|
A translation of the interview with David Kim via phone, on a recent episode of Star Haeng Show.
The weekly airing of "Star Haeng Show" has been broadcasting about all things related to StarCraft on OGN in Korea. Earlier this week they aired their over-the-phone interview with David Kim. Below is the English translation of the interview:
Q: Please say hello to the SHS viewers.
A: Hello, my name is David Kim and I work as a Senior Game Designer at the StarCraft development team. Nice to meet you.
Q: What are some of the things that you consider important when releasing a balance patch, and whose opinion do you listen to most?
A: The balance issue to StarCraft II cannot be determined or judged with just one aspect, so we receive feedback from many people. For example, from the pro-players, shoutcasters, forums, communities, ladder statistics, top-tier ladder results, tournament results and etc. We check various aspects and make a decision after taking everything into mind.
Q: What are your thoughts on the recent opinions that Protoss is too strong?
A: We feel that Protoss has been very strong for quite a while now, and Terran have been weak, so we are preparing a patch update. As you know, we are getting ready for a balance test map, and so when the testing is complete, we plan to quickly go ahead with the patch update.
Read the full interview here
|
A: We feel that Protoss has been very strong for quite a while now, and Terran have been weak, so we are preparing a patch update. As you know, we are getting ready for a balance test map, and so when the testing is complete, we plan to quickly go ahead with the patch update.
Didn't Blizzard say that there was no plan for patches, and then the TheDwf article came out and changes suddenly happened?
|
who cares why,
as long as the game strategies diversify at different stages in the game its good
|
I don't know if I read this correctly, but they might one day consider nerfing WG, wow ...
|
Q: What are your thoughts on the opinion that there needs to be more of a micro-controlling aspect and the controls now are too automated and easy?
A: We feel that some of this problem has been shown among the Protoss players where there was less of a difference in terms of control between the very top and mid to top tier players. This is something that isn’t easy to fix within Heart of the Swarm, but something the development team is working very hard on before the beta of our next expansion. We feel that ultimately it is important to make the very top tier players in each race differentiate themselves through such changes (to micro).
Please. SC2 needs more differentiation. Everything and everyone is the same. =\
+1 to changes to warpgate
+1 to BW units and units that feel important and unique
+1 comebacks
+1 economy revamp
+1 "balance" should be a far second to good design/fun
But since it is good to have a (friendly) Brood War unit come into StarCraft II by changing the design and upgrading it, we are in talks about this and are testing some things.
I hope they do not mean automating/making it easier to use by 'upgrading it'. T_T
LotV needs to drastically change SC2. Look at Starbow for ideas.
Last chance, Blizzard.
Please surprise me.
|
On July 17 2014 03:12 Pino wrote:
I don't know if I read this correctly, but they might one day consider nerfing WG, wow ...
He said they would be willing to nerf it if it became a problem but not make major design change. Since it's unlikely WG will ever be considered a major issue balance wise, I doubt there will be any changes in this expansion or the next.
|
Tbh whilst saying he was wiling to nerf it he also said several times that he didnt want to.
Personally i think thats a terrible idea. Half the character of protoss now is the warp gate. Their production is already kind of slow. The real problem is lack of early game options against them and the robustness the nexus speed boost gives them.
Sure you can get into other details, but terran (i dont know z well enough) cant attack them early and damaging their mineral lines effects them least of all races. But at the same tiem you dont want protoss to be back to 'oh crap i missed the ramp ff and now im dead'
|
On July 17 2014 03:15 purakushi wrote:Show nested quote +Q: What are your thoughts on the opinion that there needs to be more of a micro-controlling aspect and the controls now are too automated and easy?
A: We feel that some of this problem has been shown among the Protoss players where there was less of a difference in terms of control between the very top and mid to top tier players. This is something that isn’t easy to fix within Heart of the Swarm, but something the development team is working very hard on before the beta of our next expansion. We feel that ultimately it is important to make the very top tier players in each race differentiate themselves through such changes (to micro). Please. SC2 needs more differentiation. Everything and everyone is the same. =\ +1 to changes to warpgate +1 to BW units Show nested quote +But since it is good to have a (friendly) Brood War unit come into StarCraft II by changing the design and upgrading it, we are in talks about this and are testing some things. I hope they do not mean automating/making it easier to use by 'upgrading it'. T_T
Right when it got removed just before the WoL beta, the SC2 Lurker was basically a Hive-tech, long-range, anti-armor unit very much like the Siege Tank, unlike the BW Lurker. Design changes could be like that.
|
I feel rather good now about LotV since they seem to work hard on it and test a lot. Considering iNcontrol once said, Blizzard didn't plan any major changes or new units in LotV, they definitely changed their plans for the better. New (or old  ) units and a more micro intensive Protoss race! If they somehow change warpgate and forcefield, it might become great.
|
On July 17 2014 03:22 eviltomahawk wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2014 03:15 purakushi wrote:Q: What are your thoughts on the opinion that there needs to be more of a micro-controlling aspect and the controls now are too automated and easy?
A: We feel that some of this problem has been shown among the Protoss players where there was less of a difference in terms of control between the very top and mid to top tier players. This is something that isn’t easy to fix within Heart of the Swarm, but something the development team is working very hard on before the beta of our next expansion. We feel that ultimately it is important to make the very top tier players in each race differentiate themselves through such changes (to micro). Please. SC2 needs more differentiation. Everything and everyone is the same. =\ +1 to changes to warpgate +1 to BW units But since it is good to have a (friendly) Brood War unit come into StarCraft II by changing the design and upgrading it, we are in talks about this and are testing some things. I hope they do not mean automating/making it easier to use by 'upgrading it'. T_T Right when it got removed just before the WoL beta, the sc2 Lurker was basically a Hive-tech, long-range, anti-armor unit very much like the Siege Tank, unlike the BW Lurker. Design changes could be loke that.
I feel like BW lurker would be a great fix to ZvZ, as it would be a small thing allowing a player being behind to catch up, rather than the actual roach war which sometimes seems pointless
|
On July 17 2014 03:22 Musicus wrote:I feel rather good now about LotV since they seem to work hard on it and test a lot. Considering iNcontrol once said, Blizzard didn't plan any major changes or new units in LotV, they definitely changed their plans for the better. New (or old ) units and a more micro intensive Protoss race! If they somehow change warpgate and forcefield, it might become great.
I'm rather worries that since a lot of the RTS team is working on Heroes of the Storm right now, the changes in LotV might not be extensive enough yet and development might be slowed. I guess we'll see what they have planned during Blizzcon.
|
On July 17 2014 03:16 LockeTazeline wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2014 03:12 Pino wrote:
I don't know if I read this correctly, but they might one day consider nerfing WG, wow ... He said they would be willing to nerf it if it became a problem but not make major design change. Since it's unlikely WG will ever be considered a major issue balance wise, I doubt there will be any changes in this expansion or the next.
I hope they realise it's more of a design than a balance issue. Warpgate is a cool idea, but I'd love it, if they made it a late game tech and instead reduce the standard build time for gateway units. We'd see warpgate harass in the lategame and stuff, but no warpgate all-ins early on.
Also Forcefields should have 100 hp/shield or something and should be attackable by units, so they can be broken. Stalkers could've their damage vs armored units as default damage vs everything to balance the early game, together with the shortended build time on normal gateways.
So many options, I really hope Blizzard isn't afraid to try things.
|
On July 17 2014 03:12 Pino wrote:
I don't know if I read this correctly, but they might one day consider nerfing WG, wow ...
Don't think so. From the way he phrased his response, it seems that he does not want to make it sound like there are any units/abilities that are untouchable if a serious problem arises. But he's not hinting that he wants to nerf warp gates.
|
On July 17 2014 03:12 Pino wrote:
I don't know if I read this correctly, but they might one day consider nerfing WG, wow ...
WG should not exist in early game, put WG to Twilight Council. ZvP asymmetrical early stage is just pretty terrible since WoL.
|
On July 17 2014 03:15 purakushi wrote:Show nested quote +Q: What are your thoughts on the opinion that there needs to be more of a micro-controlling aspect and the controls now are too automated and easy?
A: We feel that some of this problem has been shown among the Protoss players where there was less of a difference in terms of control between the very top and mid to top tier players. This is something that isn’t easy to fix within Heart of the Swarm, but something the development team is working very hard on before the beta of our next expansion. We feel that ultimately it is important to make the very top tier players in each race differentiate themselves through such changes (to micro). Please. SC2 needs more differentiation. Everything and everyone is the same. =\ +1 to changes to warpgate +1 to BW units and units that feel important and unique +1 comebacks +1 economy revamp +1 "balance" should be a far second to good design/fun Show nested quote +But since it is good to have a (friendly) Brood War unit come into StarCraft II by changing the design and upgrading it, we are in talks about this and are testing some things. I hope they do not mean automating/making it easier to use by 'upgrading it'. T_T LotV needs to drastically change SC2. Look at Starbow for ideas. Last chance, Blizzard. Please surprise me.
It seems like David Kim gets it.
He insinuated that he's aware of the design problem right now within HotS and that they're carefully "debating" the changes.
|
Yeah it seems like he is more open to drastic changes, albeit non-committal, purely hypothetical statements.
|
Well they have one shot left and they know it.
At this point it's a bigger risk to not be aggressive in their approach with new units/abilities in LotV. It's lot easier to nerf new mechanics if they become too OP than it is to inject new elements into a stale game after the last expansion is out. In fact, the only time I can think of where Blizzard successfully introduced significant design changes through a patch was in D2.
|
On July 17 2014 03:22 Musicus wrote:I feel rather good now about LotV since they seem to work hard on it and test a lot. Considering iNcontrol once said, Blizzard didn't plan any major changes or new units in LotV, they definitely changed their plans for the better. New (or old ) units and a more micro intensive Protoss race! If they somehow change warpgate and forcefield, it might become great.
I would hold back on the excitement until we actually see what they are working on. HOTS was meant to make mech viable vs Z/P. give Protoss a harass and skill showing unit, give Zerg a cool siege unit, and look how all of that turned out...
One of the better interviews from him.
|
*sigh*
So they aren't even really considering the idea of redesigning warp gate, and I got the feeling that it was a "never gonna happen" rather than just a "wait for expansion" sort of deal.
Honestly, redesigning Warp Gate to be more of a real choice, or give it some sort of drawback would open up a whole host of other possibilities balance wise.
I did see a *small* glimmer of hope when he talked about the fact that the team is working on ways to allow players to distinguish themselves.
|
So many Protoss tears incoming, I'm going to swim in a pool with Protoss tears. NA Protoss players will now drop out of masters and diamond league, watch it happen.
User was warned for this post
|
On July 17 2014 03:22 eviltomahawk wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2014 03:15 purakushi wrote:Q: What are your thoughts on the opinion that there needs to be more of a micro-controlling aspect and the controls now are too automated and easy?
