines, and then the 1-1-1 becomes unstoppable. Still, I'd really like to see them buff Battle Cruisers and Carriers. I really think it is foolish, and MC recently noted this too, that the counter to high tech units is often low tech unit. Marines countering Immortals, Marauders countering Ultralisks, Vikings countering Carrier/Broods/Battle Cruisers ect... Terran in particular suffers from this issue, and it is why everyone goes Marine/Marauder/Medivac, because it can handle nearly everything. I think the most critical issue is that air units counter other air units. It is one of the largest problems in SC2 and they low cost ground units are so valuable. If terran had better ground anti air to deal with the colossi, then the viking could be a more well rounded unit and we would see carriers and BCs.
That's another good point.
Not to mention that when you have an air unit countering air units, it ruins any chance for micro or harassment. Marines and Thors countering Mutalisks in WOL made for very exciting exchange. Sure, the Marines and Thors win in a straight up fight, but the Mutalisks have such a mobility advantage due to the fact they fly and ignore terrain that they can divide and conquer and harass effectively.
There should be no straight air unit counters (Phoenix, Vikings, Corrupters) in the game for those reasons.
|
The cynic in me thinks Blizzard won't do a "quality of life" update because its hard to come up with new units, and updating underused units is much easier to do to make an expansion feel "complete". Think about if all of these reworks that are done in HOTS would had been done instead in WoL: what compelling change would Hots have really brought? I guess Widow mines would have drastically changed the game, and so would have Vipers and hellbats, but ultimately the things that have caused the metagame in HOTS to diverge are adjustments.
Medivac boost, hydra speed, fungal change, reaper change, Voidray and pheonix change, Muta speed/health buff. I think everyone is in agreement with you: we'd like to see a lategame tank upgrade, or reaper upgrade, or thor change. But we probably have to wait for LotV because of $$$$$.
|
I don't think the thing you suggested is really good. StarCraft is really diffrerent from Dota-games. You could change the whole hero in Dota and it may not cause a balance issue as whole because in the end there are like 100 heroes for you to choose from. In StarCraft, one small changes could be really impactful and you have to be extremely careful about it. Adding more and more new things to StarCraft is one of the worst thing Blizzard could ever do too. I am never fond of balance in all these Dota like games too.
The imbalance of MOBE hides itself behind picking system. You could pick and ban heroes. Just not making a hero too good that you see it every game is good enough for MOBA. SC simply doesn't work like that. You tweak 1 thing and you have to wait atleast 3 months to see the game evolve let alone keep channging things for the sake for dictating metagame. What Blizzard should do is exploring underused units or techs that are left and make all of them viable BUT they have to be careful not to break the thing that are good now. For a certain point where the game is diverse enough then let the game alone.
|
SC1 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
WC3 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
D2 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
Now Activision comes along...and splits up expansions into 2 parts (so more $$$ from sales)
So SC2 needs 2 expansions to be complete
D3 needs 2 expansions to be complete (for example D3 Expansion each only adds 1 hero, as opposed to D2 single xpack which added 2 heroes)
Perhaps we need to just wait patiently until David Kim and the team roll out LOTV, then all the complete unit balance will be there? lol.....
|
On September 07 2013 03:11 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2013 03:09 Plansix wrote:On September 07 2013 03:06 BronzeKnee wrote:On September 06 2013 22:38 Plansix wrote:
League of Legends does patches between seasons called “quality of life” patches, where they buff underused heroes and try to get them back into play. They don’t change or push out the current meta, but try to add in more factors by bring underused champions and items into use. Of course, after they do that, the game settles down to a new meta, but there is always this period of invention and creativity that comes with each of those patches. Dota 2 also has been patching in a similar fashion, trying to avoid nerfing heroes into the ground.
I feel SC2 could use this after the first WCS season. There is not reason to nerf dominant styles. Rather it would be more productive to buff units and buildings that are undersused in the current meta and try to get people to add them into the current match ups:
Thinks like:
Carriers
Tempest
Thors
BC
Tanks,
Hellion transformation
Nydus
Broodlords(I know, but they have fallen off and they were pretty cool when there were like 3 of them)
Banshees
Reapers(yeah, I know, but I think their “jump down” animation could be made a bit snappier)
You don’t break anything that is working, you just push forward stuff that isn’t. It’s a better, more interesting and exciting way to balance.
