|
On March 13 2014 10:54 avilo wrote:
Swarmhosts are not necessary vs mech in the first place - the viper alone allows Zerg to fight against turtle meching Terrans.
a terran who's not good enough to play in wcs explaining how he knows more about zerg than zergs who are good enough to play in wcs, buffered by a 1000-page theorycraft essay with repeated references to how you literally invented the concept of constructing a raven
i would know this is avilo even without seeing the name
|
On March 13 2014 10:58 Waise wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 10:54 avilo wrote:
Swarmhosts are not necessary vs mech in the first place - the viper alone allows Zerg to fight against turtle meching Terrans. a terran who's not good enough to play in wcs explaining how he knows more about zerg than zergs who are good enough to play in wcs, buffered by a 1000-page theorycraft essay with repeated references to how you literally invented the concept of constructing a raven i would know this is avilo even without seeing the name
I wasn't aware people weren't allowed to know things about other races than just the one they play.
You've helped me see the light.
|
On March 13 2014 11:00 Headnoob wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 10:58 Waise wrote:On March 13 2014 10:54 avilo wrote:
Swarmhosts are not necessary vs mech in the first place - the viper alone allows Zerg to fight against turtle meching Terrans. a terran who's not good enough to play in wcs explaining how he knows more about zerg than zergs who are good enough to play in wcs, buffered by a 1000-page theorycraft essay with repeated references to how you literally invented the concept of constructing a raven i would know this is avilo even without seeing the name I wasn't aware people weren't allowed to know things about other races than just the one they play. You've helped me see the light.
yup, that was definitely my point, it couldn't have been that avilo is a blowhard troll with a history of raging on forums about things above his skill level
|
For the Carrier, we believe the issue is that Carriers are mostly just A move capital ships. The main cool factor of this unit is that they see play once in a while. If they were seen often, We don't think 10+ Carriers being A moved is all that interesting to play with or watch.
Really? Who made them boring units? The way it's worded makes it sounds like he's complaining about his own game.
|
United States23455 Posts
On March 13 2014 10:52 Nauseam wrote:
A) Viewership for WCS and GSL plummets.
Hasn't viewership for WCS and GSL already plummeted a LOT since after Blizzcon?
Nope. If you have watched the viewer counts this season as opposed to season 3 of last year the everyday WCS/GSL's are getting more viewers as is Proleague.
|
People who say things like "Blizzard doesn't understand or care about the game. Blizzard doesn't care about the community." are my favorite people ever. Always good for a little laugh
|
These answers are depressing and not making me want to invest any more time playing this game than I have in the past year.
I strongly believe they're are too afraid to take risks and that it will lead this game to staleness not matter what they do.
And this time there isn't a 3rd expansion. The deadline to make this game fundamentally good is LotV, you don't have another one.
|
Im glad DK is not changing the game to make it BW 2.0 , SC2 is a different game and doesnt want to be BW 2.0.
|
Players don't need to expand more than twice - We disagree. There's a lot of variety out there whether it's 2 base play, 3 base play, or constant expansion play. Take a look at ZvP: it's extremely common for Zerg to take the 4th base around the time Protoss takes the 3rd.
I really wish he wouldn't strawman the argument that there's a soft 3 base cap as "players don't need to expand more than twice", because it just stifles the conversation. Even in WCS casts the 3 base soft cap (in terms of economy, not total number of expansions by the end of the game) is mentioned as fact, with Zerg largely being the exception because it's not uncommon to go to 90 - 100 drones.
|
Northern Ireland27011 Posts
On March 13 2014 11:05 endy wrote:Show nested quote +For the Carrier, we believe the issue is that Carriers are mostly just A move capital ships. The main cool factor of this unit is that they see play once in a while. If they were seen often, We don't think 10+ Carriers being A moved is all that interesting to play with or watch. Really? Who made them boring units? The way it's worded makes it sounds like he's complaining about his own game.
It's cool like, it's not as if there are videos about Carriers specifically, and air units in general and their microability that. Also it's not like the Carrier was microable in Brood War... god.
|
Northern Ireland27011 Posts
On March 13 2014 11:06 Parcelleus wrote:
David Kim is correct, stop whining and get better (basically). However, given how many foreigners love to whine, I expect the whining to continue.
Thanks David, keep to your guns and listen to korean top pros.
AKA some of THE whiniest players out there?
It's not a balance issue for many in the community anyway, it's a fun/enjoyability, no amount of 'get better' fixes that
|
On March 13 2014 11:11 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 11:06 Parcelleus wrote:
David Kim is correct, stop whining and get better (basically). However, given how many foreigners love to whine, I expect the whining to continue.
Thanks David, keep to your guns and listen to korean top pros. AKA some of THE whiniest players out there? It's not a balance issue for many in the community anyway, it's a fun/enjoyability, no amount of 'get better' fixes that
Half the people are saying "Blizz is catering to the casuals and don't even care about competitive play" and the rest say the opposite. They just can't win. They try their best and they just get flamed, so they'd rather be conservative with their changes
|
On March 13 2014 11:11 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 11:06 Parcelleus wrote:
David Kim is correct, stop whining and get better (basically). However, given how many foreigners love to whine, I expect the whining to continue.