A: We feel that some of this problem has been shown among the Protoss players where there was less of a difference in terms of control between the very top and mid to top tier players. This is something that isn’t easy to fix within Heart of the Swarm, but something the development team is working very hard on before the beta of our next expansion. We feel that ultimately it is important to make the very top tier players in each race differentiate themselves through such changes (to micro). Please. SC2 needs more differentiation. Everything and everyone is the same. =\ +1 to changes to warpgate +1 to BW units But since it is good to have a (friendly) Brood War unit come into StarCraft II by changing the design and upgrading it, we are in talks about this and are testing some things. I hope they do not mean automating/making it easier to use by 'upgrading it'. T_T Right when it got removed just before the WoL beta, the SC2 Lurker was basically a Hive-tech, long-range, anti-armor unit very much like the Siege Tank, unlike the BW Lurker. Design changes could be like that. Isn't there a Lurker in the HoTS campaign? How does that work?
|
Northern Ireland174 Posts
On July 17 2014 03:12 Pino wrote:
I don't know if I read this correctly, but they might one day consider nerfing WG, wow ...
I'd like to see an actual advantage to having a Gateway as apposed a Warpgate. You never see a Gateway working after the 6 min mark of any game, it's a no brainer to change it to a warpgate for obvious reasons. All I'd suggest is give Protoss a strategic reason to keep them gateways.
|
On July 17 2014 04:03 bduddy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2014 03:22 eviltomahawk wrote:On July 17 2014 03:15 purakushi wrote:Q: What are your thoughts on the opinion that there needs to be more of a micro-controlling aspect and the controls now are too automated and easy?
A: We feel that some of this problem has been shown among the Protoss players where there was less of a difference in terms of control between the very top and mid to top tier players. This is something that isn’t easy to fix within Heart of the Swarm, but something the development team is working very hard on before the beta of our next expansion. We feel that ultimately it is important to make the very top tier players in each race differentiate themselves through such changes (to micro). Please. SC2 needs more differentiation. Everything and everyone is the same. =\ +1 to changes to warpgate +1 to BW units But since it is good to have a (friendly) Brood War unit come into StarCraft II by changing the design and upgrading it, we are in talks about this and are testing some things. I hope they do not mean automating/making it easier to use by 'upgrading it'. T_T Right when it got removed just before the WoL beta, the SC2 Lurker was basically a Hive-tech, long-range, anti-armor unit very much like the Siege Tank, unlike the BW Lurker. Design changes could be like that. Isn't there a Lurker in the HoTS campaign? How does that work?
Yeah, you can morph a Hydra into a lurker, or at least I think it was the hydra. I thought it was cool but i'm no balance designer so no idea how it would work on the ladder. Would definitely help defect bio run-bys
|
"Q: Some of the cast of SHS(including special guest Flash) said that the patches are released too often. What are your thoughts on this?
Korean players tend to give similar feedback, but the western players tell us absolutely the opposite and say that patches should be made more quickly."
|
On July 17 2014 04:11 Ctone23 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2014 04:03 bduddy wrote:On July 17 2014 03:22 eviltomahawk wrote:On July 17 2014 03:15 purakushi wrote:Q: What are your thoughts on the opinion that there needs to be more of a micro-controlling aspect and the controls now are too automated and easy?
A: We feel that some of this problem has been shown among the Protoss players where there was less of a difference in terms of control between the very top and mid to top tier players. This is something that isn’t easy to fix within Heart of the Swarm, but something the development team is working very hard on before the beta of our next expansion. We feel that ultimately it is important to make the very top tier players in each race differentiate themselves through such changes (to micro). Please. SC2 needs more differentiation. Everything and everyone is the same. =\ +1 to changes to warpgate +1 to BW units But since it is good to have a (friendly) Brood War unit come into StarCraft II by changing the design and upgrading it, we are in talks about this and are testing some things. I hope they do not mean automating/making it easier to use by 'upgrading it'. T_T Right when it got removed just before the WoL beta, the SC2 Lurker was basically a Hive-tech, long-range, anti-armor unit very much like the Siege Tank, unlike the BW Lurker. Design changes could be like that. Isn't there a Lurker in the HoTS campaign? How does that work? Yeah, you can morph a Hydra into a lurker, or at least I think it was the hydra. I thought it was cool but i'm no balance designer so no idea how it would work on the ladder. Would definitely help defect bio run-bys
It was definitely a Hydra morph. I forgot how the campaign Lurker worked, but it may have been like the BW Lurker. There was also an alternative Lurker morph called the Impaler that attacked like a Sunken Colony.
I kinda hope that when LotV comes out, Blizzard would support an official game mode with units and upgrades from all three campaigns. There are already custom maps like that, but it would be sick cool to have a casual matchmaking mode like that.
|
The interview is pretty good, I wish it was completely on TL and not just in link, several of the answers that aren't quoted in OP are very interesting as well
|
On July 17 2014 03:15 purakushi wrote:Show nested quote +Q: What are your thoughts on the opinion that there needs to be more of a micro-controlling aspect and the controls now are too automated and easy?
A: We feel that some of this problem has been shown among the Protoss players where there was less of a difference in terms of control between the very top and mid to top tier players. This is something that isn’t easy to fix within Heart of the Swarm, but something the development team is working very hard on before the beta of our next expansion. We feel that ultimately it is important to make the very top tier players in each race differentiate themselves through such changes (to micro). Please. SC2 needs more differentiation. Everything and everyone is the same. =\ +1 to changes to warpgate +1 to BW units and units that feel important and unique +1 comebacks +1 economy revamp +1 "balance" should be a far second to good design/fun Show nested quote +But since it is good to have a (friendly) Brood War unit come into StarCraft II by changing the design and upgrading it, we are in talks about this and are testing some things. I hope they do not mean automating/making it easier to use by 'upgrading it'. T_T LotV needs to drastically change SC2. Look at Starbow for ideas. Last chance, Blizzard. Please surprise me.
Yeah, starbow is so successful. Clearly the future of RTS right there
I like that he talks about changing how micro works in the next expansion, thats encouraging
|
On July 17 2014 04:10 NihilisticGod wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2014 03:12 Pino wrote:
I don't know if I read this correctly, but they might one day consider nerfing WG, wow ... I'd like to see an actual advantage to having a Gateway as apposed a Warpgate. You never see a Gateway working after the 6 min mark of any game, it's a no brainer to change it to a warpgate for obvious reasons. All I'd suggest is give Protoss a strategic reason to keep them gateways.
Here's how I want Gateways to work:
Warpgate research allows for warp in at a Pylon anywhere, but with a cooldown of double the unit production time. The research would *also* cut down production time of Gateways (not warpgates) by, I don't know, 25%. Increase the transformation time.
This would make Warpgate very obviously used for attack, but simply the prelude to a huge move out, or an attempt to try to finish with one more round of warp ins. Or maybe players leave half and half, or have some dedicated solely to Warp Prism harass, who knows! The point is, there will be more options. And it would also still give players a reason to keep Gateways around, and have a more "normal" macro rotation. If this ends up making Gateways+Warpgate more powerful, then increase research cost/time again.
I don't know, I feel like it's something worth looking into, especially if Blizzard seems unwilling to completely remove/entirely redesign the ability.
|
"We feel that some of this problem has been shown among the Protoss players where there was less of a difference in terms of control between the very top and mid to top tier players"....then make some design changes to Protoss units. Of course there will be no difference in control when zealots can just be a-moved thanks to charge. And no redesign for warpgate *heart breaks* 
|
Warpgate and force-fields will never be redesigned. What may happen is gateways get a buff somehow, plus a nerf to warpgate (could be just a later, more expensive upgrade) to allow for more options.
|
Seriously the only change that really needs to be done to WG is to make it so units take 10 seconds to warp in instead of 5. They could even take 5 seconds off the cooldown period so the overall production cycle still takes the same amount of time. As a Terran right now though, having 15 Zealots in your base in the late game in a matter of seconds is a fucking nightmare to deal with, especially if youre maxed and have to pull army back from the field to go fight it (goodbye addons). Increasing the warp in time will allow more of a chance to kill the prism before that happens. Also, and increased warp in time means Toss will have to warp in reinforcements further away from a fight, or have a greater risk of losing those units if the Terran starts winning the fight, making their ability to win almost any late game fight that much harder.
|
As long as the units are simple to understand, have a clear role, and fullfill that same role at the end (and not another) - then new units is a better idea and more required than BW units..
Pls guys, don't go backwards.. There are other ways units can do the same thing in a more creative way.. If you like SBow - play it, it provides good games, but I don't quite like it cause it copies too much BW, and overall it's not the way to go for IMO
EDIT: speaking of which - Is there someone relatively good in the editor to teach/assist (pm me if you wish), kinda want to try some cool stuff, but doing really slow.. :/
|
On July 17 2014 04:25 Green_25 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2014 03:15 purakushi wrote:Q: What are your thoughts on the opinion that there needs to be more of a micro-controlling aspect and the controls now are too automated and easy?
A: We feel that some of this problem has been shown among the Protoss players where there was less of a difference in terms of control between the very top and mid to top tier players. This is something that isn’t easy to fix within Heart of the Swarm, but something the development team is working very hard on before the beta of our next expansion. We feel that ultimately it is important to make the very top tier players in each race differentiate themselves through such changes (to micro). Please. SC2 needs more differentiation. Everything and everyone is the same. =\ +1 to changes to warpgate +1 to BW units and units that feel important and unique +1 comebacks +1 economy revamp +1 "balance" should be a far second to good design/fun But since it is good to have a (friendly) Brood War unit come into StarCraft II by changing the design and upgrading it, we are in talks about this and are testing some things. I hope they do not mean automating/making it easier to use by 'upgrading it'. T_T LotV needs to drastically change SC2. Look at Starbow for ideas. Last chance, Blizzard. Please surprise me. Yeah, starbow is so successful. Clearly the future of RTS right there I like that he talks about changing how micro works in the next expansion, thats encouraging The fact that Starbow was able to gather such a following, which is still enjoys to a degree (300+ concurrent on last ladder cup), proves that the lessons it brings to the table should not just be ignored. Its actually a really fun game to play, and I believe that the only reason its not played by more people is because the ladder system is to complicated. I'm not saying SC2 is a terrible game or that everyone should abandon it to go play SB, but there are definitely things that they did better in SB than Blizz is doing in SC2, and Blizz should address those concerns.
|
Honestly, they should just change whatever the fuck they want for LotV. Don't worry about some pussy-ass "it's gonna change too much and the casuals won't like it" approach. Adding 2-3 new units for each race in LotV won't really do much to affect the diminishing SC2 player base.
Doing some crazy shit like no WG or no 1a units like the colossus would definitely attract some of players that went to DotA/LoL back into SC2.
|
On July 17 2014 04:02 nuogaiyen wrote:
So many Protoss tears incoming, I'm going to swim in a pool with Protoss tears. NA Protoss players will now drop out of masters and diamond league, watch it happen.
You are almost as delirious as people who expect a warp gate or force field change. While Blizzard is being nonsensical to the point they don't what to do with widow mines anymore - yet cannot help patching it countless times -, a time warp nerf is not going to drastically change anything that players cannot adapt to. Nobody will ever drop from diamond to platinum in terms of skill level because of a nerf like this, that only happens to inactive players. There's a considerable skill gap between platinum and diamond.
|
On July 17 2014 04:53 vhapter wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2014 04:02 nuogaiyen wrote:
So many Protoss tears incoming, I'm going to swim in a pool with Protoss tears. NA Protoss players will now drop out of masters and diamond league, watch it happen. You are almost as delirious as people who expect a warp gate or force field change. While Blizzard is being nonsensical to the point they don't what to do with widow mines anymore - yet cannot help patching it countless times -, a time warp nerf is not going to drastically change anything that players cannot adapt to. Nobody will ever drop from diamond to platinum in terms of skill level because of a nerf like this, that only happens to inactive players. There's a considerable skill gap between platinum and diamond.
