EPTDavid Kim answers Balance Questions on Battle.net forums -…
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Pirfiktshon
United States1072 Posts
| ||
|
Shiiken
Germany4 Posts
Those root-problems are and have always been Warpgate and Forcefield (not to say thats all of them). A lot of the problems later occured as consequence of these two designs. For example: The trend of Zerg going for ultra lategame in ZvP (Broodlord/Infestor; Swarmhost-Turtle) in my opinion is because of the volatility of the matchup. Its far too easy for Zerg to lose a game in the blink of an eye. Oh btw... The reason the Infestor got buffed in WoL was for Zerg to have something to deal with forcefields. I dont have to tell anyone how retarded that ended up. One could write hundrets of pages about whats wrong with the game and Blizzards approach to balance it. What i would like DK and the crew to do is this: 1. Stop trying to make fools of us by your PR-Talk. You waste your time talking and writing for hours while saying nothing of substance at all. We are not that stupid! 2. Take a deep breath, lean back and look at viewerstatistics. Find out what matches made the audience go crazy (good for the game) and what matches bored the viewers to death (bad for the game). ZvT and TvT for example produce so many good matches. PvP produces so many horrible matches that it makes you want to throw your hardware out of the window. Figure out why a certain game is rated good and why a certain match is rated bad. 3. Look at what the most common reasons for a boring match are. 4. Find reasons for the cause of the problem. 5. Find reasons for the cause of the cause of the problem. 6. Go back until you cant get any further. 7. Fix the root-problem. 8. Then fix all the little things. I actually would call it tweaking. You deny the problems that need to be fixed and instead tweaking little things that keep you and us occupied but dont change shit about whats wrong with the game. And (by the way) what stands between current SC2 and the SC2 we all want. Its not so much about winpercentages its about weather or not people enjoy the game. If i want perfect balance i take a coin and flip it. Its balanced perfectly but at the same time boring as shit. I could go on and on but has to be it for now. I still dont give up on SC2 but i am so utterly pissed. QUOTE]On February 08 2014 16:20 pure.Wasted wrote: On February 06 2014 15:14 BronzeKnee wrote: What a completely ignorant and idiotic statement. So you spent months designing something (intending Swarmhosts to give Zerg an aggressive option mid-game) and it is used exactly in the opposite way that you intended (allowing Zergs to turtle in the mid and late game) causing a major game play issue, and it "don't matter"? It does matter. Your design failed. Miserably. Hold yourself accountable. Say you learned from the mistake. Don't dismiss it as a non-issue. And what about the problem of Zergs not having aggressive options mid game to finish off opponents? Does that not matter anymore now? Don't you understand David? You set out to fix a problem, failed, and now say the problem doesn't matter? Well then why did you try to fix it in the first place!? By ignoring his question, you're basically saying saying the initial problem didn't exist and that you have no plans to fix it. This sums up the design team perfectly. They simply have no idea what they are doing. They try to "fix" an issue, fail, and then forget about fixing said problem, because they realize the issue actually wasn't a problem in the first place. And we are left the the "results" (ie Swarmhost) which they then try to somehow fit into the game. And often the "results" overlap with existing units, ie Tempests. Remember Tempests solving the non-existent Muta problem in WOL? Yeah, me too. Now Tempests are just a replacement for the Carrier, performing nearly the same role (long range capital ship). Frankly, I'm not sure what is worse: Blizzard's inability to identify real problems with the game, or their inability to implement in the game what they had planned to implement. Either way, it is really laughable how brain-dead that comment is. David, you really know how to spew the political bullshit. Too bad you aren't as good at designing units that actually perform the role you intend them to. I wish this comment hadn't gotten as buried as it did, because this