This is probably the best thing that Blizzard can do. Unfortunately, they need to be extremely careful due to the way units synergize which is why they don't strictly follow this path. For instance if you buff Tanks or Banshees without doing anything about unupgraded Marines, and then the 1-1-1 becomes unstoppable. Still, I'd really like to see them buff Battle Cruisers and Carriers. I really think it is foolish, and MC recently noted this too, that the counter to high tech units is often low tech unit. Marines countering Immortals, Marauders countering Ultralisks, Vikings countering Carrier/Broods/Battle Cruisers ect... Terran in particular suffers from this issue, and it is why everyone goes Marine/Marauder/Medivac, because it can handle nearly everything. I think the most critical issue is that air units counter other air units. It is one of the largest problems in SC2 and they low cost ground units are so valuable. If terran had better ground anti air to deal with the colossi, then the viking could be a more well rounded unit and we would see carriers and BCs. That's another good point. Not to mention that when you have an air unit countering air units, it ruins any chance for micro or harassment. Marines and Thors countering Mutalisks in WOL made for very exciting exchange. Sure, the Marines and Thors win in a straight up fight, but the Mutalisks have such a mobility advantage due to the fact they fly and ignore terrain that they can divide and conquer and harass effectively. There should be no straight air unit counters (Phoenix, Vikings, Corrupters) in the game for those reasons.
Phoenix are not a huge problem because they are at least limited to light units, and they don't really kick the shit out of mutas(I mean they do, but the units can dance all day). Vikings are like sky tanks that alpha strike down any air unit that comes near them, the more expensive the better. I would love to see them change the viking up and buff the Thor's single target anti air to make air units more viable. Hell, I would give it a mini stun to deal with collossi and go from there. I will watch colossi dance around thors all day, rather than watch the viking blob try to bring down the colossi before they get off to many shots.
|
There is nothing to learn from MOBA's in terms of balancing to be honest. Slight buffs/nerfs can have HUGE effects in SC2 and it is very hard to predict how far it can go and leaves the game in a imbalanced state for tournaments. In Moba's new stuff is usually held back in tournaments(for example certain heroes are not allowed in cm after a rework/them being new) and there is a BAN phase which makes it possible to cut out certain imbalances.
While these things can be fixed by releasing custom maps(the way blizzard is doing right now) it is very hard to recognize if something is balanced or not since the high level players will probably not have the time to play the custom maps all the time which leaves us with players that do not play at the highest level to judge whether something is balanced or not, making it impossible to say whether it is balanced for the highest level of play or not.
At this point they could give it a try though to release custom maps with a bit more "drastic" changes. Maybe you could just release different maps(normal maps without balance changes) that could break the "metagame" cause they require different strategies(Like it was done in bw i believe? you can correct me on that if im wrong) but in a game a like sc2 it can be quite hard to do since there is no mechanic related to the map(e.g. no high-ground mechanic)
|
On September 07 2013 03:22 mikumegurine wrote:
SC1 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
WC3 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
D2 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
Now Activision comes along...and splits up expansions into 2 parts (so more $$$ from sales)
So SC2 needs 2 expansions to be complete
D3 needs 2 expansions to be complete (for example D3 Expansion each only adds 1 hero, as opposed to D2 single xpack which added 2 heroes)
Perhaps we need to just wait patiently until David Kim and the team roll out LOTV, then all the complete unit balance will be there? lol.....