I think people are more worried about the widow mine change, but yeah I agree. These are, frankly, minor tweaks. Nothing more. Mothership Core sight range was more game changing, imo
|
On July 17 2014 04:39 VArsovskiSC wrote:
As long as the units are simple to understand, have a clear role, and fullfill that same role at the end (and not another) - then new units is a better idea and more required than BW units..
Pls guys, don't go backwards.. There are other ways units can do the same thing in a more creative way.. If you like SBow - play it, it provides good games, but I don't quite like it cause it copies too much BW, and overall it's not the way to go for IMO
EDIT: Is there someone good in the editor to assist (pm me if you wish), kinda want to try some cool stuff, but doing really slow..
Everyone wants completely new units with innovative design that offer cool game play. Problem is, many of the new SC2 units are inferior in all those departments to their BW counterparts, so if the new "original" stuff is so bad, then we'd rather have the old stuff that we know worked very well.
I'm probably exaggerating here, but i can see some people on the design team be a bit offended by the heavy criticism of things like WP, FF, SH, Warhound, MSC, etc and at the desire for the "older" BW designed units to come back.
IMO WG and FF and maybe the way the economy is set up are sacred cows to the design team. It's their "original" stuff. No matter how many arguments you would bring that altering these things would improve the game, they will not listen.
|
On July 17 2014 04:25 Green_25 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2014 03:15 purakushi wrote:Q: What are your thoughts on the opinion that there needs to be more of a micro-controlling aspect and the controls now are too automated and easy?
A: We feel that some of this problem has been shown among the Protoss players where there was less of a difference in terms of control between the very top and mid to top tier players. This is something that isn’t easy to fix within Heart of the Swarm, but something the development team is working very hard on before the beta of our next expansion. We feel that ultimately it is important to make the very top tier players in each race differentiate themselves through such changes (to micro). Please. SC2 needs more differentiation. Everything and everyone is the same. =\ +1 to changes to warpgate +1 to BW units and units that feel important and unique +1 comebacks +1 economy revamp +1 "balance" should be a far second to good design/fun But since it is good to have a (friendly) Brood War unit come into StarCraft II by changing the design and upgrading it, we are in talks about this and are testing some things. I hope they do not mean automating/making it easier to use by 'upgrading it'. T_T LotV needs to drastically change SC2. Look at Starbow for ideas. Last chance, Blizzard. Please surprise me. Yeah, starbow is so successful. Clearly the future of RTS right there I like that he talks about changing how micro works in the next expansion, thats encouraging
It's about the ideas, not the relative success. Expecting a homegrown mod to in any way compete with the officially endorsed and heavily subsidized version is asinine. It has some interesting concepts that are worth exploring. That's really all that is being said.
|
I think I have read something quite dangerous as a balance designer from this interview...
The balance issue to StarCraft II cannot be determined or judged with just one aspect, so we receive feedback from many people. For example, from the pro-players, shoutcasters, forums, communities, ladder statistics, top-tier ladder results, tournament results and etc. We check various aspects and make a decision after taking everything into mind.
One thing he simply did not mention is about mechanics; it's all about feedback and statistics, especially at the top level. While this methodology has its merit (basically, you cannot listen to lower skilled players too much as it's hard to distinguish their complaint as from their skill or from a more fundamental problem.), it is quite flawed.
One obvious flaw is the lag. Statistics needs time to be established. Especially when you only look at the top, the samples become more scarce. So even if the change is in the right direction, it often comes too late.
Another big problem is that there are problems that will not manifest at top level. There are things that can be overcome by skill, but nevertheless should not be. The Photon Overcharge is one example of such problem. Many people say a 1-click 1 minute defense is too easy to hold of any early aggression; yet from statistics it does not show that Protoss always have clear edge after early game. The thing is that, any early game defense advantage can be compensated by mid game weaknesses; and in this case, the weakness of early Protoss gateway units are the balancing counterpoint of the Photon Overcharge. So, in David Kim's sense and probably also from the statistics, this setting is actually balanced.
But of course, that is not the whole story. The easy early defense leads to all sorts of all-in builds that makes Protoss a lot easier to play at lower level. Basically you practice those builds, try to do them correctly, and you can already get yourself to Platinum or even diamonds. The problem is, getting on the offense being Protoss on this setting is easier, while getting the proper defense being Terran/Zerg is harder. On the top these evens out, but it is still a problem.
I think it is necessary to look into mechanics to really understand what makes such differences and how it needs to be fixed. For this particular example, the mothership core and photon overcharge is meant to protect the early weakness but it brings too much aggression potential. So maybe nerfing timewarp is a potential way; slowing mothership core down can be another; or maybe, one can stop photon overcharge by killing the mothership core. I mean, there are different ways, but the best changes tend to be deduced from mechanics, not statistics.
|
On July 17 2014 04:48 HelloSon wrote:
Honestly, they should just change whatever the fuck they want for LotV. Don't worry about some pussy-ass "it's gonna change too much and the casuals won't like it" approach. Adding 2-3 new units for each race in LotV won't really do much to affect the diminishing SC2 player base.
Doing some crazy shit like no WG or no 1a units like the colossus would definitely attract some of players that went to DotA/LoL back into SC2.
I don't think casuals care about the 'design' so much as the game just being stale, so any changes are good. Overall though moba players aren't playing starcraft because you removed collosi, they have their game and we have ours, its not changing. Don't worry about it
|
On July 17 2014 03:46 c0ldfusion wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2014 03:15 purakushi wrote:Q: What are your thoughts on the opinion that there needs to be more of a micro-controlling aspect and the controls now are too automated and easy?
A: We feel that some of this problem has been shown among the Protoss players where there was less of a difference in terms of control between the very top and mid to top tier players. This is something that isn’t easy to fix within Heart of the Swarm, but something the development team is working very hard on before the beta of our next expansion. We feel that ultimately it is important to make the very top tier players in each race differentiate themselves through such changes (to micro). Please. SC2 needs more differentiation. Everything and everyone is the same. =\ +1 to changes to warpgate +1 to BW units and units that feel important and unique +1 comebacks +1 economy revamp +1 "balance" should be a far second to good design/fun But since it is good to have a (friendly) Brood War unit come into StarCraft II by changing the design and upgrading it, we are in talks about this and are testing some things. I hope they do not mean automating/making it easier to use by 'upgrading it'. T_T LotV needs to drastically change SC2. Look at Starbow for ideas. Last chance, Blizzard. Please surprise me. It seems like David Kim gets it. He insinuated that he's aware of the design problem right now within HotS and that they're carefully "debating" the changes.
I hope so. That's the part I was going to quote as well. I really hope it's not just lip service that it's usually been in the past.
I'd still be fine with them coming out with something new and fantastic, just not another swarm host.
On July 17 2014 04:24 eviltomahawk wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2014 04:11 Ctone23 wrote:On July 17 2014 04:03 bduddy wrote:On July 17 2014 03:22 eviltomahawk wrote:On July 17 2014 03:15 purakushi wrote:Q: What are your thoughts on the opinion that there needs to be more of a micro-controlling aspect and the controls now are too automated and easy?
A: We feel that some of this problem has been shown among the Protoss players where there was less of a difference in terms of control between the very top and mid to top tier players. This is something that isn’t easy to fix within Heart of the Swarm, but something the development team is working very hard on before the beta of our next expansion. We feel that ultimately it is important to make the very top tier players in each race differentiate themselves through such changes (to micro). Please. SC2 needs more differentiation. Everything and everyone is the same. =\ +1 to changes to warpgate +1 to BW units But since it is good to have a (friendly) Brood War unit come into StarCraft II by changing the design and upgrading it, we are in talks about this and are testing some things. I hope they do not mean automating/making it easier to use by 'upgrading it'. T_T Right when it got removed just before the WoL beta, the SC2 Lurker was basically a Hive-tech, long-range, anti-armor unit very much like the Siege Tank, unlike the BW Lurker. Design changes could be like that. Isn't there a Lurker in the HoTS campaign? How does that work? Yeah, you can morph a Hydra into a lurker, or at least I think it was the hydra. I thought it was cool but i'm no balance designer so no idea how it would work on the ladder. Would definitely help defect bio run-bys It was definitely a Hydra morph. I forgot how the campaign Lurker worked, but it may have been like the BW Lurker. There was also an alternative Lurker morph called the Impaler that attacked like a Sunken Colony. I kinda hope that when LotV comes out, Blizzard would support an official game mode with units and upgrades from all three campaigns. There are already custom maps like that, but it would be sick cool to have a casual matchmaking mode like that.
Not sure I ever saw that idea before, but I'd really like it.
|
On July 17 2014 03:15 purakushi wrote:Show nested quote +Q: What are your thoughts on the opinion that there needs to be more of a micro-controlling aspect and the controls now are too automated and easy?
A: We feel that some of this problem has been shown among the Protoss players where there was less of a difference in terms of control between the very top and mid to top tier players. This is something that isn’t easy to fix within Heart of the Swarm, but something the development team is working very hard on before the beta of our next expansion. We feel that ultimately it is important to make the very top tier players in each race differentiate themselves through such changes (to micro). Please. SC2 needs more differentiation. Everything and everyone is the same. =\ +1 to changes to warpgate +1 to BW units and units that feel important and unique +1 comebacks +1 economy revamp +1 "balance" should be a far second to good design/fun Show nested quote +But since it is good to have a (friendly) Brood War unit come into StarCraft II by changing the design and upgrading it, we are in talks about this and are testing some things. I hope they do not mean automating/making it easier to use by 'upgrading it'. T_T LotV needs to drastically change SC2. Look at Starbow for ideas. Last chance, Blizzard. Please surprise me.
I'm going to contradict your opinion. I don't want a Brood War II, I really like the game that was released as SC II: WoL and HotS. You know, you should maybe consider to play some Starbow or Brood War, because that's why that stuff exists, and stop saying "SC2 should be like the game I want it to be". I do like Age of Empires, but I'm not saying "do some AoE mechanics to SC2 because else it sucks", which is what you're saying tbh.
|
We feel that some of this problem has been shown among the Protoss players where there was less of a difference in terms of control between the very top and mid to top tier players. This is something that isn’t easy to fix within Heart of the Swarm, but something the development team is working very hard on before the beta of our next expansion. We feel that ultimately it is important to make the very top tier players in each race differentiate themselves through such changes (to micro).
A: Units like the Battlecruiser and Carrier aren’t easy to control, but are units that don’t require a lot of skills whether you are a top class player or lower class player. If we were to make changes, it would be first to fix the differentiating factor and then strengthening them.
These are the important ones in my opinion.
If they really take this approach for LotV and really consider changing things for the sake of diverse gameplay, it can only become even more awesome than current SC2.
Also I like that they do communicate these kinds of thoughts, that they say they take feedback very seriously, but also that they do not intend to change things like Warp Gate just for the sake of testing some theory that may be popular within certain groups of the community.
|
I don't understand this obsession with the widow mine. It's fine as it is now. I want to see mech and tanks in TvP. Nerf the immortal. At least nerf it's shield ability so things can hurt them.
|
On July 17 2014 05:58 boxerfred wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2014 03:15 purakushi wrote:Q: What are your thoughts on the opinion that there needs to be more of a micro-controlling aspect and the controls now are too automated and easy?