lack of responsibility and accountability might be the most infuriating thing about the SC2 design process (of which Blizzard has made us a part, for better or worse). If they were constantly trying different things and transparent about their motivations for trying these things, there would still be disagreements -- but they would be about facts. How can we have a meaningful discussion with Blizzard when we don't understand what they want from this game. For instance, they say they want mech to be playable, but the steps they take to make this happen are so obnoxiously indirect, their words become seriously suspect. They buff Ghosts to buff mech? First of all, the buff is extremely one-dimensional (possibly opening new timings), second it does more for bio than mech. If they were being transparent, they would say, "we expect this to increase Terran midgame all-in viability with bio, which would be a desirable secondary outcome, and we're trying to hit two birds with one stone." Then we could retort, "But we don't want Terran to have any more midgame all-in viability with bio than they already do!" and have an evolving discussion, instead of talking about symptoms every time. Are they actually not able to put 2+2 together, or are they being hopelessly optimistic, or are they trying to mislead us? Why do we have to guess what their true motivation is? Why can't they simply fucking say? Then, WHAT KIND of mech do they want to be playable? TvT aggressive mech? ZvT turtle mech? If it's turtle mech without a fix to the game's economy, then thanks but no thanks. Nobody wants that. Even Blizz is gearing up to nerf Ravens, except Ravens don't need a nerf, they need a redesign. After four years, can't this be a dialogue instead of the same non-committal non-answers over and over again? The truth is they completely and utterly botched Heart of the Swarm in every way except a slightly improved PvP, a temporary reprieve in lategame PvZ (there goes that!) and giving Protoss early map presence and aggressive macro openings, which is a fantastic change in theory but in practice it's taken PvT from a stale MU where Terrans win with boring all-ins/early pressure or Protoss win macro wars, and shit all over it, making us look back on those days fondly. David Kim says "we don't redesign in patches" which would be fine if they redesigned in expansions but they don't. The changes to Terran from WOL to HOTS are... one core unit for one MU (which then got nerfed without nerfing the correspondingly buffed Muta), one boring, nichey half-unit (Hellbat), and easier transition from mech to air -- which allows for extremely tedious SkyTerran, thank god for that. And let's not forget the Warhound, which was so awful, Terrans begged to have it go away (and be replaced, which Blizz forgot to do). HOTS alpha+beta took, what, one year? One and a half? Anyone on this forum would be capable of coming up with 50 units in a single day that would be worth testing out. They couldn't do worse than the Warhound, that's for sure. Blizzard tried out three, then cut one. Then they have the gall to not redesign in patches! If you did your job when you were supposed to, maybe you wouldn't have to. Here's my prediction for what happens: SC2 will survive, no doubt boosted by LOTV sales, but viewership will drop steadily and Blizzard will have their proof that putting money into RTS is not a great investment. And then the next time they start talking about competitive RTS, they'll think twice. "Sure," they'll say, "if we'd designed the game better, maybe things would have turned out differently... or maybe they wouldn't have. Why take the risk?" I hope this doesn't happen, but the "come what may" attitude and pathological unwillingness to have an open discussion about the issues hampering this game doesn't give me much hope. [/QUOTE] | ||
|
plogamer
Canada3132 Posts
