|
On November 14 2014 19:52 VArsovskiSC wrote:My 2 concerns is that DKim takes only "selective" and "gradual" approach in his creativity of new stuff: #1 - "gradual" approach mistake - when they said Banshee +1 range - we wanted to make them better vs Marines, Terran has the Cyclone to deflect harassment.. Well sure Mr. Kim, but what about the other 2 races ?  , like - 5 range Queens surely won't be able to beat Banshees, and Stalkers already lose to them in a straight up engagement unless in very superior numbers.. ? I was SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO w.t.f. when listening to that - as if Starcraft was all about TvT, lol.. Ah sure - we'll see for the other two races later on.. well - w.t.f. - you can't make design gradual like that, means that further requriements will affect changes to current design, it's like 3 times the work required, lol #2 - "elitist" approach "mistake" - I don't like how DKim has an ALMOST EXCLUSIVE ELITIST approach.. Like - sure - they brought the Reaver micro back, but this is actually even harder , I mean w.t.f. - a unit that's 100/100 and costs 300 gas.. Really ? I mean the problem is - if you put units in the game that are only usable for pros - you surely won't have a greater playable audience.. ============================================================================= I mean - I'd be pretty satisfied EVEN NOW if there weren't a few w.t.f. factors in the game like: #1 - Banshee Range = biggest w.t.f. of them all #2 - Siege Tank Siege drop micro - again w.t.f. with this ?.. I'd be OK if this was an upgrade researchable, or even better some per-siege-tank "individual upgrade" for 25/25 or sth, but there's NO WAY this stays as is defendable.. Are Zergs really committed to Ravager/Queen being the only option to defend this ?, are they supposed to rush to Mutas every game or what ?? #3 - Nydus change - sure it sounds fun when Zerg has one Nydus network, but what to do as Protoss if Zerg has 3 networks or more ? #4 - Warp-in mechanic change.. How on Earth is Protoss supposed to defend vs Ling runbies and vs Bio Drops ? As for the new units - well #1 - Disruptor should be a relatively "expendable" unit, should cost like 150/75, or say 125/100 but do lesser AoE and a lesser Damage.. You'll ask - Banelings for Protoss ? - y, they could make the unit have 50/50 or even 40/40, but it's still something that would make the race work better (perhaps even without forcefields, or with 75 energy per FF) IMO #2 - Cyclone should have a "role", not kill everything.. Therefore I think it should have something like 9 (+ 9 vs Armored) damage and start with 5 latch and 8 max kiting range, and have it upgradeable for only later stages in the game for those radiuses to be like 7/13 respectively.. w.t.f. with the radiuses even from the early game, lol ============================================================================= And yes - would've liked for them to test if there were less workers per base saturation, not just the 12 on start.. Think the game would be much more fun if now when the armies are much more have-to-be-microable to require less economy management overall.. Surely - more options for harassment, but harassment as is now is actually brutal - like - GG outright and no chance to come back for-EVER.. If they made it like 12 workers per base (or even 16 to retain the 8 patches per base) - unless being committed to a multi-base harass - 12 (or even 16) workers aren't that much detrimental, so a better gameplay with more army-vs-army "skirmishing/domination" battles rather than army fight and one (or a couple) of drops
Are you actually talking about stats ROFL, what you saw was just a pre-alpha they just showed how some of the units were, theres still a lot of changes coming before the beta, you are talking like they already released the game lol.