A: We feel that some of this problem has been shown among the Protoss players where there was less of a difference in terms of control between the very top and mid to top tier players. This is something that isn’t easy to fix within Heart of the Swarm, but something the development team is working very hard on before the beta of our next expansion. We feel that ultimately it is important to make the very top tier players in each race differentiate themselves through such changes (to micro). Please. SC2 needs more differentiation. Everything and everyone is the same. =\ +1 to changes to warpgate +1 to BW units and units that feel important and unique +1 comebacks +1 economy revamp +1 "balance" should be a far second to good design/fun But since it is good to have a (friendly) Brood War unit come into StarCraft II by changing the design and upgrading it, we are in talks about this and are testing some things. I hope they do not mean automating/making it easier to use by 'upgrading it'. T_T LotV needs to drastically change SC2. Look at Starbow for ideas. Last chance, Blizzard. Please surprise me. I'm going to contradict your opinion. I don't want a Brood War II, I really like the game that was released as SC II: WoL and HotS. You know, you should maybe consider to play some Starbow or Brood War, because that's why that stuff exists, and stop saying "SC2 should be like the game I want it to be". I do like Age of Empires, but I'm not saying "do some AoE mechanics to SC2 because else it sucks", which is what you're saying tbh.
It's not that I necessarily want it to be more like BW. I want SC2 to be a better game. Whether or not ideas come from BW or wherever makes no difference, but there are already great designs out there that Blizzard should be open to. Not putting them in SC2 just because they were in BW should not be a reason to not include the mechanic or unit. Sure, BW could have been better, but this is all about solving the many issues that SC2 has.
|
On July 17 2014 06:29 BruMeister wrote:
I don't understand this obsession with the widow mine. It's fine as it is now. I want to see mech and tanks in TvZ. Nerf the immortal. At least nerf it's shield ability so things can hurt them.
I could see giving tanks something like +5 damage vs shields per vehicle weapons upgrade.
|
we receive feedback from many people. For example, from the pro-players, shoutcasters, forums, communities, ladder statistics, top-tier ladder results, tournament results and etc. We check various aspects and make a decision after taking everything into mind.
We need a place and a system to aggregate all pro and shoutcaster opinions with the names on them. If overwhelming majority of the recognized community members will say that we need this and that then DK will be unable to hide behind this dodgy F word "we do what we do based on some top secret feedbacks - primary from my butt."
|
We feel that some of this problem has been shown among the Protoss players where there was less of a difference in terms of control between the very top and mid to top tier players.
So glad this aspect of SC2 has been officially acknowledged. People have been saying it for years. Increasing the diversity of mechanics and strategy is definitely the right way to go so amazing players can show how much better they really are.
|
Q: Some of the cast of SHS(including special guest Flash) said that the patches are released too often. What are your thoughts on this?
A: Korean players tend to give similar feedback, but the western players tell us absolutely the opposite and say that patches should be made more quickly.
Com'on
the only reason why widow mine got nerf "during the beginning of hots" aka "innovation era" it's because teamliquid users were whining too much
During that momment, it was absolutely true that zergs were getting immuned to the widow mines.
and look at the current situation. terrans have suffered about a year.
even DK admits that widowmine nerf was the terrible mistake he ever made.
->" For the widow mine on the other hand, we received a lot of feedback saying that this is too much of a problem in TvZ in Heart of the Swarm. While we received many feedbacks from the players and community, we also felt that it was too strong, leading us to nerf the widow mine. However, for that instance, we feel that maybe it would have been better to leave it up to the players a little bit more. "
so, my conclusion is. Western people have to stop whining and crying for the balance.
David Kim have killed SC2 balance because of that.
|
On July 17 2014 06:48 Cheeseling wrote:Show nested quote +we receive feedback from many people. For example, from the pro-players, shoutcasters, forums, communities, ladder statistics, top-tier ladder results, tournament results and etc. We check various aspects and make a decision after taking everything into mind. We need a place and a system to aggregate all pro and shoutcaster opinions with the names on them. If overwhelming majority of the recognized community members will say that we need this and that then DK will be unable to hide behind this dodgy F word "we do what we do based on some top secret feedbacks - primary from my butt."
I heard a long while back that there may have been a hidden pro-only forum on Battle.net. I dunno if it still exists, if ever. There is already a lot of evidence of David Kim talking with pros. People have posted B.net chat screenshots with DK. Some players have talked about exchanging emails with DK. I guess people don't feel like sharing these conversations explicitly too much.
|
The thing is, balance is not the biggest problem in the game right now. Yeah it could use a bit of tweaks here and there (which they're doing). What it really needs is a major design overhaul.
|
On July 17 2014 05:58 boxerfred wrote:
I'm going to contradict your opinion. I don't want a Brood War II, I really like the game that was released as SC II: WoL and HotS. You know, you should maybe consider to play some Starbow or Brood War, because that's why that stuff exists, and stop saying "SC2 should be like the game I want it to be". I do like Age of Empires, but I'm not saying "do some AoE mechanics to SC2 because else it sucks", which is what you're saying tbh.
I'm going to utterly agree with your contradiction.
I notice nobody is quoting this bit of the interview:
There have been some misunderstandings in communicating with the Korean players because they tend to say that their feedback was not taken into account. The reality is that some Protoss player will say that Protoss should be buffed, Zergs will say Protoss are too strong and should be nerfed, and there will be another player that will say the exact opposite to both of them.
The never-ending problem is that 99% of players and spectators, and even 95%+ of top pros have absolutely no idea about game design and balancing. Being good at playing a game makes you good at designing one in about the same way that eating a lot makes you a good chef.
So what happens is that in forums, the most plausibly and forcefully stated opinions formed by people who have no experience in the field they're opining on get repeated so often by other people who equally don't know what they're talking about that at some point they become accepted truths on the basis of neither evidence nor rigorous testing of the alternatives. And then when Blizzard says "we tested that but it didn't have the effect you say it would", posters invariably believe the opinion of the person who hasn't actually implemented the change and tested it over the person who has, because "lol David Kim, amirite?"
(And then occasionally, as with the Mothership Core vision nerf, Blizzard will push something live that they already know from testing isn't particularly effective, presumably just to shut the community up.)
And when the community actually does put its alternatives to the test, they unsurprisingly turn out not to be magical solutions to everyone's problems.
I dropped a pretty significant donation on one of the higher profile Starbow tournaments because I was genuinely interested in what pro players would do with the game, and wanted to help make sure there was an incentive for them to compete. There were a couple of fun games, but the promised "lots of come-backs and battles spread out over the map" didn't eventuate.
It was mostly mid-game timing pushes that won the game if they succeeded and lost it if they failed, with the buffed defenders advantage just making the game drag out pointlessly after it was already over. Which I guess means they at least partly succeeded in making the game more like Brood War.
|
With the design philosophy they have, I really don't see what will keep this game going 2 years after the release of LotV.
|
On July 17 2014 07:18 Noocta wrote:
With the design philosophy they have, I really don't see what will keep this game going 2 years after the release of LotV.
We will keep it going .
|
On July 17 2014 07:14 carlfish wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2014 05:58 boxerfred wrote:
I'm going to contradict your opinion. I don't want a Brood War II, I really like the game that was released as SC II: WoL and HotS. You know, you should maybe consider to play some Starbow or Brood War, because that's why that stuff exists, and stop saying "SC2 should be like the game I want it to be". I do like Age of Empires, but I'm not saying "do some AoE mechanics to SC2 because else it sucks", which is what you're saying tbh.
I'm going to utterly agree with your contradiction. I notice nobody is quoting this bit of the interview: Show nested quote + There have been some misunderstandings in communicating with the Korean players because they tend to say that their feedback was not taken into account. The reality is that some Protoss player will say that Protoss should be buffed, Zergs will say Protoss are too strong and should be nerfed, and there will be another player that will say the exact opposite to both of them. The never-ending problem is that 99% of players and spectators, and even 95%+ of top pros have absolutely no idea about game design and balancing. Being good at playing a game makes you good at designing one in about the same way that eating a lot makes you a good chef. So what happens is that in forums, the most plausibly and forcefully stated opinions formed by people who have no experience in the field they're opining on get repeated so often by other people who equally don't know what they're talking about that at some point they become accepted truths on the basis of neither evidence nor rigorous testing of the alternatives. And then when Blizzard says "we tested that but it didn't have the effect you say it would", posters invariably believe the opinion of the person who hasn't actually implemented the change and tested it over the person who has, because "lol David Kim, amirite?"
I appreciate your tone of calm rationality, but the fact of the matter is the SC2 design team simply doesn't inspire much faith at this point. They don't have any clear vision for what they want from this game other than "50-50," and even if they did, I doubt they have the balls to really go for it.
Take David Kim's statement that they're looking into ways for top Protosses to distinguish themselves from lower tier Protosses. On the surface, that sounds fantastic! Problem is, 1) this is something people have been talking about since literally the WOL beta, where have DK and his people been for the last 4 years that they've suddenly realized this is a problem that needs solving, but not with the first expansion pack which cost us money? 2) their fix will invariably be "introduce one new Protoss unit that takes some skill to use" which does nothing for 99% of games, and they're not going to touch their precious Zealot/Colossus/Immortal/Dark Templar/Tempest/Void Ray designs which are the ones that actually matter, so this great sentiment will never materialize in a meaningful way, and 3) there's a chance it won't materialize period!!! Blizzard said they wanted mech in TvP for HOTS, and what did we get? Nothing. Did they even try? If you want to count the Warhound as trying, sure, they gave it their A++ effort.
Fans aren't always right... but sometimes they are. Sometimes it's obvious that they're right. The fact that the Colossus shouldn't have made it out of WOL Beta in its current state is a fact, and the fact that it's taken 4 years for Blizzard to CONSIDER doing something about this (maybe possibly) is a travesty.
|
Make warpgate on a spellcaster like the oracle so it has some serious use lategame and will feel strategic about it.
Then remove warpgate from gateways and make zealot and stalker perhaps better. Nerf blink and charge.
More micro war between zealots/stalker vs bio and zerg AND get the macro war in there to, thats why i believe there is a good thing to just remove the warpgate.
|
Q: What are your thoughts on the opinion that there needs to be more of a micro-controlling aspect and the controls now are too automated and easy?
A: We feel that some of this problem has been shown among the Protoss players where there was less of a difference in terms of control between the very top and mid to top tier players. This is something that isn’t easy to fix within Heart of the Swarm, but something the development team is working very hard on before the beta of our next expansion. We feel that ultimately it is important to make the very top tier players in each race differentiate themselves through such changes (to micro).
Q: Is there anything that you can hint on Legacy of the Void?
A: What we can tell you now is that the StarCraft II development team has been working hard on the next expansion for a long time. As for multiplayer, we not only consider what we feel would be ideal for the new expansion, but also listen, debate, and test the feedback we received from our community, players, and etc. to figure out what is best.
At least it's nice to know that they're working on LotV.
|
A game of SC2 has feedback that is just too wild for a great competitive game. It's a pretty balanced game between players A and B until A or B makes a move that gives them an insurmountable lead and they can then bludgeon their opponent to death with their unstoppable force.