On February 08 2014 21:46 dargul wrote: Ghost buff did nothing. Even without energy upgrade ghost will have emp when he arrive to the protoss base. And 1 additional snipe per ghost mean nothing. It is the same useless buff as it was with 10% tank attack speed buff. I even rechecked bombers scv pull allin with ghosts - he didn't do energy upgrade for this... without upgrade ghost will be better in defence... but who will build ghosts for defence? don't know may be kim think that terran suppose tp build ghosts instead of 5bunkkers to defend blink allin? What made blink-stalker all-ins very powerful? Ask anyone. It's the templar follow up. A protoss that failed a blink-stalker all-in can easily transition and have storms ready for the Terran counter-attack. Of course, it depends on how badly the all-in fails. If the Protoss fails miserably and loses all his stalkers, then the transition to templar is a non-issue. But in most games, Protoss that fail the blink-stalker all-in (as in, getting repelled without losing too many stalkers) make that transition to templar - even following up with chargelot/archon or chargelot/archon/templar. The follow up to templar is now less potent because the time it takes the Terran to make an effective ghost switch is now reduced by the duration of the moebius reactor. Yes, it doesn't do much to buff the vaunted scv pull. Well, even then, extra emps is always fucking nice when the Protoss splits up templars. I don't see how you can't see that. EMP is a weak spell compared to storm, but it's still pretty nice. Now bomber's scv pull allin with ghosts has extra emp for each ghost he makes. If he made 4 ghosts, he'll have 8 emps rather than 4 by the time his ghosts walk to the Protoss base. That gives more room for error. TLDR, now Terrans can make 5 bunkers to hold blink-stalker and not be completely fucked by the templar switch. (I make seige tanks + bunkers, so I don't need that many but w/e) ps. I'm not certain if it's enough of a buff to Terran yet. Blinkstalkers still are extremely strong, picking off my tanks and shit. But let's wait a bit before we make Terran OP. It's better for the game to balanced in gradual, measured tones, imo. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On February 09 2014 05:09 plogamer wrote: What made blink-stalker all-ins very powerful? Ask anyone. It's the templar follow up. A protoss that failed a blink-stalker all-in can easily transition and have storms ready for the Terran counter-attack. Of course, it depends on how badly the all-in fails. If the Protoss fails miserably and loses all his stalkers, then the transition to templar is a non-issue. But in most games, Protoss that fail the blink-stalker all-in (as in, getting repelled without losing too many stalkers) make that transition to templar - even following up with chargelot/archon or chargelot/archon/templar. The follow up to templar is now less potent because the time it takes the Terran to make an effective ghost switch is now reduced by the duration of the moebius reactor. Yes, it doesn't do much to buff the vaunted scv pull. Well, even then, extra emps is always fucking nice when the Protoss splits up templars. I don't see how you can't see that. EMP is a weak spell compared to storm, but it's still pretty nice. Now bomber's scv pull allin with ghosts has extra emp for each ghost he makes. If he made 4 ghosts, he'll have 8 emps rather than 4 by the time his ghosts walk to the Protoss base. That gives more room for error. TLDR, now Terrans can make 5 bunkers to hold blink-stalker and not be completely fucked by the templar switch. (I make seige tanks + bunkers, so I don't need that many but w/e) Pre-patch: Ghost spawns with 50 energy; 45 seconds are needed to get the EMP, which is done when you reach Protoss' base. Post-patch: Ghost spawns with 75 energy; 135 seconds (2 minuts 15) are needed to get a second EMP, so no, you won't have a second EMP for 3 Ghosts SCVs pulls. The patch has like zero effect on this strategy. Likewise, you're still massively behind if you get mass Bunkers against a Templar transition. There is no 3 Ghosts timing you can use to immediately counter and win. That is why I suggested to lengthen the time it takes to get Storm, to increase the window of vulnerability and thus introduce some risk to 2-bases Blink into Storm instead of being a free attempt at winning the game into being ahead in most cases anyway. | ||
|
TeeTS
Germany2762 Posts
