EPTI'd prefer if they came out and just said that, but I understand. I have to sugarcoat things and play politics at my job too.
Feb 10 Proposed Changes: Pro Opinions - Page 10
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
BronzeKnee
United States5225 Posts
I'd prefer if they came out and just said that, but I understand. I have to sugarcoat things and play politics at my job too. | ||
|
Rockmonsterdude
Sweden169 Posts
 | ||
|
BEARDiaguz
Australia2362 Posts
On February 12 2014 14:08 BronzeKnee wrote: I really get the feeling that is TeamLiquid's passive aggressive way to say to Blizzard, hey some of your ideas are really, really dumb. I'd prefer if they came out and just said that, but I understand. I have to sugarcoat things and play politics at my job too. I'd feel it's more team liquid's way of making more content so people will click it and comment and such. After all this is a Starcraft 2 website. | ||
|
pure.Wasted
Canada4701 Posts
On February 12 2014 15:28 Rockmonsterdude wrote: Meh, do people still think Blizzard will ever fix Starcraft 2 balance? The game is not even that fun. Only boring units. I have give up on Starcraft 2 ladder ever being good. Starbow fighting! SC2 Marine is probably the most exciting unit across both games. High risk, high reward, high mechanical skill ceiling, great versatility, very responsive. On the mechanical side alone, there's focus fire, kiting, stutter step, Stimming, Medivac harass, Storm dodging, Bane dodging, Medivac vs. Muta retreat micro, Bunker pressure micro. So... no. There are fun units in SC2. Though given the extinction of the Terran race, you might be excused for thinking it's no longer in the game... | ||
|
Fjodorov
5007 Posts
| ||
|
Rowrin
United States280 Posts
build they were trying for was something like proxy stargate and oracle(s) while fleet bacon goes up. and 3-4 gate mamacore, building stalkers in-between tempest queues. Use mama vision for tempest spotting to snipe any bunkers/marines/maruaders and stalkers kill marines / keep marines away from tempests. | ||
|
Telmancho
France5 Posts
Also as Terran some of these changes are welcome, can't wait to see which ones actually go through. | ||
|
Eliezar
United States481 Posts
On February 12 2014 13:56 aZealot wrote: I think map restrictions in SC2 tend to be over-stated. There are really, as far as I can see, only two real requirements for a map in SC2. That there be a small ramp into the main, and that there be a reasonable choke or ramp into the natural. The third may be the requirement for a third that is reasonably close to the main and natural (this was especially the case for P in WOL, however given the MSC and PO and faster P tech in HOTS it may not be as hard a requirement as it was). Everything else is open to exploration. Consider, for example, Whirlwhind which was a huge map with a lot of wide open space and large ramps into every expansion bar the main. But, we had some great pro games on that map (and, I personally, played some real fun ladder games on that map). Safe uniform maps are boring maps and will lead to stale gameplay. StarCraft 2 maps are quite cookie cutter and very few so far have been really good. There are certain ideas that were explored at release that were good ideas executed poorly and much of that had to do with map size and not map design. We've had very few 3 start maps which cause an interesting dynamic. We've had very few outer path maps. We've had very 4 ladder maps with back pocket expos, those could be explored more. Basic design seems to revolve around easy natural, hard third or easy natural, easy third. Combo that with number of starting positions and number of attack paths. I'd love to see the resources varied more. Naturals with only 6 minerals and 1 gas would be interesting on a map. It could be so similar to something we've already done, but just have a different mineral layout and everything plays out different. Or 4 start maps where the 2 starts that don't get a player end up having gold minerals. Ninja expos like crazy? But more than anything a faster flowing game with slower battles would be preferred. I don't think maps can do this. | ||
|
BreakfastBurrito
United States893 Posts
I really don't think the top Zergs are struggling vs Protoss right now. I'm not too sure about this point | ||
|
SiroKO
France721 Posts
Simply overkill, like the pros said, blink is not only used as an all-in against T. Cooldown to 15 second will have so many side-effects in PvZ, and even PvP. Sad thing is, people are so frustrated by current P relative dominance that they agree with this absurd nerf. | ||
|
Asturas
Finland587 Posts