An ideal game progression is one where the lead changes hands but the better player eventually wins.
|
On July 17 2014 08:20 pure.Wasted wrote:
Fans aren't always right... but sometimes they are. Sometimes it's obvious that they're right. The fact that the Colossus shouldn't have made it out of WOL Beta in its current state is a fact, and the fact that it's taken 4 years for Blizzard to CONSIDER doing something about this (maybe possibly) is a travesty.
And yet they keep buffing the widow mine, which will lead to more colossus play in PvT since it's the obvious counter. They should remove the bonus damage to shields now that they're bringing back the old widow mine, and buff vikings instead to discourage colossus play.
|
On July 17 2014 06:58 neverlose9999 wrote:
so, my conclusion is. Western people have to stop whining and crying for the balance.
David Kim have killed SC2 balance because of that.
Happening since WoL beta. Koreans cry as well though, but they know that every change hurts their training. Just imagine Mech would be the only thing that works vs Z. Terrans would just get destroyed for 2 years straight until they could compete again. (have to train mech and bio instead of only bio and hope for the best in TvT)
|
On July 17 2014 09:54 Cheren wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2014 08:20 pure.Wasted wrote:
Fans aren't always right... but sometimes they are. Sometimes it's obvious that they're right. The fact that the Colossus shouldn't have made it out of WOL Beta in its current state is a fact, and the fact that it's taken 4 years for Blizzard to CONSIDER doing something about this (maybe possibly) is a travesty. And yet they keep buffing the widow mine, which will lead to more colossus play in PvT since it's the obvious counter. They should remove the bonus damage to shields now that they're bringing back the old widow mine, and buff vikings instead to discourage colossus play.
Honestly? I like your suggestion, but I think doing both is fine. Templar openings were definitely feeling a bit too strong pre +shields buff. Now it could be that the only reason that's true is the econ/upgrade advantage Protoss had thanks to the multitude of scary openings at their disposal, but it could be that that only explains part of it.
Strong WM is a nice counter to Blink pressure builds, and gives Terrans some strong pressure builds of their own. These are both good things. Buffing Vikings on top of that would incentivize Protoss to go Templar, and that would be great, too.
|
Sorry, is this the show that had Flash sit in on, with the recent translation?
|
They won't remove or change Warp Gate. As much as it would help the game, it won't happen.
And Blizzard's ideas for allowing better players to distinguish themselves haven't worked out too well...
|
Quite an honest and fair interview. I think we can a bit more optimistic about LOTV now. Maybe the main reason that Blizzard is not buffing Tank in TvP is that they are planning to tweak the tank more. To allow more micro differentiate. (Pro that target fire and control the tanks)
Right now, a lot of units are quite 1 dimensional...
Widow mine is actually not a bad place to use to tweak balance for HOTS, as there is wide variation on degree of success how the opponent disarm the mine fields.
Over all a +1
|
On July 17 2014 08:58 TopRamen wrote:
A game of SC2 has feedback that is just too wild for a great competitive game. It's a pretty balanced game between players A and B until A or B makes a move that gives them an insurmountable lead and they can then bludgeon their opponent to death with their unstoppable force.
An ideal game progression is one where the lead changes hands but the better player eventually wins.
I disagree. Honestly, it's not all that important that the better player eventually wins. This is not the case in Football(American or World), Poker, Settlers of Catan, or any number of popular competitive games. I would agree that good game design should avoid snowballing and award skill, but a great game should also be dramatic, unpredictable and open to any number of dynamic strategies.
It looks like LoTV is going to take multiplayer in a bit of more hardcore direction. This makes sense. Any number of casual players have left and at this point they're not coming back. (Though they should come back for the campaign. Give Blizzard credit; HoTS was a sizable improvement on WOL as a single player game) It was ambitious of Blizzard to think that a multiplayer RTS would have lasting appeal to "casual" gamers. I would expect some more micro-intensive units for LoTV. Which is not to say LoTV should turn SC2 into BW. I don't think I'd play the game if had BW's terrible pathing. Or if it didn't have auto-mining for that matter.
|
sounds like david kim knows what he is doing.
thanks to Mr. Kim for doing a tough interview with some tough questions and providing some pretty deep insight.
i wonder how long it is before Browder announces he is leaving SC2 completely?
|
Man, what would people whine about if Warp gate was removed. I am sure they would find something.
I love how every interview DK says the same thing about pro gamers and that they all want their own race buffed/other races nerfed. I also like how Korean and Western players want things changed at different speeds. Its almost like he confirms what we already knew to be true. I do like his comment about carriers and BCs, that they are both kinda deathbally and not really a blast to watch. Cause its true.
|
On July 17 2014 12:09 Plansix wrote:
I do like his comment about carriers and BCs, that they are both kinda deathbally and not really a blast to watch. Cause its true.
You kind of expect a little more analysis and insight from the man in charge after 4 years, though, don't you?
Until he actually does something about it (makes the units more interesting, then makes them viable), all it really is is a reasonable excuse for doing nothing to improve the game. I'd have been more impressed if he'd said this... say, as they were tinkering with Tempest/new BC abilities for HOTS, when this brilliant realization could have actually been acted upon.
|
On July 17 2014 12:14 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2014 12:09 Plansix wrote:
I do like his comment about carriers and BCs, that they are both kinda deathbally and not really a blast to watch. Cause its true. You kind of expect a little more analysis and insight from the man in charge after 4 years, though, don't you? Until he actually does something about it (makes the units more interesting, then makes them viable), all it really is is a reasonable excuse for doing nothing to improve the game. I'd have been more impressed if he'd said this... say, as they were tinkering with Tempest/new BC abilities for HOTS, when this brilliant realization could have actually been acted upon.
The problem is "improving" things requires you to do a shit ton of testing. Because before you improve something, you need to make it shitty over and over and over. Since Blizzard is working on Hearthstone and Heroes, that time is not now. There is no awesome switch that they can just flip or just "take community suggests that are awesome, while not taking shitty ones" button either.
And you do know the reason why he doesn't elaborate right? English is his second language. He speaks English well, but you can tell he runs up against the limits of his vocabulary a lot. You can tell because he uses a lot of the same adjectives over and over.
|
On July 17 2014 12:20 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2014 12:14 pure.Wasted wrote:On July 17 2014 12:09 Plansix wrote:
I do like his comment about carriers and BCs, that they are both kinda deathbally and not really a blast to watch. Cause its true. You kind of expect a little more analysis and insight from the man in charge after 4 years, though, don't you? Until he actually does something about it (makes the units more interesting, then makes them viable), all it really is is a reasonable excuse for doing nothing to improve the game. I'd have been more impressed if he'd said this... say, as they were tinkering with Tempest/new BC abilities for HOTS, when this brilliant realization could have actually been acted upon. The problem is "improving" things requires you to do a shit ton of testing. Because before you improve something, you need to make it shitty over and over and over. Since Blizzard is working on Hearthstone and Heroes, that time is not now. There is no awesome switch that they can just flip or just "take community suggests that are awesome, while not taking shitty ones" button either.
There is a "take community suggests that are awesome, while not taking shitty ones" button.
It's called Heart of the Swarm Beta. "Oops" isn't really a justifiable defense for not using it, as far as I'm concerned, especially not when they've never actually said "We didn't take enough advantage of it, but that'll change next time." I absolutely expect LOTV Beta to be the same polish-fest that WOL and HOTS Betas were.
And you do know the reason why he doesn't elaborate right? English is his second language. He speaks English well, but you can tell he runs up against the limits of his vocabulary a lot. You can tell because he uses a lot of the same adjectives over and over.
Where did you get that I have a problem with his vocabulary? My issue isn't with the way he talks about things, it's the fact that these things should have been talked about (by him or DB or anyone else) years ago. For all I know at this point, they didn't even arrive at these thoughts independently, they just read someone on a forum saying "BCs and Carriers would be A-move" and took that as their own position. (Fortunate how it means they don't need to do any work until LOTV, but that's pure coincidence, I'm sure) I've never read anything from Blizzard that was as insightful as Xequecal's analysis of Mech play, or any number of posters' analysis of SC2 vs SC1 economies. Blizz devs have never demonstrated to me that they actually understand what's going on in their game, and how to manipulate the things that are going on to make a superior game in the future.
I still remember Blizz saying they want to make mech viable and then introducing the A-move, massable bio-unit-in-mech-clothing Warhound. That was only one year ago. What does that tell you about what they understand of mech play?
|
Is this post serious?????
We feel that Protoss has been very strong for quite a while now,???? so that is clear since 1 1/2 year and no one does something agains it????
is that a joke? i mean that game is about laddering and ppoints some earn their money with it ....and then there is a post on JULY 17th that protoss is too strong but we didnt change anything since 1 1/2 years????
so that means if im a zerg(terran) player i could have retired the last 1 1/2 years? is it some kind of that???
or just play a unfair "balanced" price competition game ??
where is the goal of playing an imbalanced game if one race is too strong??????
nice choice for i dont know over a 1.000.000. starcraft players out there
|
Ah I broke my rule about posting in these balance threads. I don't realty know what blizzard knows, but I'm sure someone will tell me. Either way, the interview was good and DK seems to have a handle on stuff.
|
Protoss needs a major redesign. My best suggestion would be bring warp gate to tier2/3, a late game ability. Terran needs its strength of bio/mech rebalanced (compared to mech, bio is too good even in late game, but mostly because mech is shit), zerg needs fix in its mirror match.
|
On July 17 2014 12:36 Plansix wrote:
Ah I broke my rule about posting in these balance threads. I don't realty know what blizzard knows, but I'm sure someone will tell me. Either way, the interview was good and DK seems to have a handle on stuff.
I'm not a big fan of David Kim's, but this must be stressed indeed. I thought he answered well to the questions. He acknowledged most of what people consider are the current flaws of the game (which already takes a lot for a game designer in the balance team) and seemed to claim that his team is looking for answers.
People who are disappointed at that interview probably didn't have realistic expectations. What is he gonna go, spoil the 4-5 LotV units and major race changes? Say that he's bringing the Reaveromgsogosu back? For now he's trying to balance the game (by patching the current expansion) and saying they're working on the next expansion so that problems in this one don't occur anymore. I don't know what more you can ask of him.
|
On July 17 2014 12:56 ZenithM wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2014 12:36 Plansix wrote:
Ah I broke my rule about posting in these balance threads. I don't realty know what blizzard knows, but I'm sure someone will tell me. Either way, the interview was good and DK seems to have a handle on stuff. I'm not a big fan of David Kim's, but this must be stressed indeed. I thought he answered well to the questions. He acknowledged most of what people consider are the current flaws of the game (which already takes a lot for a game designer in the balance team) and seemed to claim that his team is looking for answers. People who are disappointed at that interview probably didn't have realistic expectations. What is he gonna go, spoil the 4-5 LotV units and major race changes? Say that he's bringing the Reaveromgsogosu back? For now he's trying to balance the game (by patching the current expansion) and saying they're working on the next expansion so that problems in this one don't occur anymore. I don't know what more you can ask of him.