On February 09 2014 05:09 plogamer wrote: What made blink-stalker all-ins very powerful? Ask anyone. It's the templar follow up. A protoss that failed a blink-stalker all-in can easily transition and have storms ready for the Terran counter-attack. Of course, it depends on how badly the all-in fails. If the Protoss fails miserably and loses all his stalkers, then the transition to templar is a non-issue. But in most games, Protoss that fail the blink-stalker all-in (as in, getting repelled without losing too many stalkers) make that transition to templar - even following up with chargelot/archon or chargelot/archon/templar. The follow up to templar is now less potent because the time it takes the Terran to make an effective ghost switch is now reduced by the duration of the moebius reactor. Yes, it doesn't do much to buff the vaunted scv pull. Well, even then, extra emps is always fucking nice when the Protoss splits up templars. I don't see how you can't see that. EMP is a weak spell compared to storm, but it's still pretty nice. Now bomber's scv pull allin with ghosts has extra emp for each ghost he makes. If he made 4 ghosts, he'll have 8 emps rather than 4 by the time his ghosts walk to the Protoss base. That gives more room for error. TLDR, now Terrans can make 5 bunkers to hold blink-stalker and not be completely fucked by the templar switch. (I make seige tanks + bunkers, so I don't need that many but w/e) ps. I'm not certain if it's enough of a buff to Terran yet. Blinkstalkers still are extremely strong, picking off my tanks and shit. But let's wait a bit before we make Terran OP. It's better for the game to balanced in gradual, measured tones, imo. sorry to disappoint you, but there is no extra emp on the allin. ghost get an extra 25 energy now, but not extra 75. Instead of having 75-80 energy, when they reach the protoss base, they have now around 100. this is still far away from 2 emps. and the templar follow up after blink pressure.... yes it´s nice to safe 100/100 for the terran. But it´s not gamechanging at all. you have your ghosts 40seconds earlier for defence. For offensive purposes nothing changes again. So you will be able to stay alive towards the lategame more safely. Yeah, great, TvP lategame, that´s where you want to be as terran! | ||
|
ChoDing
United States740 Posts
| ||
|
plogamer
Canada3132 Posts
On February 09 2014 05:18 TheDwf wrote: Pre-patch: Ghost spawns with 50 energy; 45 seconds are needed to get the EMP, which is done when you reach Protoss' base. Post-patch: Ghost spawns with 75 energy; 135 seconds (2 minuts 15) are needed to get a second EMP, so no, you won't have a second EMP for 3 Ghosts SCVs pulls. The patch has like zero effect on this strategy. Likewise, you're still massively behind if you get mass Bunkers against a Templar transition. There is no 3 Ghosts timing you can use to immediately counter and win. That is why I suggested to lengthen the time it takes to get Storm, to increase the window of vulnerability and thus introduce some risk to 2-bases Blink into Storm instead of being a free attempt at winning the game into being ahead in most cases anyway. I see I was mistaken about the moebius upgrade (since I so rarely used to get it doing Polt's style of marauder heavy army). How about the cloak upgrade becoming immediately available? The templar switch will have next to no detection. It's 120 seconds, - maybe the next step can be to buff that upgrade. The problem with lengthening storm upgrade is possibly the use of storm in PvZ. It could potentially open up timings for Z. Not that it would be bad considering how Z are getting trashed after the Daedulus Point fix. | ||
|
pure.Wasted
Canada4701 Posts
On February 08 2014 20:02 S1eth wrote: Let's just say that your post is unreasonable. You would need 50 months to test 50 units to get any reasonably useful results. I don't need 50 months to see that the Warhound, Tempest, and Oracle are horrible units, while the Widow Mine and Swarm Host have potential depending on how the numbers get tweaked. You seem to think it comes down to balance. It doesn't. Many of the units Blizzard designed for this game plain suck at allowing players to show off mechanical skill and multitasking ability. And your claim that Blizzard tried "3 units" is just plain wrong. You only see one tiny snapshot of the development process. You have no idea of all the single-player-only units, or those that were cut from single player. The sentry alone has like 3 different cut versions that didn't make it into the game. Plain wrong, is it? Of the 7 new units that went into Beta test for HOTS, exactly two functioned the way Blizzard intended them to - Viper and Tempest. The Warhound didn't promote "mech" play, the WM was too bio-friendly, the Hellbat was too drop friendly, the