Thanks David, keep to your guns and listen to korean top pros. AKA some of THE whiniest players out there? It's not a balance issue for many in the community anyway, it's a fun/enjoyability, no amount of 'get better' fixes that
I enjoy the game as do many others as you can see by the thousands of players that are online playing the game.
The real question is : how many BW players are disappointed by SC2 and want it to be like BW ? I think that is what is most telling about the 'questions' to DK.
SC2 is a great game on it's own terms imho.
|
On March 13 2014 11:10 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 11:05 endy wrote:For the Carrier, we believe the issue is that Carriers are mostly just A move capital ships. The main cool factor of this unit is that they see play once in a while. If they were seen often, We don't think 10+ Carriers being A moved is all that interesting to play with or watch. Really? Who made them boring units? The way it's worded makes it sounds like he's complaining about his own game. It's cool like, it's not as if there are videos about Carriers specifically, and air units in general and their microability that. Also it's not like the Carrier was microable in Brood War... god.
???
|
Q: Stronger Team Colors for PLAYERS?
We're following this issue very closely, and it's something that we do want to address, if we can.
Yes you can, it is really that simple.
Also found this answer that Davie gave to be interesting.
However, they are high priority for the next game.
As in expansion or SC3?
|
Northern Ireland27011 Posts
On March 13 2014 11:15 endy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 11:10 Wombat_NI wrote:On March 13 2014 11:05 endy wrote:For the Carrier, we believe the issue is that Carriers are mostly just A move capital ships. The main cool factor of this unit is that they see play once in a while. If they were seen often, We don't think 10+ Carriers being A moved is all that interesting to play with or watch. Really? Who made them boring units? The way it's worded makes it sounds like he's complaining about his own game. It's cool like, it's not as if there are videos about Carriers specifically, and air units in general and their microability that. Also it's not like the Carrier was microable in Brood War... god. ???
'Carrier is an A-move unit' - Videos exist that Blizzard HAVE WATCHED that explain the factors that made Brood War carriers microable and they don't implement them and then return to 'Carrier is an A-move unit' as if it's some immutable and unchangeable fact of life.
It's infuriating to me, they could have just disregarded the 'Save the Carrier' campaign and scrapped it altogether if they weren't going to make it an interesting unit.
|
On March 13 2014 11:15 endy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 11:10 Wombat_NI wrote:On March 13 2014 11:05 endy wrote:For the Carrier, we believe the issue is that Carriers are mostly just A move capital ships. The main cool factor of this unit is that they see play once in a while. If they were seen often, We don't think 10+ Carriers being A moved is all that interesting to play with or watch. Really? Who made them boring units? The way it's worded makes it sounds like he's complaining about his own game. It's cool like, it's not as if there are videos about Carriers specifically, and air units in general and their microability that. Also it's not like the Carrier was microable in Brood War... god. ???
He's not slamming you he's talking about all the effort LaLush and others put into making videos that explain how to make air units more micro intensive in SC2
|
It's really upsetting that no one ever thinks about non 1v1 gametypes.
Carriers are used very frequently in 2v2. Seriously. I'd say I end up making carriers every 10 games or so, and 1 in 5 Protoss I play will make carriers. About 1 in every 15 games vs Terran will see them making BCs too. It's a completely different world there. With completely different balance concerns (mostly around maps).
If Blizzard paid a bit of attention to team gametypes (and FFA too, I suppose), you might see a lot more people playing SC2 in general which would only be a boost to the scene as a whole, even if 1v1 remained the only pro gametype.
|
On March 13 2014 11:19 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 11:15 endy wrote:On March 13 2014 11:10 Wombat_NI wrote:On March 13 2014 11:05 endy wrote:For the Carrier, we believe the issue is that Carriers are mostly just A move capital ships. The main cool factor of this unit is that they see play once in a while. If they were seen often, We don't think 10+ Carriers being A moved is all that interesting to play with or watch. Really? Who made them boring units? The way it's worded makes it sounds like he's complaining about his own game. It's cool like, it's not as if there are videos about Carriers specifically, and air units in general and their microability that. Also it's not like the Carrier was microable in Brood War... god. ??? 'Carrier is an A-move unit' - Videos exist that Blizzard HAVE WATCHED that explain the factors that made Brood War carriers microable and they don't implement them and then return to 'Carrier is an A-move unit' as if it's some immutable and unchangeable fact of life. It's infuriating to me, they could have just disregarded the 'Save the Carrier' campaign and scrapped it altogether if they weren't going to make it an interesting unit.
Sorry I did not know about those videos so I completely misunderstood your previous post. Yes it is infuriating ;;
|
Don't bring team games into this. It is soooooooooooooo frickin hard to balance a three race game as it is without making all the units do the same thing just with different appearances. If you think they're gonna put serious effort into trying to balance team games you're out of your mind
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