Talking about range and cost and making stuff upgrades only comes once everything is already done and only balancing is left and I think that won't happen for several months
|
On November 14 2014 21:29 Lexender wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2014 19:52 VArsovskiSC wrote:My 2 concerns is that DKim takes only "selective" and "gradual" approach in his creativity of new stuff: #1 - "gradual" approach mistake - when they said Banshee +1 range - we wanted to make them better vs Marines, Terran has the Cyclone to deflect harassment.. Well sure Mr. Kim, but what about the other 2 races ? , like - 5 range Queens surely won't be able to beat Banshees, and Stalkers already lose to them in a straight up engagement unless in very superior numbers.. ? I was SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO w.t.f. when listening to that - as if Starcraft was all about TvT, lol.. Ah sure - we'll see for the other two races later on.. well - w.t.f. - you can't make design gradual like that, means that further requriements will affect changes to current design, it's like 3 times the work required, lol #2 - "elitist" approach "mistake" - I don't like how DKim has an ALMOST EXCLUSIVE ELITIST approach.. Like - sure - they brought the Reaver micro back, but this is actually even harder , I mean w.t.f. - a unit that's 100/100 and costs 300 gas.. Really ? I mean the problem is - if you put units in the game that are only usable for pros - you surely won't have a greater playable audience.. ============================================================================= I mean - I'd be pretty satisfied EVEN NOW if there weren't a few w.t.f. factors in the game like: #1 - Banshee Range = biggest w.t.f. of them all #2 - Siege Tank Siege drop micro - again w.t.f. with this ?.. I'd be OK if this was an upgrade researchable, or even better some per-siege-tank "individual upgrade" for 25/25 or sth, but there's NO WAY this stays as is defendable.. Are Zergs really committed to Ravager/Queen being the only option to defend this ?, are they supposed to rush to Mutas every game or what ?? #3 - Nydus change - sure it sounds fun when Zerg has one Nydus network, but what to do as Protoss if Zerg has 3 networks or more ? #4 - Warp-in mechanic change.. How on Earth is Protoss supposed to defend vs Ling runbies and vs Bio Drops ? As for the new units - well #1 - Disruptor should be a relatively "expendable" unit, should cost like 150/75, or say 125/100 but do lesser AoE and a lesser Damage.. You'll ask - Banelings for Protoss ? - y, they could make the unit have 50/50 or even 40/40, but it's still something that would make the race work better (perhaps even without forcefields, or with 75 energy per FF) IMO #2 - Cyclone should have a "role", not kill everything.. Therefore I think it should have something like 9 (+ 9 vs Armored) damage and start with 5 latch and 8 max kiting range, and have it upgradeable for only later stages in the game for those radiuses to be like 7/13 respectively.. w.t.f. with the radiuses even from the early game, lol ============================================================================= And yes - would've liked for them to test if there were less workers per base saturation, not just the 12 on start.. Think the game would be much more fun if now when the armies are much more have-to-be-microable to require less economy management overall.. Surely - more options for harassment, but harassment as is now is actually brutal - like - GG outright and no chance to come back for-EVER.. If they made it like 12 workers per base (or even 16 to retain the 8 patches per base) - unless being committed to a multi-base harass - 12 (or even 16) workers aren't that much detrimental, so a better gameplay with more army-vs-army "skirmishing/domination" battles rather than army fight and one (or a couple) of drops Are you actually talking about stats ROFL, what you saw was just a pre-alpha they just showed how some of the units were, theres still a lot of changes coming before the beta, you are talking like they already released the game lol. Talking about range and cost and making stuff upgrades only comes once everything is already done and only balancing is left and I think that won't happen for several months
I wasn't talking about stats, I was critisizing a bad approach.. But yes - stats were the arguments
Still - doesn't require an expert to see how that's overall a very bad approach
|
On November 14 2014 22:31 VArsovskiSC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2014 21:29 Lexender wrote:On November 14 2014 19:52 VArsovskiSC wrote:My 2 concerns is that DKim takes only "selective" and "gradual" approach in his creativity of new stuff: #1 - "gradual" approach mistake - when they said Banshee +1 range - we wanted to make them better vs Marines, Terran has the Cyclone to deflect harassment.. Well sure Mr. Kim, but what about the other 2 races ? , like - 5 range Queens surely won't be able to beat Banshees, and Stalkers already lose to them in a straight up engagement unless in very superior numbers.. ? I was SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO w.t.f. when listening to that - as if Starcraft was all about TvT, lol.. Ah sure - we'll see for the other two races later on.. well - w.t.f. - you can't make design gradual like that, means that further requriements will affect changes to current design, it's like 3 times the work required, lol #2 - "elitist" approach "mistake" - I don't like how DKim has an ALMOST EXCLUSIVE ELITIST approach.. Like - sure - they brought the Reaver micro back, but this is actually even harder , I mean w.t.f. - a unit that's 100/100 and costs 300 gas.. Really ? I mean the problem is - if you put units in the game that are only usable for pros - you surely won't have a greater playable audience.. ============================================================================= I mean - I'd be pretty satisfied EVEN NOW if there weren't a few w.t.f. factors in the