Oracle was completely useless, the Swarm Host is a turtle unit instead of an aggression unit and is now facing a redesign. Again, a whopping 2/7 units worked the way Blizzard wanted them to. Now, whether the fault lies with poor unit design or inevitable emergent behavior, you have to admit that's a pretty shitty result. Any normal person looks at that kind of statistic and says, "Gee whiz, if they're so bad at predicting how units will be used, maybe they shouldn't throw out all their scrapped units that we never saw, and should instead put them into the Beta for us to tinker with, because we might find cooler, better uses for them than Blizzard envisioned." | ||
|
TW
Poland255 Posts
Since then he made many mistakes losing mutas left and right. But once the game went longer, and Inno had to defend several bases Solar could fly with mutas all around the map sniping vikings turrets etc. How the Fuck terran can defend against it. Turrets in late game are joke, left 2 Thors at each base?, does not matter becaue they will be sniped before Vikings arrive. Inno deserved to win that game but still lost. This is fucking rediculous. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25070 Posts
What is potentially interesting IMO is that Inno, one of the finest, if not THE best biomine player is going mech so often of late. | ||
|
Xiphos
Canada7507 Posts
On February 09 2014 07:53 Wombat_NI wrote: I'm not sure he did deserve to win, didn't see enough of the game but saw patches. What is potentially interesting IMO is that Inno, one of the finest, if not THE best biomine player is going mech so often of late. Its the habit from enjoying StarBow too much. | ||
|
TW
Poland255 Posts
Top 5 Terran lost to regular good Zerg. How long Terrans have to be losing like this? Blizzard should wake up before is too late. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25070 Posts
| ||
|
Xiphos
Canada7507 Posts
On February 09 2014 08:01 TW wrote: He went bio in the 3 game, still lost. Top 5 Terran lost to regular good Zerg. How long Terrans have to be losing like this? Blizzard should wake up before is too late. Why should Blizzard wake up? Shouldn't a well designed, well balanced game suppose to have players overcoming all odds to win? | ||
|
Pandain
United States12989 Posts
On February 09 2014 08:01 TW wrote: He went bio in the 3 game, still lost. Top 5 Terran lost to regular good Zerg. How long Terrans have to be losing like this? Blizzard should wake up before is too late. Solar is one of the best Zerg's on the planet right now. He's been a consistent ace for Samsung Telecom and their most valuable player imo. He's not a "regular good Zerg". | ||
|
Faust852
Luxembourg4004 Posts
On February 09 2014 08:03 Xiphos wrote: Why should Blizzard wake up? Shouldn't a well designed, well balanced game suppose to have players overcoming all odds to win? Not that often, and not when it only happens with terrans. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
| ||
|
Squat
Sweden7978 Posts
On February 09 2014 07:58 Xiphos wrote: Its the habit from enjoying StarBow too much. If only Sc2 mech could work like SB mech. Fuck, TvP is so beautiful in that game. | ||
|
TW
Poland255 Posts
Zest is doing fine among Trap, Rain, Parting, Dear, hero... Inno is in a slump, Flash is in code B, Maru lost two last games in proleague so is in a slump probably too, Supernova got owned, Teaja didn't reach ro16 in Asus ROG, TY lost to Parting, MMA lost 2:0 to Paranoid (seriously?) Look, Welmu beat 3:0 Life recently, Teaja lost to another nonkorean Zerg, MMA lost to Paranoid, now tell me when was the last time nonkorean Terran won a match against code S Zerg or Protos??? | ||
|
Glorfindel!
Sweden1815 Posts
On February 09 2014 08:16 TW wrote: Yes I know, Solars is doing fine recently among Soulkey, Roro etc. Zest is doing fine among Trap, Rain, Parting, Dear, hero... Inno is in a slump, Flash is in code B, Maru lost two last games in proleague so is in a slump probably too, Supernova got owned, Teaja didn't reach ro16 in Asus ROG, TY lost to Parting, MMA lost 2:0 to Paranoid (seriously?) Look, Welmu beat 3:0 Life recently, Teaja lost to another nonkorean Zerg, MMA lost to Paranoid, now tell me when was the last time nonkorean Terran won a match against code S Zerg or Protos??? Has that ever happend? :D Talking foreign players btw: Bly 2 - 0 Dear WTF? | ||
| ||