But what bothers me, is no changes to Swarm Hosts and Oracles. I still believe that buffing Oracles was one of the biggest mistakes made by Blizzard balancing team. It was a good unit to harass, it became a scary imbalanced unit messing with build orders just by the possibility of happening. And Swarm Hosts? In my opinion it is very poorly designed unit. Almost ruining e-sport, seriously. We have more and more absolutely boring and ridiculous games involving Swarm Hosts. Examples? Recent Proleague, almost all Stephano games on his stream. Also, I like that pro gamers are talking about problem with map pool, about how maps are a big factor when it comes to discussion about Blink all-ins. I think that giving us maps which are non-blink friendly plus nerfing MSC vision is better solution than messing up with Blink cooldown. | ||
|
TAMinator
Australia2706 Posts
| ||
|
Belha
Italy2850 Posts
I LOVE how unbiased sounds TLO (at least compared to most pro players). | ||
|
aZealot
New Zealand5447 Posts
On February 12 2014 17:10 Eliezar wrote: StarCraft 2 maps are quite cookie cutter and very few so far have been really good. There are certain ideas that were explored at release that were good ideas executed poorly and much of that had to do with map size and not map design. We've had very few 3 start maps which cause an interesting dynamic. We've had very few outer path maps. We've had very 4 ladder maps with back pocket expos, those could be explored more. Basic design seems to revolve around easy natural, hard third or easy natural, easy third. Combo that with number of starting positions and number of attack paths. I'd love to see the resources varied more. Naturals with only 6 minerals and 1 gas would be interesting on a map. It could be so similar to something we've already done, but just have a different mineral layout and everything plays out different. Or 4 start maps where the 2 starts that don't get a player end up having gold minerals. Ninja expos like crazy? I agree. I think once we got a certain set of maps in WOL then the development of new maps became, in a sense, path dependent from the template of all existing maps. But, as Artosis said in a recent Meta, what was appropriate for early/mid WOL may not be right for HOTS as the game is more mature. There is scope to explore the game in new ways. The thing is we can't have too many crazy maps all at once. That will create as many problems as having a large number of uniform maps. This is because it will be too much to figure out all at once. I think we as players tend to be quite resistant to change. So, while respecting the standard play we have all gotten used to we could slowly start to experiment with a wider variety of map. Sure, sometimes we may get it wrong, but that is fine. There is no pressure or expectation to get it right all the time. I read that DK made a point for a more diverse map pool a while ago. If so, this is a great path for Blizzard to pursue. I just wanted to make the point that the so-called perfect balanced map (which does not, for example, allow for abusive blink play, or abusive drop play, or abusive muta play) would be boring as fuck to play. You'd do little other than repeat your build for the 54658 time and march out and fight and gg or not. There would be little challenge in a map (or a game) like that. Sure you don't want too many crazy maps season after season. But, neither do you want the same maps season after season. Hopefully, in 2014 we get to a good place somewhere between these extremes. I think the game would be better for it. As to your suggestions, I agree. A map with less resources at the natural and third, but say more at the fourth would be quite an interesting map to play. Even a 3 player layout was something TLO mentioned as worth looking at in the recent Meta. | ||
|
TW
Poland255 Posts
then you are not paying attention. no pro zerg just lets their swarm hosts sit in place until it reaches the phase of the game where creep and static d are literally on every inch of the map, and at that point the game is usually over anyway because zerg just mines the map. did you watch soulkey vs reality? Have you seen Roro - Rain game? Once Roro put his SH on a high ground, he barely moved them. Also moving them once every 2 minutes seems not to be that hard. It is just SH design. Anyway, community wants to change SH, pros want to change them, but still Blizzard refuses to at least try to change them. Everybody hates WOL because of Broodlord Infestor. Currently, HOTS meta is switching more and more into SH turtling play. If Blizzard doesn't redesign them now, in several months everyone's gonna hate HOTS because of SH. If nerf to SH will put Z in disadvantage then buff something else to keep game more interesting. This is the time, it will be too late very soon. | ||
Ragnarork
France9034 Posts
| ||
|
vjcamarena
Spain493 Posts
Thanks for doing this, TL! | ||
|
JustPassingBy
10776 Posts
On February 12 2014 15:28 Rockmonsterdude wrote: Meh, do people still think Blizzard will ever fix Starcraft 2 balance? The game is not even that fun. Only boring units. I have give up on Starcraft 2 ladder ever being good. Starbow fighting! Balance? Sure it will. Whenever a strategy is too strong, just give the opposing units bonus damage against the units in the strategy. But is this really how we want balance to be? | ||
|
MattD
United Kingdom83 Posts
| ||
|
TW
Poland255 Posts
| ||
| ||
Well we hit a deadend here.