This post is simply wrong. None of the games you mentioned above were complete. There were a lot of things you could improve upon them. I don't even need to tell you the flaws of all those games. Everyone who played them know it.
|
On September 07 2013 03:29 Wildmoon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2013 03:22 mikumegurine wrote:
SC1 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
WC3 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
D2 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
Now Activision comes along...and splits up expansions into 2 parts (so more $$$ from sales)
So SC2 needs 2 expansions to be complete
D3 needs 2 expansions to be complete (for example D3 Expansion each only adds 1 hero, as opposed to D2 single xpack which added 2 heroes)
Perhaps we need to just wait patiently until David Kim and the team roll out LOTV, then all the complete unit balance will be there? lol..... This post is simply wrong. None of the games you mentioned above were complete. There were a lot of things you could improve upon them. I don't even need to tell you the flaws of all those games. Everyone who played them know it.
Like the fact that they kept releasing balance patches for D2 for almost 10 years. And WC3 for a number of years as well. But lets just have selective memory and assume they were perfect right when they came out of the box.
|
On September 07 2013 03:29 Wildmoon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2013 03:22 mikumegurine wrote:
SC1 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
WC3 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
D2 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
Now Activision comes along...and splits up expansions into 2 parts (so more $$$ from sales)
So SC2 needs 2 expansions to be complete
D3 needs 2 expansions to be complete (for example D3 Expansion each only adds 1 hero, as opposed to D2 single xpack which added 2 heroes)
Perhaps we need to just wait patiently until David Kim and the team roll out LOTV, then all the complete unit balance will be there? lol..... This post is simply wrong. None of the games you mentioned above were complete. There were a lot of things you could improve upon them. I don't even need to tell you the flaws of all those games. Everyone who played them know it.
BW releasing the units then patches following, did not complete the game?
WC3 frozen throne releasing all the units, then the patches afterwards did not make the best WC3 possible?
was D2's expack and following patches, not the best D2 complete experience?
They werent perfect games but they were the best complete experience possible
then finally SC2/D3 will have the complete units to work with, then patches from there can further balance the game
COMPLETE does not mean perfect, it means the game has gotten all its base tools to work with
Obviously expansions do not make the game IMMEDIATELY perfect, who said that?
but the expansions give the units/base tools, which then patches can work on that
without all the units/base tools, (IE HOTS right now or D3 1st expack) , Blizzard isnt even planning to be fully balanced
I'm saying with SC2, and D3, Blizzard is looking LONGTERM, and thinking of ways to hold back stuff so they can include it it in the FINAL expack,
|
On September 07 2013 03:32 mikumegurine wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2013 03:29 Wildmoon wrote:On September 07 2013 03:22 mikumegurine wrote:
SC1 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
WC3 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
D2 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
Now Activision comes along...and splits up expansions into 2 parts (so more $$$ from sales)
So SC2 needs 2 expansions to be complete
D3 needs 2 expansions to be complete (for example D3 Expansion each only adds 1 hero, as opposed to D2 single xpack which added 2 heroes)
Perhaps we need to just wait patiently until David Kim and the team roll out LOTV, then all the complete unit balance will be there? lol..... This post is simply wrong. None of the games you mentioned above were complete. There were a lot of things you could improve upon them. I don't even need to tell you the flaws of all those games. Everyone who played them know it. BW releasing the units then patches following, did not complete the game? WC3 frozen throne releasing all the units, then the patches afterwards did not make the best WC3 possible? was D2's expack and following patches, not the best D2 complete experience? They werent perfect games but they were the best complete experience possible I'm saying with SC2, and D3, Blizzard is looking LONGTERM, and thinking of ways to hold back stuff so they can include it it in the FINAL expack then finally SC2/D3 will have the complete units to work with, then patches from there can further balance the game
Those games were far from the best they could be. You assume they are holding back stuff but there's the interview with Chris Sigaty that he doesn't even know if there will be new units in LotV and if there is then they may remove some units. Looking longterm doeesn't mean they are holding back. It could mean they are willing to improve it for longer. This is derailing the thread so I won't argue further.