Here's what would give me hope for LOTV:
1. Admit that they wasted HOTS and plan to be a lot more experimental with LOTV alpha/beta. (We only got one version of Warhound, and no replacements for it once it got cut = complete and total waste of a Beta)
2. Talk about why they think mech doesn't work, and what they think could make mech work. Is it making fundamental changes to existing units? Is it introducing new units? Could SC1 mech work in SC2? Why or why not? Why did they think Warhound was a good idea, and why didn't they try to make a replacement once they realized it wasn't?
If all he says is "mech doesn't work right now" (which he didn't in this interview, but has in the past), that's great, but anyone could see that. I expect someone who gets paid to think about this stuff to have more opinions than "it doesn't work right now."
3. Talk about why he thinks Protoss doesn't allow the top players to distinguish themselves. What units are problematic in his view? What units are fine and don't need changes? Is his plan to change Colossus, Immortal, Archon, Void Ray, Tempest, Dark Templar to make them more microable or is it to add one new unit which takes micro?
Again, if all he says is "Protoss doesn't always show off micro," it's hard to argue, but it also doesn't prove he understands what he's talking about. It's an easy answer that everyone can agree with, but that's all it is.
4. Talk about Terran lategame, what is it missing in their opinion? Is it missing a way to transition from bio to mech? Or is it missing a bio lategame? By bio lategame, would they be looking at introducing new units, or revamping existing units (Reaper), or just adding new functionality to existing units (more stuff like Afterburners)?
5. Do they really still think that ladder numbers are an accurate way of judging game balance when Terrans are extinct across all levels of play? Why did they say three weeks ago that balance is fine, and then immediately after the ZPartCraft article say that balance isn't fine? (Obviously I think we all know, but right now nothing stops Blizz from bullshitting us with "balance is fine" next time it so obviously isn't.)
Everything he says is very political, non-committal stuff that tells us nothing about their design process. There's no reason to believe they've learned from past mistakes. They may have, but nothing in the interview supports it.
|
On July 17 2014 12:20 Plansix wrote:
Because before you improve something, you need to make it shitty over and over and over. Since Blizzard is working on Hearthstone and Heroes, that time is not now. There is no awesome switch that they can just flip or just "take community suggests that are awesome, while not taking shitty ones" button either.
Working on Hearthstone and Heroes does not preclude Blizzard from working on SC2. I don't know why people keep thinking that Blizzard projects are some zero sum game. Every project has its own budget. They're also clearly working on LoTV, which is where the SC2 resources are going.
I too I'm pretty happy DK and Blizzard don't take community whine too seriously. The truth is SC2 in general and HoTS is really well designed. It's not perfect but what game is? BW wasn't. There's really good reasons the game was designed with "a-move" units. Lower league players need to be able to control the game without having good mechanics. Believe it or not, Blizzard kind of knows what they're doing. The amount of times I read something along the lines of, "Blizzard doesn't even understand their own game, if only they just did_____.It's so obvious." is unbelievable. It's not so obvious. These things need to be playtested and nobody testing the game is as good as the Korean GMs. Game's pretty damn balanced for 99% of the playerbase.
|
On July 17 2014 13:12 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2014 12:56 ZenithM wrote:On July 17 2014 12:36 Plansix wrote:
Ah I broke my rule about posting in these balance threads. I don't realty know what blizzard knows, but I'm sure someone will tell me. Either way, the interview was good and DK seems to have a handle on stuff. I'm not a big fan of David Kim's, but this must be stressed indeed. I thought he answered well to the questions. He acknowledged most of what people consider are the current flaws of the game (which already takes a lot for a game designer in the balance team) and seemed to claim that his team is looking for answers. People who are disappointed at that interview probably didn't have realistic expectations. What is he gonna go, spoil the 4-5 LotV units and major race changes? Say that he's bringing the Reaveromgsogosu back? For now he's trying to balance the game (by patching the current expansion) and saying they're working on the next expansion so that problems in this one don't occur anymore. I don't know what more you can ask of him. Here's what would give me hope for LOTV: 1. Admit that they wasted HOTS and plan to be a lot more experimental with LOTV alpha/beta. (We only got one version of Warhound, and no replacements for it once it got cut = complete and total waste of a Beta) 2. Talk about why they think mech doesn't work, and what they think could make mech work. Is it making fundamental changes to existing units? Is it introducing new units? Could SC1 mech work in SC2? Why or why not? Why did they think Warhound was a good idea, and why didn't they try to make a replacement once they realized it wasn't? If all he says is "mech doesn't work right now" (which he didn't in this interview, but has in the past), that's great, but anyone could see that. I expect someone who gets paid to think about this stuff to have more opinions than "it doesn't work right now." 3. Talk about why he thinks Protoss doesn't allow the top players to distinguish themselves. What units are problematic in his view? What units are fine and don't need changes? Is his plan to change Colossus, Immortal, Archon, Void Ray, Tempest, Dark Templar to make them more microable or is it to add one new unit which takes micro? Again, if all he says is "Protoss doesn't always show off micro," it's hard to argue, but it also doesn't prove he understands what he's talking about. It's an easy answer that everyone can agree with, but that's all it is. 4. Talk about Terran lategame, what is it missing in their opinion? Is it missing a way to transition from bio to mech? Or is it missing a bio lategame? By bio lategame, would they be looking at introducing new units, or revamping existing units (Reaper), or just adding new functionality to existing units (more stuff like Afterburners)? 5. Do they really still think that ladder numbers are an accurate way of judging game balance when Terrans are extinct across all levels of play? Why did they say three weeks ago that balance is fine, and then immediately after the ZPartCraft article say that balance isn't fine? (Obviously I think we all know, but right now nothing stops Blizz from bullshitting us with "balance is fine" next time it so obviously isn't.) Everything he says is very political, non-committal stuff that tells us nothing about their design process. There's no reason to believe they've learned from past mistakes. They may have, but nothing in the interview supports it.
Hm, you bring up a lot of very excellent points. It does seem like every interview we hear nothing but generalizations and buzz words. I would like, for once, to hear some really deep analysis like this, if only so we can see that they (especially Mr. Kim) truly understand the game that's played at the pro level.
|
On July 17 2014 13:12 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2014 12:56 ZenithM wrote:On July 17 2014 12:36 Plansix wrote:
Ah I broke my rule about posting in these balance threads. I don't realty know what blizzard knows, but I'm sure someone will tell me. Either way, the interview was good and DK seems to have a handle on stuff. I'm not a big fan of David Kim's, but this must be stressed indeed. I thought he answered well to the questions. He acknowledged most of what people consider are the current flaws of the game (which already takes a lot for a game designer in the balance team) and seemed to claim that his team is looking for answers. People who are disappointed at that interview probably didn't have realistic expectations. What is he gonna go, spoil the 4-5 LotV units and major race changes? Say that he's bringing the Reaveromgsogosu back? For now he's trying to balance the game (by patching the current expansion) and saying they're working on the next expansion so that problems in this one don't occur anymore. I don't know what more you can ask of him. Here's what would give me hope for LOTV: 1. Admit that they wasted HOTS and plan to be a lot more experimental with LOTV alpha/beta. (We only got one version of Warhound, and no replacements for it once it got cut = complete and total waste of a Beta) 2. Talk about why they think mech doesn't work, and what they think could make mech work. Is it making fundamental changes to existing units? Is it introducing new units? Could SC1 mech work in SC2? Why or why not? Why did they think Warhound was a good idea, and why didn't they try to make a replacement once they realized it wasn't? If all he says is "mech doesn't work right now" (which he didn't in this interview, but has in the past), that's great, but anyone could see that. I expect someone who gets paid to think about this stuff to have more opinions than "it doesn't work right now." 3. Talk about why he thinks Protoss doesn't allow the top players to distinguish themselves. What units are problematic in his view? What units are fine and don't need changes? Is his plan to change Colossus, Immortal, Archon, Void Ray, Tempest, Dark Templar to make them more microable or is it to add one new unit which takes micro? Again, if all he says is "Protoss doesn't always show off micro," it's hard to argue, but it also doesn't prove he understands what he's talking about. It's an easy answer that everyone can agree with, but that's all it is. 4. Talk about Terran lategame, what is it missing in their opinion? Is it missing a way to transition from bio to mech? Or is it missing a bio lategame? By bio lategame, would they be looking at introducing new units, or revamping existing units (Reaper), or just adding new functionality to existing units (more stuff like Afterburners)? 5. Do they really still think that ladder numbers are an accurate way of judging game balance when Terrans are extinct across all levels of play? Why did they say three weeks ago that balance is fine, and then immediately after the ZPartCraft article say that balance isn't fine? (Obviously I think we all know, but right now nothing stops Blizz from bullshitting us with "balance is fine" next time it so obviously isn't.) Everything he says is very political, non-committal stuff that tells us nothing about their design process. There's no reason to believe they've learned from past mistakes. They may have, but nothing in the interview supports it.
what you want is their current design thought process.
the interview is about how they do their design process, not specifically about the current balance.
Read all the parts about protoss warpgate as an example.
that's why there is more focus on how they do the patches, why korean pros thought d.kim doesn't listen to them
|
On July 17 2014 15:32 ETisME wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2014 13:12 pure.Wasted wrote:On July 17 2014 12:56 ZenithM wrote:On July 17 2014 12:36 Plansix wrote:
Ah I broke my rule about posting in these balance threads. I don't realty know what blizzard knows, but I'm sure someone will tell me. Either way, the interview was good and DK seems to have a handle on stuff. I'm not a big fan of David Kim's, but this must be stressed indeed. I thought he answered well to the questions. He acknowledged most of what people consider are the current flaws of the game (which already takes a lot for a game designer in the balance team) and seemed to claim that his team is looking for answers. People who are disappointed at that interview probably didn't have realistic expectations. What is he gonna go, spoil the 4-5 LotV units and major race changes? Say that he's bringing the Reaveromgsogosu back? For now he's trying to balance the game (by patching the current expansion) and saying they're working on the next expansion so that problems in this one don't occur anymore. I don't know what more you can ask of him. Here's what would give me hope for LOTV: 1. Admit that they wasted HOTS and plan to be a lot more experimental with LOTV alpha/beta. (We only got one version of Warhound, and no replacements for it once it got cut = complete and total waste of a Beta) 2. Talk about why they think mech doesn't work, and what they think could make mech work. Is it making fundamental changes to existing units? Is it introducing new units? Could SC1 mech work in SC2? Why or why not? Why did they think Warhound was a good idea, and why didn't they try to make a replacement once they realized it wasn't? If all he says is "mech doesn't work right now" (which he didn't in this interview, but has in the past), that's great, but anyone could see that. I expect someone who gets paid to think about this stuff to have more opinions than "it doesn't work right now." 3. Talk about why he thinks Protoss doesn't allow the top players to distinguish themselves. What units are problematic in his view? What units are fine and don't need changes? Is his plan to change Colossus, Immortal, Archon, Void Ray, Tempest, Dark Templar to make them more microable or is it to add one new unit which takes micro? Again, if all he says is "Protoss doesn't always show off micro," it's hard to argue, but it also doesn't prove he understands what he's talking about. It's an easy answer that everyone can agree with, but that's all it is. 4. Talk about Terran lategame, what is it missing in their opinion? Is it missing a way to transition from bio to mech? Or is it missing a bio lategame? By bio lategame, would they be looking at introducing new units, or revamping existing units (Reaper), or just adding new functionality to existing units (more stuff like Afterburners)? 5. Do they really still think that ladder numbers are an accurate way of judging game balance when Terrans are extinct across all levels of play? Why did they say three weeks ago that balance is fine, and then immediately after the ZPartCraft article say that balance isn't fine? (Obviously I think we all know, but right now nothing stops Blizz from bullshitting us with "balance is fine" next time it so obviously isn't.) Everything he says is very political, non-committal stuff that tells us nothing about their design process. There's no reason to believe they've learned from past mistakes. They may have, but nothing in the interview supports it. what you want is their current design thought process. the interview is about how they do their design process, not specifically about the current balance. Read all the parts about protoss warpgate as an example. that's why there is more focus on how they do the patches, why korean pros thought d.kim doesn't listen to them
What I said was specifically a response to posters like Plansix and bhfberserk who suggest that this interview is reason to be optimistic about LOTV. I'm just saying that there's nothing here that we haven't heard before. Politically correct responses and received wisdom. No analysis, no insight, no indication at all that past mistakes have been learned from.
