|
On January 10 2014 11:55 CutTheEnemy wrote:
On EU, 24% of masters players are terran now compared with 35% and 38% for zerg and protoss. How can he say its balanced considering this? His appeal to win percentages within leagues is highly misleading.
He's also been speaking for years as though he's ignorant of our main complaint- its isn't balance per se, its how hard and stressful it is to play terran and win. We know terrans can win once they go pro, but most of us aren't capable of sustaining the serious damage to our personal relationships, grades, hands and paychecks it takes in order to play the race competitively.
well if it's not the balance that is the problem then what do you suggest? Adding easily spamable no-micro units? Blizzard tried that. Any other ideas?
|
On January 10 2014 23:58 Swisslink wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2014 23:33 Hider wrote:Especially in the late game against Protoss and a meching Terran, the Zerg has just nothing to deal with these kind of armies without the Swarmhost in its current form (Just watch all the VOD's of Zerg players who don't use Swarmhosts... they just lose at one point).
So: Yes, everyone hates Swarmhosts, nobody hates them more than the Zerg themself, but right now they need them. And as long as they don't change A LOT, the Swarmhost will be needed in the future as well. I actually think it isn't impossible to "fix" in a patch. By fix I mean we make the following changes; 1) Nerf it into obviolion like Reaper was in WOL. This is simply accepting that the SH is extremely flawed and just bad for the game. In LOTV it can then be replaced by a different unit. 2) Make Ravens 3 supply instead of 2 --> Nerfs terran mech turtle a lot. Swarm Hosts less neccsary. 3) Nerf protoss air (I guess VR's and Tempests are the problem here) --> Makes Swarm hosts less necessary. Alternatively, we could also make HT's (and Ghosts) 3 supply, which will make protoss turtling less efificent. I just feel like they never change multiple things to make something better. They normally adjust minor stuff in order to make something slightly stronger and weaker. I can't remember a patch where they adjusted multiple things for a single purpose. But we'll see - I just hope they won't simply nerf the Swarmhost to nerf the turtling Zerg - because IMO it's normally the opponent who forces the Zerg to turtle and the Zerg just reacts with the only option he got. If your proposed adjustments would equalize a major Swarmhost nerf... I have no idea, tbh  But I agree: Give the Zerg a more interesting unit in LotV... and maybe change the completely idiotic Tempest. I mean, everyone always stated that there are too many boring hardcounters in SCII and that they are just way too good without doing anything... ... And all they were able to come up was a HARDCOUNTER to Broodlords? Srsly?
I think the only problem zerg has is they have extremely weak antiair, give zerg antiair (hopefully interesting one) and zerg is fine and doesn't need the swarmhost anymore.
I think vs mech the new antiair plus viper would be enough.
|
On January 10 2014 23:55 JustPassingBy wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2014 23:44 Plansix wrote:On January 10 2014 23:40 shadymmj wrote:
i'm not quite sure where apm = difficulty figures into this argument. if sc2's goal was to reduce mindless actions required then protoss is moving in the right direction. i can for example design a race where you had to constantly type the alphabet from a-z to receive gas, but that's not skill, nor is it in theory difficult. it's just unnecessary tedium - bad design. Dota is the same way, where you have to constantly manage the control of your hero to not get hung up on creeps. There are even tricks to increase your dps by canceling out of your backswing animation. If the army managed itself, no one would make mistakes and the game would just devolve down to a moving across the map. Even if the army manages itself, there is still the aspect to positioning and multi-tasking.
I do not believe that is enough for an RTS with players as good as we have in SC2. Positioning is not something that is very entertaining to watch, and if it's too important it just makes battles completely deterministic. There needs to be a rather high possibility of mechanical failure in fights and army control in order to make it exciting and properly reward mechanically superior players.
|
Turtling gets countered by greed gets countered by allin gets countered by turtling?
|
On January 10 2014 23:58 KOtical wrote:
if someone seeks another game to keep getting frustrated other than sc2. how about some dark souls!?!? xD
Dark Souls is way more fun than SC2.
|
On January 10 2014 23:58 KOtical wrote:
if someone seeks another game to keep getting frustrated other than sc2. how about some dark souls!?!? xD
Darksoul first playtrough is insanely hard but after you get good at it its not so bad 
|
On January 11 2014 00:00 Swiipii wrote:
So ... GM league is not a good argument because it's a small sample size but 20 games in PL are enough to say that the game is fine? Come on. -_-"
Maybe this makes it easier to read for you.
David Kim wrote:
It’s the only major tournament going on right now, and it represents a sample size that is too small to draw any broad conclusions from
|
On January 11 2014 00:04 boxerfred wrote:
Turtling gets countered by greed gets countered by allin gets countered by turtling?