|
On September 07 2013 03:36 Wildmoon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2013 03:32 mikumegurine wrote:On September 07 2013 03:29 Wildmoon wrote:On September 07 2013 03:22 mikumegurine wrote:
SC1 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
WC3 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
D2 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
Now Activision comes along...and splits up expansions into 2 parts (so more $$$ from sales)
So SC2 needs 2 expansions to be complete
D3 needs 2 expansions to be complete (for example D3 Expansion each only adds 1 hero, as opposed to D2 single xpack which added 2 heroes)
Perhaps we need to just wait patiently until David Kim and the team roll out LOTV, then all the complete unit balance will be there? lol..... This post is simply wrong. None of the games you mentioned above were complete. There were a lot of things you could improve upon them. I don't even need to tell you the flaws of all those games. Everyone who played them know it. BW releasing the units then patches following, did not complete the game? WC3 frozen throne releasing all the units, then the patches afterwards did not make the best WC3 possible? was D2's expack and following patches, not the best D2 complete experience? They werent perfect games but they were the best complete experience possible I'm saying with SC2, and D3, Blizzard is looking LONGTERM, and thinking of ways to hold back stuff so they can include it it in the FINAL expack then finally SC2/D3 will have the complete units to work with, then patches from there can further balance the game Those games were far from the best they could be. If units are the only things you think make the game the best they could be then I don't know. You assume they are holding back stuff but there's the interview with Chris Sigaty that he doesn't even know if there will be new units in LotV and if there is then they may remove some units. Looking longterm doeesn't mean they are holding back. It could mean they are willing to improve it for longer.
Its such a weird argument for expansions to games(which Blizzard is the only one doing now a days). IF they add new content and features, people are upset that they were not in the original game and point to press releases were Blizzard said they wanted to add those features. If Blizzard doesn't add new features, then people get upset because there isn’t enough in the expansion.
|
On September 07 2013 03:36 Wildmoon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2013 03:32 mikumegurine wrote:On September 07 2013 03:29 Wildmoon wrote:On September 07 2013 03:22 mikumegurine wrote:
SC1 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
WC3 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
D2 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
Now Activision comes along...and splits up expansions into 2 parts (so more $$$ from sales)
So SC2 needs 2 expansions to be complete
D3 needs 2 expansions to be complete (for example D3 Expansion each only adds 1 hero, as opposed to D2 single xpack which added 2 heroes)
Perhaps we need to just wait patiently until David Kim and the team roll out LOTV, then all the complete unit balance will be there? lol..... This post is simply wrong. None of the games you mentioned above were complete. There were a lot of things you could improve upon them. I don't even need to tell you the flaws of all those games. Everyone who played them know it. BW releasing the units then patches following, did not complete the game? WC3 frozen throne releasing all the units, then the patches afterwards did not make the best WC3 possible? was D2's expack and following patches, not the best D2 complete experience? They werent perfect games but they were the best complete experience possible I'm saying with SC2, and D3, Blizzard is looking LONGTERM, and thinking of ways to hold back stuff so they can include it it in the FINAL expack then finally SC2/D3 will have the complete units to work with, then patches from there can further balance the game Those games were far from the best they could be. You assume they are holding back stuff but there's the interview with Chris Sigaty that he doesn't even know if there will be new units in LotV and if there is then they may remove some units. Looking longterm doeesn't mean they are holding back. It could mean they are willing to improve it for longer. This is derailing the thread so I won't argue further.
who said they were the "best they can be"? who said they were perfect?
the expansions completed the games units, so from there patches could tweak things
Perhaps English is not your first language? complete does not mean PERFECT
Complete means having all the necessary or appropriate parts.