If all you wanted to know was "why doesn't Blizzard patch more/less often?" then this interview may well have been satisfying, and I see nothing wrong with that!
|
same old same old
1. WG is silly design and lot of people knew this since day 1. You can look up shitload of threads about WG since beta. For me WG is n1 problem of SC2 and i can't see it being redone (you could look at starbow for inspiration). It would require too much of testing and all that stuff and i don't think blizzard would want to invest time and money into that. Real shame. There is a reason why TvT, TvZ and were 2 most fun matchups in WOL.
2. "We waited too long to patch in WOL" REALLY? I think you ruined the game by patching too soon in WOL (especially in the early days). Completely destroying tanks because they were too good on Steppes of freaking war. When bigger maps came, all you could do against protoss was bio. Hardly a "strategic diversity". Oh and i remember broodlord infestor in TvZ. They didnt do shit about it for 6 months until koreans figured a counter (mass raven). And it worked. I thought they'd learn from this and wouldn't patch the game every other week.
3. Micro. Oh well. Kinda hard to distinguish yourself with micro if you're a protoss eh? Thank WG for that. And no, spamming forcefields or storm isn't micro. The only real micro protoss has is blink micro or prism micro. Funny that the most "amazing" micro that you can distinguish yourself as a terran is marine vs bling, which was NOT intended by blizzard but a player figured it out. TvZ is such a great MU because of a NOT intended micro. We can be thankful for that "anomaly" because with protoss there sure as hell isn't any room for unique micro.
Maybe next time Blizzard. You made a great game but not a brilliant one this time.
|
On July 17 2014 04:41 Survivor61316 wrote:
and I believe that the only reason its not played by more people is because the ladder system is to complicated.
Well, there's also quite a bunch of people that think starbow is a balance mess, with unlimited selection muta flocks, no good protoss response to zerg t3 and lurkers/marines having buffed up stats.
|
It's sad when the Q&A is 5 times the size of the patch :-/
|
David Kim's posts make me zzzzzz...
I'd be really glad if they had some other guy with better communication skills to tell people what they are doing.
Fun fact, DK used "we feel" term 25 times. And it makes me sad that balance of the game relies on what they're feeling rather than solid reasonings.
|
On July 17 2014 18:30 saddaromma wrote:
David Kim's posts make me zzzzzz...
I'd be really glad if they had some other guy with better communication skills to tell people what they are doing.
Fun fact, DK used "we feel" term 25 times. And it makes me sad that balance of the game relies on what they're feeling rather than solid reasonings.
He is just being humble and respecting other's opinions rather than considering everything he thinks as a given fact.
|
On July 17 2014 12:32 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2014 12:20 Plansix wrote:On July 17 2014 12:14 pure.Wasted wrote:On July 17 2014 12:09 Plansix wrote:
I do like his comment about carriers and BCs, that they are both kinda deathbally and not really a blast to watch. Cause its true. You kind of expect a little more analysis and insight from the man in charge after 4 years, though, don't you? Until he actually does something about it (makes the units more interesting, then makes them viable), all it really is is a reasonable excuse for doing nothing to improve the game. I'd have been more impressed if he'd said this... say, as they were tinkering with Tempest/new BC abilities for HOTS, when this brilliant realization could have actually been acted upon. The problem is "improving" things requires you to do a shit ton of testing. Because before you improve something, you need to make it shitty over and over and over. Since Blizzard is working on Hearthstone and Heroes, that time is not now. There is no awesome switch that they can just flip or just "take community suggests that are awesome, while not taking shitty ones" button either. There is a "take community suggests that are awesome, while not taking shitty ones" button. It's called Heart of the Swarm Beta. "Oops" isn't really a justifiable defense for not using it, as far as I'm concerned, especially not when they've never actually said "We didn't take enough advantage of it, but that'll change next time." I absolutely expect LOTV Beta to be the same polish-fest that WOL and HOTS Betas were.
This I agree with. I've been playing Blizzard games since Warcraft 1 and I feel that they completely wussed out with HotS. No Blizzard-made expansion has made fewer changes than HotS did (other than maybe Beyond the Dark Portal). Even the amount of attempted changes was depressingly low. They barely touched all the WoL units when designing HotS.
D3's RoS expansion made a lot of changes so it's just the SC2 team that decided not to make many changes with HotS. Maybe they procrastinated knowing they have another expansion planned to make fixes. But it feels like a wasted opportunity.
|
On July 18 2014 00:08 andrewlt wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2014 12:32 pure.Wasted wrote:On July 17 2014 12:20 Plansix wrote:On July 17 2014 12:14 pure.Wasted wrote:On July 17 2014 12:09 Plansix wrote:
I do like his comment about carriers and BCs, that they are both kinda deathbally and not really a blast to watch. Cause its true. You kind of expect a little more analysis and insight from the man in charge after 4 years, though, don't you? Until he actually does something about it (makes the units more interesting, then makes them viable), all it really is is a reasonable excuse for doing nothing to improve the game. I'd have been more impressed if he'd said this... say, as they were tinkering with Tempest/new BC abilities for HOTS, when this brilliant realization could have actually been acted upon. The problem is "improving" things requires you to do a shit ton of testing. Because before you improve something, you need to make it shitty over and over and over. Since Blizzard is working on Hearthstone and Heroes, that time is not now. There is no awesome switch that they can just flip or just "take community suggests that are awesome, while not taking shitty ones" button either. There is a "take community suggests that are awesome, while not taking shitty ones" button. It's called Heart of the Swarm Beta. "Oops" isn't really a justifiable defense for not using it, as far as I'm concerned, especially not when they've never actually said "We didn't take enough advantage of it, but that'll change next time." I absolutely expect LOTV Beta to be the same polish-fest that WOL and HOTS Betas were. This I agree with. I've been playing Blizzard games since Warcraft 1 and I feel that they completely wussed out with HotS. No Blizzard-made expansion has made fewer changes than HotS did (other than maybe Beyond the Dark Portal). Even the amount of attempted changes was depressingly low. They barely touched all the WoL units when designing HotS. D3's RoS expansion made a lot of changes so it's just the SC2 team that decided not to make many changes with HotS. Maybe they procrastinated knowing they have another expansion planned to make fixes. But it feels like a wasted opportunity.
Yeah Blizzard isn't the great company that we once knew and love.
|
On July 17 2014 11:56 sc2isnotdying wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2014 08:58 TopRamen wrote:
A game of SC2 has feedback that is just too wild for a great competitive game. It's a pretty balanced game between players A and B until A or B makes a move that gives them an insurmountable lead and they can then bludgeon their opponent to death with their unstoppable force.
An ideal game progression is one where the lead changes hands but the better player eventually wins. I disagree. Honestly, it's not all that important that the better player eventually wins. This is not the case in Football(American or World), Poker, Settlers of Catan, or any number of popular competitive games. I would agree that good game design should avoid snowballing and award skill, but a great game should also be dramatic, unpredictable and open to any number of dynamic strategies. It looks like LoTV is going to take multiplayer in a bit of more hardcore direction. This makes sense. Any number of casual players have left and at this point they're not coming back. (Though they should come back for the campaign. Give Blizzard credit; HoTS was a sizable improvement on WOL as a single player game) It was ambitious of Blizzard to think that a multiplayer RTS would have lasting appeal to "casual" gamers. I would expect some more micro-intensive units for LoTV. Which is not to say LoTV should turn SC2 into BW. I don't think I'd play the game if had BW's terrible pathing. Or if it didn't have auto-mining for that matter.
Well I guess it depends on what your definition of a 'better' player is.
I don't think we can say for sure that LoTV is going to take multiplayer in a hardcore direction. We still haven't seen anything, all we've heard is talk.
Any emphasis on the 'casual' gaming audience is a mistake. BW became a great competitive and casual game at the same time without the help of Blizzard.
HoTS was a sizable improvement at first, then slowly turned into WoLs stale metagame later.
I don't expect many micro-intensive units, because of the engine's limitations.
Pathing is a tricky issue, I understand from a programmer's perspective you want things to run smoothly. But on the other hand, bad pathing makes gathering up troops harder, creating sort of a supply-line esque feel to it. I don't know how to make an elegant solution that has smooth pathing and keep the benefit of a supply-line feel. Starbow tried a couple of things but they weren't very graceful.
Auto-mining you can keep. I don't think auto-mining does much in the long run.
|
I think HotS is a sizeable improvement on WoL, which was already a great game (at least for me). I have no doubt that LotV will further improve gameplay and enjoyability so SC2 can definitely be the a supreme RTS.
|
Protoss crying??? Even map is good for terran, can this change game balanced?? Protoss is balanced for foreigner maybe ,however for korean it is really hard to beat protoss.especially Warping unit really make game easy for protoss. Macro level b protoss can even beat top terran player with warp gate all in
|
In Diamond league I've noticed some things. The terran players' skill level is amazing in comparison to the TvZs and TvPs I'm playing... I've seen awesome marine tank positioning and micro the sort I just haven't seen from the other players. Zerg keeps trying to suicide 100 of his banes and protoss havent been doing much other than massing Zealot/Templar once they lose their armies and 'A' moving forward...
For the players that are playing well... for their sake... we need this patch as a community to be a success...
|
"For the widow mine on the other hand, we received a lot of feedback saying that this is too much of a problem in TvZ in Heart of the Swarm. While we received many feedbacks from the players and community, we also felt that it was too strong, leading us to nerf the widow mine. However, for that instance, we feel that maybe it would have been better to leave it up to the players a little bit more. This is because when the widow mine came into the game, while it helped Terrans win more agaist Zerg, the match itself was really exciting with endless action from about the 10 minute mark. Since there was many fun matches, we feel that maybe it would have been better to wait."
This is the only part of the interview that I found debatable and a little dangerous. The reason why you should have let the widow mine like it was isn't that the game was fun. The reason is that zerg was doing good enough against it without a change, and the widow mine didn't look like it "helped terran win more games against zerg" anymore.
If you start balancing through excitement, you will be faced with the problem that excitement isn't balanced for all races. The majority of the audience likes terran, so they will be more excited when terrans play. A lot of people hate PvP, so excitement will drop fast anytime protoss does well. You should be doing the same test when terran looks like it's overpowered and when protoss looks like it's overpowered, otherwise the whole process makes no sense.
|
I quit playing HotS after the initial season after beta because the game was just inconsistent. Countless imbalances were there and the unit compositions were always the same, never any rough changes in that matter.