That's how it should work ideally, yes.
|
On January 11 2014 00:01 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2014 23:58 Swisslink wrote:On January 10 2014 23:33 Hider wrote:Especially in the late game against Protoss and a meching Terran, the Zerg has just nothing to deal with these kind of armies without the Swarmhost in its current form (Just watch all the VOD's of Zerg players who don't use Swarmhosts... they just lose at one point).
So: Yes, everyone hates Swarmhosts, nobody hates them more than the Zerg themself, but right now they need them. And as long as they don't change A LOT, the Swarmhost will be needed in the future as well. I actually think it isn't impossible to "fix" in a patch. By fix I mean we make the following changes; 1) Nerf it into obviolion like Reaper was in WOL. This is simply accepting that the SH is extremely flawed and just bad for the game. In LOTV it can then be replaced by a different unit. 2) Make Ravens 3 supply instead of 2 --> Nerfs terran mech turtle a lot. Swarm Hosts less neccsary. 3) Nerf protoss air (I guess VR's and Tempests are the problem here) --> Makes Swarm hosts less necessary. Alternatively, we could also make HT's (and Ghosts) 3 supply, which will make protoss turtling less efificent. I just feel like they never change multiple things to make something better. They normally adjust minor stuff in order to make something slightly stronger and weaker. I can't remember a patch where they adjusted multiple things for a single purpose. But we'll see - I just hope they won't simply nerf the Swarmhost to nerf the turtling Zerg - because IMO it's normally the opponent who forces the Zerg to turtle and the Zerg just reacts with the only option he got. If your proposed adjustments would equalize a major Swarmhost nerf... I have no idea, tbh But I agree: Give the Zerg a more interesting unit in LotV... and maybe change the completely idiotic Tempest. I mean, everyone always stated that there are too many boring hardcounters in SCII and that they are just way too good without doing anything... ... And all they were able to come up was a HARDCOUNTER to Broodlords? Srsly? I think the only problem zerg has is they have extremely weak antiair, give zerg antiair (hopefully interesting one) and zerg is fine and doesn't need the swarmhost anymore. I think vs mech the new antiair plus viper would be enough.
I kind of agree. Zerg is lacking some kind of tanky ground to air unit, the role that is currently often taken by queens.
|
On January 11 2014 00:13 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2014 00:00 Swiipii wrote:
So ... GM league is not a good argument because it's a small sample size but 20 games in PL are enough to say that the game is fine? Come on. -_-" Maybe this makes it easier to read for you. Show nested quote +David Kim wrote:
It’s the only major tournament going on right now, and it represents a sample size that is too small to draw any broad conclusions from
Peoples elective reading skills are truely impressive. It's almost like they can't see the word that disagree with the pints that are being made.
|
On January 11 2014 00:13 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2014 00:00 Swiipii wrote:
So ... GM league is not a good argument because it's a small sample size but 20 games in PL are enough to say that the game is fine? Come on. -_-" Maybe this makes it easier to read for you. Show nested quote +David Kim wrote:
It’s the only major tournament going on right now, and it represents a sample size that is too small to draw any broad conclusions from
Then why does he even mention it as a supporting argument in his post at all?
|
On January 11 2014 00:21 Bagi wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2014 00:13 Big J wrote:On January 11 2014 00:00 Swiipii wrote:
So ... GM league is not a good argument because it's a small sample size but 20 games in PL are enough to say that the game is fine? Come on. -_-" Maybe this makes it easier to read for you. David Kim wrote:
It’s the only major tournament going on right now, and it represents a sample size that is too small to draw any broad conclusions from Then why even mention it as a supporting argument in his post at all?
It's not so hard to read the OP, is it?
David Kim wrote:
Speaking of the pro level, we’ve been getting a lot of feedback from pro players that is contrary to what we were hearing from them last season. This seems to be mostly because of the results for Protoss pros this week in Proleague play.
|
On January 11 2014 00:21 Bagi wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2014 00:13 Big J wrote:On January 11 2014 00:00 Swiipii wrote:
So ... GM league is not a good argument because it's a small sample size but 20 games in PL are enough to say that the game is fine? Come on. -_-" Maybe this makes it easier to read for you. David Kim wrote:
It’s the only major tournament going on right now, and it represents a sample size that is too small to draw any broad conclusions from Then why even mention it as a supporting argument in his post at all?
Because it shows that Protoss can and do lost to terrans. And why not, since it is so overwhelming. Protoss are getting rocked it proleague, which is where thy normally shine.
|
On January 10 2014 23:45 Frex wrote:
46% protoss so far in EU GM with 170 players in it.
Then you have this David Kim showing us good looking winrates that actually aren´t raw winrates but something else.