In other words, the expacks released all the necessary parts (that BLIZZARD deemed was a complete game, SC1needs BW, WC3 needs TFT, D2 needs expack, etc)
Noone said the expacks automatically made the game PERFECT, they just added all the base components that Blizzard deems a complete saga/game
And right now, SC2 Game as a whole, is not complete, neither is D3, SC2 needs 1 more expack, and D3 needs 2 more expans
|
On September 07 2013 03:44 mikumegurine wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2013 03:36 Wildmoon wrote:On September 07 2013 03:32 mikumegurine wrote:On September 07 2013 03:29 Wildmoon wrote:On September 07 2013 03:22 mikumegurine wrote:
SC1 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
WC3 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
D2 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
Now Activision comes along...and splits up expansions into 2 parts (so more $$$ from sales)
So SC2 needs 2 expansions to be complete
D3 needs 2 expansions to be complete (for example D3 Expansion each only adds 1 hero, as opposed to D2 single xpack which added 2 heroes)
Perhaps we need to just wait patiently until David Kim and the team roll out LOTV, then all the complete unit balance will be there? lol..... This post is simply wrong. None of the games you mentioned above were complete. There were a lot of things you could improve upon them. I don't even need to tell you the flaws of all those games. Everyone who played them know it. BW releasing the units then patches following, did not complete the game? WC3 frozen throne releasing all the units, then the patches afterwards did not make the best WC3 possible? was D2's expack and following patches, not the best D2 complete experience? They werent perfect games but they were the best complete experience possible I'm saying with SC2, and D3, Blizzard is looking LONGTERM, and thinking of ways to hold back stuff so they can include it it in the FINAL expack then finally SC2/D3 will have the complete units to work with, then patches from there can further balance the game Those games were far from the best they could be. You assume they are holding back stuff but there's the interview with Chris Sigaty that he doesn't even know if there will be new units in LotV and if there is then they may remove some units. Looking longterm doeesn't mean they are holding back. It could mean they are willing to improve it for longer. This is derailing the thread so I won't argue further. who said they were the "best they can be"? who said they were perfect? the expansions completed the games units, so from there patches could tweak things Perhaps English is not your first language? complete does not mean PERFECT Complete means having all the necessary or appropriate parts. In other words, the expacks released all the necessary parts (that BLIZZARD deemed was a complete game, SC1needs BW, WC3 needs TFT, D2 needs expack, etc) Noone said the expacks automatically made the game PERFECT, they just added all the base components that Blizzard deems a complete saga/game And right now, SC2 Game as a whole, is not complete, neither is D3, SC2 needs 1 more expack, and D3 needs 2 more expans
Your argument is slowly shifting to the point where no one can challenge it because it is so broad. It seems to be "the game is done when they said it is done" which was always true.
|
On September 07 2013 03:47 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2013 03:44 mikumegurine wrote:On September 07 2013 03:36 Wildmoon wrote:On September 07 2013 03:32 mikumegurine wrote:On September 07 2013 03:29 Wildmoon wrote:On September 07 2013 03:22 mikumegurine wrote:
SC1 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
WC3 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
D2 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
Now Activision comes along...and splits up expansions into 2 parts (so more $$$ from sales)
So SC2 needs 2 expansions to be complete
D3 needs 2 expansions to be complete (for example D3 Expansion each only adds 1 hero, as opposed to D2 single xpack which added 2 heroes)
Perhaps we need to just wait patiently until David Kim and the team roll out LOTV, then all the complete unit balance will be there? lol..... This post is simply wrong. None of the games you mentioned above were complete. There were a lot of things you could improve upon them. I don't even need to tell you the flaws of all those games. Everyone who played them know it. BW releasing the units then patches following, did not complete the game? WC3 frozen throne releasing all the units, then the patches afterwards did not make the best WC3 possible? was D2's expack and following patches, not the best D2 complete experience? They werent perfect games but they were the best complete experience possible I'm saying with SC2, and D3, Blizzard is looking LONGTERM, and thinking of ways to hold back stuff so they can include it it in the FINAL expack then finally SC2/D3 will have the complete units to work with, then patches from there can further balance the game Those games were far from the best they could be. You assume they are holding back stuff but there's the interview with Chris Sigaty that he doesn't even know if there will be new units in LotV and if there is then they may remove some units. Looking longterm doeesn't mean they are holding back. It could mean they are willing to improve it for longer. This is derailing the thread so I won't argue further. who said they were the "best they can be"? who said they were perfect? the expansions completed the games units, so from there patches could tweak things Perhaps English is not your first language? complete does not mean PERFECT Complete means having all the necessary or appropriate parts. In other words, the expacks released all the necessary parts (that BLIZZARD deemed was a complete game, SC1needs BW, WC3 needs TFT, D2 needs expack, etc) Noone said the expacks automatically made the game PERFECT, they just added all the base components that Blizzard deems a complete saga/game And right now, SC2 Game as a whole, is not complete, neither is D3, SC2 needs 1 more expack, and D3 needs 2 more expans Your argument is slowly shifting to the point where no one can challenge it because it is so broad. It seems to be "the game is done when they said it is done" which was always true.