Coming back playing after that, I still see the same thing going on. This is a problem and it shows that Blizzard hasn't really paid much attention to the actual gameplay.
It could be people living the past, or it could be it doesnt need to be changed because Blizzard feels it works, or it could be some underlying fact, but I still see the same stuff used and done in majority of games.
|
To be honest, this interview gives me hope that the game will be fun again in the future. The answers from David kim are less political chosen than in his previous Q&A's and more understanding what the community wants.
Crossing my fingers!~!!!
|
On July 17 2014 16:55 19Meavis93 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2014 04:41 Survivor61316 wrote:
and I believe that the only reason its not played by more people is because the ladder system is to complicated.
Well, there's also quite a bunch of people that think starbow is a balance mess, with unlimited selection muta flocks, no good protoss response to zerg t3 and lurkers/marines having buffed up stats.
And people like me who just find it much less fun and awesome than SC2 ^^
|
Correct me if I'm wrong, but this seems to be the best interview DK has given so far. Sure, it's nothing special, but it's definitely an improvement over the previous ones.
It gives me hope that LOTV will be even better. (Cause, you know, "SC2 is a bad game" that for some reason I and tens of thounsands of people keep playing 4 years after it's launch).
|
On July 17 2014 12:20 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2014 12:14 pure.Wasted wrote:On July 17 2014 12:09 Plansix wrote:
I do like his comment about carriers and BCs, that they are both kinda deathbally and not really a blast to watch. Cause its true. You kind of expect a little more analysis and insight from the man in charge after 4 years, though, don't you? Until he actually does something about it (makes the units more interesting, then makes them viable), all it really is is a reasonable excuse for doing nothing to improve the game. I'd have been more impressed if he'd said this... say, as they were tinkering with Tempest/new BC abilities for HOTS, when this brilliant realization could have actually been acted upon. The problem is "improving" things requires you to do a shit ton of testing. Because before you improve something, you need to make it shitty over and over and over. Since Blizzard is working on Hearthstone and Heroes, that time is not now. There is no awesome switch that they can just flip or just "take community suggests that are awesome, while not taking shitty ones" button either. And you do know the reason why he doesn't elaborate right? English is his second language. He speaks English well, but you can tell he runs up against the limits of his vocabulary a lot. You can tell because he uses a lot of the same adjectives over and over.
not like the interview wasn't in english to begin with.
|
On July 17 2014 03:22 Musicus wrote:I feel rather good now about LotV since they seem to work hard on it and test a lot. Considering iNcontrol once said, Blizzard didn't plan any major changes or new units in LotV, they definitely changed their plans for the better. New (or old ) units and a more micro intensive Protoss race! If they somehow change warpgate and forcefield, it might become great.
Can I interest you in some property I'm trying to sell?
|
Man, it was really nice to hear him admit that the Broodlord Infestor was awful and allowed to go on far too long, and that they widow mine nerf was a knee jerk in response to not wanting to wait too long. Good stuff. I regained some of my faith here. While the upcoming patch I truly don't believe will do much for TvP, I'm at least going to try the mine and see what it does.
|
Well that interview wasn't bad overall.. Hopefully we get to see the stuff they've been working on for LotV at this year's Blizzcon
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On July 18 2014 00:08 andrewlt wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2014 12:32 pure.Wasted wrote:On July 17 2014 12:20 Plansix wrote:On July 17 2014 12:14 pure.Wasted wrote:On July 17 2014 12:09 Plansix wrote:
I do like his comment about carriers and BCs, that they are both kinda deathbally and not really a blast to watch. Cause its true. You kind of expect a little more analysis and insight from the man in charge after 4 years, though, don't you? Until he actually does something about it (makes the units more interesting, then makes them viable), all it really is is a reasonable excuse for doing nothing to improve the game. I'd have been more impressed if he'd said this... say, as they were tinkering with Tempest/new BC abilities for HOTS, when this brilliant realization could have actually been acted upon. The problem is "improving" things requires you to do a shit ton of testing. Because before you improve something, you need to make it shitty over and over and over. Since Blizzard is working on Hearthstone and Heroes, that time is not now. There is no awesome switch that they can just flip or just "take community suggests that are awesome, while not taking shitty ones" button either. There is a "take community suggests that are awesome, while not taking shitty ones" button. It's called Heart of the Swarm Beta. "Oops" isn't really a justifiable defense for not using it, as far as I'm concerned, especially not when they've never actually said "We didn't take enough advantage of it, but that'll change next time." I absolutely expect LOTV Beta to be the same polish-fest that WOL and HOTS Betas were. This I agree with. I've been playing Blizzard games since Warcraft 1 and I feel that they completely wussed out with HotS. No Blizzard-made expansion has made fewer changes than HotS did (other than maybe Beyond the Dark Portal). Even the amount of attempted changes was depressingly low. They barely touched all the WoL units when designing HotS. D3's RoS expansion made a lot of changes so it's just the SC2 team that decided not to make many changes with HotS. Maybe they procrastinated knowing they have another expansion planned to make fixes. But it feels like a wasted opportunity.
How is HotS not at least as big a change as BW?
BW:
Terran:
Medics
Valkyries
Charon Boosters for Goliaths
Zerg:
Lurkers
Devourers
I thiiiiiiiiink ultra armor upgrade was a BW upgrade? I'm not sure about that tho.
Protoss:
DTs
Dark Archons
Corsairs
You could argue that the medic/lurker/dt made a bigger change to play styles than the HotS units, but I'm not really sure about that... The MSC change is bigger than any of them, and the rest are close at least.
TFT was a true game changer, they recognized some problems with the game and really made a big overhaul (if I recall correctly, they brought on Zileas for that and he was in charge of the overhaul?)
|
Blizz never put enough attention nor effort in HotS.. It was great from the start - it addressed like 70% (or more like 80%) of those issues that existed in WoL, problem is - when the game came out - nothing has been "taken care of", so we all think like the guy above said lol..
Like - things like Swarmhost and the WMine - everyone knew it was a good start (design-wise), but sadly - it was a start that never "evolved"..
Swarmhosts were supposed to be Battering-rams at the first thought, then they were supposed to be the "day-night" unit that is strong half of it's time and half-not, so it created those "wavy" dynamic overall..
Well - that also failed too: Simple - SHost was never "tweaked" at all.. Almost as if it was "good enough despite everyone seeing it's flaw" - like - even from day1 it was clear that they were too expensive and that upgrade they had wasn't a "choice" but rather a must-have, so..
So yes - basically any unit that isn't designed to harass - it's a bad idea to "force" the player into committing it's production, like everyone knew even from week 1 (ok, not from day1, but certainly from week 1 for sure) that 6 SHosts won't do a "thing" and that 15 were like - unstoppable..
We never EVER saw a single try/test/tweak of the SHost.. They could've made it cheaper but less "snowbally" in large numbers or sth.. Just like the Raven - another very badly designed unit overall, 1 does nothing (except detect), 10 are not even approachable ..
We didn't see SHost being cheaper, not having the upgrade, Locusts not having the upgrade, locust lifetime wasn't ever changed for a single day not even in a test map overall.. I mean - there were things like make SHost 150 then 180HP (now what - it has 200 ?, not sure though) from 120 or so.. But, BUT - the attacking power of that unit was never experimented for.. And there are loads and loads of ways they could think/deal with that problem TBH, like - at least give some "not main pathway curves" a try regarding that one.. They could even make Locusts lose life instead of timer so the farther those were going the easier to be dealt with overall..
The WMine - same - I was disgusted even from day one from that unit - was made against Zerg and Zerg only.. And Terrans were like "yum yum Zerg tears" well - it's a flaud.. I mean - the unit was designed vs Ling/Bane and that's it overall.. We didn't see the unit change - nor tweak.. Even from day1 I knew it was a bad thing that one - they didn't "think" of it over.. If you made vs Protoss - big deal, P will warp in another round and mines won't be active for 10 seconds later, but with Zerg - not that they were overkilling those (remind you I'm talking about the earliest days of HotS, now Zergs do split, send in "scouting Lings", do Infested-Terran "sweep" e.t.c. to prevent that from happening or so, and even the Overseer was far too slow to follow the Muta flock)..
The thing is - not that the mine would've destroyed Zerg, but also by the time they consolidate for the next wave - mines would recharge again, lol.. The unit couldv'e been tweaked in million and one ways, but NO - it was never done, as if it was fine from day 1 on (it was not)
Tempest - again - w.t.f. - why does it need +50, yes + FIFTY bonus damage vs "blips" in the air ??, like - does it blow them away or sth ?, like they could've "played with it blowing away massive air back further, by blow-away I literally mean knockback, rofl" and still not end in a worse spot than now.. .. That unit currently shuts down ANY Broodlord, BC, Carrier, MS (not that it means something though, lol, like - that's another unit that could use some love, like - at least be not abductable, BLord IS now frenzied, and this thing can be pulled away ?, rofl) play.. PERIOD..
WHY that huuuge bonus ??, let me say again - HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE bonus ??, why ? - Tempests were left like that "unfinished" for us to "play toys with".. Like - here's a MIND-BLOWING fact - if that vs massive Air Tempest bonus was like +30 instead of +50, or even better - +25 + 15 vs shields instead of +50 - we probably might've seen BCs and BLords..
A 60 damage-per-shot (dps, lol) instead of 80 Tempest would've ended like this:
4 shot instead of 3-shot Broodlord, 10-Shot instead of 7-shot BCs (and if they made it 25 instead of 50 bonus, BCs would require 11 instead of 10 shots - based on upgrades on both sides, so adds that one too upon, and BLords would probably survive to a 6th shot cause of regen, unless upgrades were done for Protoss), and 6-shot instead of 5-shot Colossi (but yah - what's the big deal with the Colossus - they could add up +10 to shields (or even +15), and be back to square 1 regarding using it vs Colossus)
Like - that's a VERY SMALL STEP to even consider, but it was never done - TRUE - tft - it probably would've not changed almost anything overall, but it certainly is AN IMPROVEMENT for a very small "'try-see" cost IMO.. And it's not even "game-changing" or anything, but it certainly is a "refreshment" of some kind, that "gives hope", for a little-to-none cost
Then there's the things like - divide Locust damage in 2 shots (like Phoenix do, not that like Locusts don't shoot 2 spines instead of 1 already - even visually, lol) - the gain would've been VERY SIMPLE - Armored units like the Colossus or Thor would last longer vs Locust shots (not to even say that Guardian shield would've mitigated 4 damage instead of 2).. Terran also have that "building armor" upgrade thing, so yah - it was never even tried.. (o.f.c. - the cost of that would've been Immortals falling twice the faster due to double rate of HS depletion overall)..
LIKE = AGREE - YES - HotS was, WAS awesome and looked very promising from day one it came out, and it was like - everyone was thinking - wow this game is AWESOME, gonna be the BEST EVER RTS, but since that - almost nothing was addressed upon (except the Hellbat drops - and that one was even inspired mostly by TvT, the irony, lmao)..
OK, let's not be "that cinycal" and "bashing" over them cause they certainly did an awesome job regarding the other units than the mentioned there - the Viper, the Oracle, the Prismatic alignment to Voidray, the Reaper, the new ability of Thor.. Pretty well done job regarding those overall :D
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