When will the crying stop!? The guy just freaking posted.
|
there is only one conclusion that I can make with this statistics, and is that blizzard is trying to use data that always tend to go to 50% independent of the race balance, to prove that the races are balanced, either the game is not balanced, or david kim failed at statistics, this show us that blizzard is not enough committed with the game.
|
I guess it all depends on how you measure balance, if you take the best player of each race and make them duke it out the game is probly balanced, has always been, but if you take 100-1000 top players of each race, its extremely extremely fucking imbalanced. Its same as saying that the wealth in the world is fairly balanced, if you take 3 of the richest fuckers out there, but if you include the couple of billion people who are fucking starving, it doesnt look too fair anymore does it. David kim is just a fucking delusional guy living in his very own world, far from realism.
|
On January 11 2014 00:24 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2014 00:21 Bagi wrote:On January 11 2014 00:13 Big J wrote:On January 11 2014 00:00 Swiipii wrote:
So ... GM league is not a good argument because it's a small sample size but 20 games in PL are enough to say that the game is fine? Come on. -_-" Maybe this makes it easier to read for you. David Kim wrote:
It’s the only major tournament going on right now, and it represents a sample size that is too small to draw any broad conclusions from Then why even mention it as a supporting argument in his post at all? Because it shows that Protoss can and do lost to terrans. And why not, since it is so overwhelming. Protoss are getting rocked it proleague, which is where thy normally shine.
Proleague is a different beast altogether. Those teams solely practice and form strategies for Proleague only maps... Not saying it's insignificant but I don't think you can draw broad conclusions from it.
|
On January 11 2014 00:30 Ctone23 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2014 00:24 Plansix wrote:On January 11 2014 00:21 Bagi wrote:On January 11 2014 00:13 Big J wrote:On January 11 2014 00:00 Swiipii wrote:
So ... GM league is not a good argument because it's a small sample size but 20 games in PL are enough to say that the game is fine? Come on. -_-" Maybe this makes it easier to read for you. David Kim wrote:
It’s the only major tournament going on right now, and it represents a sample size that is too small to draw any broad conclusions from Then why even mention it as a supporting argument in his post at all? Because it shows that Protoss can and do lost to terrans. And why not, since it is so overwhelming. Protoss are getting rocked it proleague, which is where thy normally shine. Proleague is a different beast altogether. Those teams solely practice and form strategies for Proleague only maps... Not saying it's insignificant but I don't think you can draw broad conclusions from it.
And DK says exactly that in his post. But they also can't ignore it either.
|
On January 11 2014 00:28 Satiinifi wrote:
I guess it all depends on how you measure balance, if you take the best player of each race and make them duke it out the game is probly balanced, has always been, but if you take 100-1000 top players of each race, its extremely extremely fucking imbalanced. Its same as saying that the wealth in the world is fairly balanced, if you take 3 of the richest fuckers out there, but if you include the couple of billion people who are fucking starving, it doesnt look too fair anymore does it. David kim is just a fucking delusional guy living in his very own world, far from realism.
But there is also another problem wiht using only the very top... Its not evenly matched. Proleague is still something like this:
- Top 30 protoss
- Top 10-15 terran
- Top 20 zergs
Eventually we will also expect that these win-rates go towards 50-50, because the terran players that play in proleague is of a lower decimil (they are the top-top-top while the protoss players are "just" top-top).
David Kim simply fails to see that all of the metrics that he use to balance the game, eventually goes towards 50-50. That's just the mechanics of the competitive and the ladder system.
|
When I read that kind of post by David Kim, I get the feeling that Blizzard has lost sight of the fact that SC2 is a game, and it is meant for people to have fun and enjoy themselves.
As of now, according to this post, they seem to be lost in numbers, completely forgetting the fact that a lot of people are falling out of love with the game because they don't find it enjoyable. Balance and level of enjoyment are two different (and sometimes unrelated) things. LoL and DotA 2 are, to my mind, clearly not balanced. But player skill makes up for it along with team play. WC3 was not balanced, and with hindsight, actually needed some serious work on a couple of mechanics. It still was a ton of fun (and still is) and people did complain about the balance but still played it, because it was awesome. It's probably harder to work that way with a RTS though, because it's no team game and you can't rely on another player to make up for something that might happen due to an unbalance.
Blizzard should give up on the idea of making a 100% balanced game, there is no such thing. Not unless you create a bland produce with one race where every player gets exactly the same units. There will always be an unbalance somewhere, no matter how small.
I wish Blizzard would focus on the more important picture: getting people who are no longer enjoying the game to like it again by bringing some bold changes to it. Look at DotA 2: I believe IceFrog recently released a patch where he changed a whole lot of things, and I mean a whole lot. Of course, it's a different game and there are factors to be taken into consideration which make it so that the changes probably can't be as harsh, but still. He is willing to make huge changes to his game, and Blizzard is not (never was, really). In the end, I think it will cost them dear.
Don't get me wrong, I understand their need to balance SC2, it's an e-sport, there's money involved and a lot of people take it very seriously. It's a business and a sport. Nonetheless, I think it's a mistake to focus solely on that when a lot of people are complaining about a more important factor for a game: their level of enjoyment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