Argument has not shifted, perhaps read the posts again
1. Game is not complete (Blizzard says SC2 is a trilogy when completed)
2. Dont expect perfect balanced gameplay, since SC2 is not complete at the HOTS level, and Blizzard is holding back stuff for the final expansion (HOTS simply cant be too large, and then LOTV small cause people would complain about that...in other words one expansion cant have too much more than the other expack)
3. Same is happening with D3
4. $$$Profit?
|
Idk if they can apply the same stuff to their patching, but I hope they would some day look back and realize how much they could have taken from past. Since the beginning they have lacked proper highground advantage and worker scaling, combine this with micro limiting, spammable abilities or even passives. But all that stuff is too "core" for the game and wont get touched, ever. So we can just hope they will work with the units how they can, maybe LotV will remove some of the most obnoxious units and replace/add better ones.
|
On September 07 2013 03:50 mikumegurine wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2013 03:47 Plansix wrote:On September 07 2013 03:44 mikumegurine wrote:On September 07 2013 03:36 Wildmoon wrote:On September 07 2013 03:32 mikumegurine wrote:On September 07 2013 03:29 Wildmoon wrote:On September 07 2013 03:22 mikumegurine wrote:
SC1 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
WC3 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
D2 only had 1 expansion, and that expansion made the game complete
Now Activision comes along...and splits up expansions into 2 parts (so more $$$ from sales)
So SC2 needs 2 expansions to be complete
D3 needs 2 expansions to be complete (for example D3 Expansion each only adds 1 hero, as opposed to D2 single xpack which added 2 heroes)
Perhaps we need to just wait patiently until David Kim and the team roll out LOTV, then all the complete unit balance will be there? lol..... This post is simply wrong. None of the games you mentioned above were complete. There were a lot of things you could improve upon them. I don't even need to tell you the flaws of all those games. Everyone who played them know it. BW releasing the units then patches following, did not complete the game? WC3 frozen throne releasing all the units, then the patches afterwards did not make the best WC3 possible? was D2's expack and following patches, not the best D2 complete experience? They werent perfect games but they were the best complete experience possible I'm saying with SC2, and D3, Blizzard is looking LONGTERM, and thinking of ways to hold back stuff so they can include it it in the FINAL expack then finally SC2/D3 will have the complete units to work with, then patches from there can further balance the game Those games were far from the best they could be. You assume they are holding back stuff but there's the interview with Chris Sigaty that he doesn't even know if there will be new units in LotV and if there is then they may remove some units. Looking longterm doeesn't mean they are holding back. It could mean they are willing to improve it for longer. This is derailing the thread so I won't argue further. who said they were the "best they can be"? who said they were perfect? the expansions completed the games units, so from there patches could tweak things Perhaps English is not your first language? complete does not mean PERFECT Complete means having all the necessary or appropriate parts. In other words, the expacks released all the necessary parts (that BLIZZARD deemed was a complete game, SC1needs BW, WC3 needs TFT, D2 needs expack, etc) Noone said the expacks automatically made the game PERFECT, they just added all the base components that Blizzard deems a complete saga/game And right now, SC2 Game as a whole, is not complete, neither is D3, SC2 needs 1 more expack, and D3 needs 2 more expans Your argument is slowly shifting to the point where no one can challenge it because it is so broad. It seems to be "the game is done when they said it is done" which was always true. Argument has not shifted, perhaps read the posts again 1. Game is not complete (Blizzard says SC2 is a trilogy when completed) 2. Dont expect perfect balanced gameplay, since SC2 is not complete at the HOTS level, and Blizzard is holding back stuff for the final expansion 3. Same is happening with D3 4. $$Profit?
Your initial post denotes sarcasm and derision due to the question at the end and the lol with three periods. I am not really seeing the point you are trying to make, that activision is greedy for making 2 expansions, even thought they told us long ago that they were?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