game like: #1 - Banshee Range = biggest w.t.f. of them all #2 - Siege Tank Siege drop micro - again w.t.f. with this ?.. I'd be OK if this was an upgrade researchable, or even better some per-siege-tank "individual upgrade" for 25/25 or sth, but there's NO WAY this stays as is defendable.. Are Zergs really committed to Ravager/Queen being the only option to defend this ?, are they supposed to rush to Mutas every game or what ?? #3 - Nydus change - sure it sounds fun when Zerg has one Nydus network, but what to do as Protoss if Zerg has 3 networks or more ? #4 - Warp-in mechanic change.. How on Earth is Protoss supposed to defend vs Ling runbies and vs Bio Drops ? As for the new units - well #1 - Disruptor should be a relatively "expendable" unit, should cost like 150/75, or say 125/100 but do lesser AoE and a lesser Damage.. You'll ask - Banelings for Protoss ? - y, they could make the unit have 50/50 or even 40/40, but it's still something that would make the race work better (perhaps even without forcefields, or with 75 energy per FF) IMO #2 - Cyclone should have a "role", not kill everything.. Therefore I think it should have something like 9 (+ 9 vs Armored) damage and start with 5 latch and 8 max kiting range, and have it upgradeable for only later stages in the game for those radiuses to be like 7/13 respectively.. w.t.f. with the radiuses even from the early game, lol ============================================================================= And yes - would've liked for them to test if there were less workers per base saturation, not just the 12 on start.. Think the game would be much more fun if now when the armies are much more have-to-be-microable to require less economy management overall.. Surely - more options for harassment, but harassment as is now is actually brutal - like - GG outright and no chance to come back for-EVER.. If they made it like 12 workers per base (or even 16 to retain the 8 patches per base) - unless being committed to a multi-base harass - 12 (or even 16) workers aren't that much detrimental, so a better gameplay with more army-vs-army "skirmishing/domination" battles rather than army fight and one (or a couple) of drops Are you actually talking about stats ROFL, what you saw was just a pre-alpha they just showed how some of the units were, theres still a lot of changes coming before the beta, you are talking like they already released the game lol. Talking about range and cost and making stuff upgrades only comes once everything is already done and only balancing is left and I think that won't happen for several months I wasn't talking about stats, I was critisizing a bad approach.. But yes - stats were the arguments Still - doesn't require an expert to see how that's overall a very bad approach
Stats are not final. No point in using them as arguments since they are going to change wildly. Even the design is not final, as it showed with the HotS announcement (ultralisk burrow charge, replicant, baneling burrow movement, warhound, the initial mines and oracles, etc).
The only process Blizzard seems to have is the following:
- Think about crazy, ridiculously over-the-top things that sound/seem really FUN. Based on what they showed, I'd say this is where they're at in LotV.
- Actually try it in game, see if the FUN is still there and if doesn't ruin the FUN for the other player too. Based on this outcome, either keep the "design" of the change, or redesign/scrap it.
- Once they have a good view of what they think will really improve the FUN of the game, then, and only finally then, do they start to worry about balancing.
See how the the balance, the stats and even the design really only appear at the end of the process ? You're arguing about stuff that isn't even relevant yet. So please, don't go any further.
|
On November 14 2014 22:31 VArsovskiSC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2014 21:29 Lexender wrote:On November 14 2014 19:52 VArsovskiSC wrote:My 2 concerns is that DKim takes only "selective" and "gradual" approach in his creativity of new stuff: #1 - "gradual" approach mistake - when they said Banshee +1 range - we wanted to make them better vs Marines, Terran has the Cyclone to deflect harassment.. Well sure Mr. Kim, but what about the other 2 races ? , like - 5 range Queens surely won't be able to beat Banshees, and Stalkers already lose to them in a straight up engagement unless in very superior numbers.. ? I was SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO w.t.f. when listening to that - as if Starcraft was all about TvT, lol.. Ah sure - we'll see for the other two races later on.. well - w.t.f. - you can't make design gradual like that, means that further requriements will affect changes to current design, it's like 3 times the work required, lol #2 - "elitist" approach "mistake" - I don't like how DKim has an ALMOST EXCLUSIVE ELITIST approach.. Like - sure - they brought the Reaver micro back, but this is actually even harder , I mean w.t.f. - a unit that's 100/100 and costs 300 gas.. Really ? I mean the problem is - if you put units in the game that are only usable for pros - you surely won't have a greater playable audience.. ============================================================================= I mean - I'd be pretty satisfied EVEN NOW if there weren't a few w.t.f. factors in the game like: #1 - Banshee Range = biggest w.t.f. of them all #2 - Siege Tank Siege drop micro - again w.t.f. with this ?.. I'd be OK if this was an upgrade researchable, or even better some per-siege-tank "individual upgrade" for 25/25 or sth, but there's NO WAY this stays as is defendable.. Are Zergs really committed to Ravager/Queen being the only option to defend this ?, are they supposed to rush to Mutas every game or what ?? #3 - Nydus change - sure it sounds fun when Zerg has one Nydus network, but what to do as Protoss if Zerg has 3 networks or more ? #4 - Warp-in mechanic change.. How on Earth is Protoss supposed to defend vs Ling runbies and vs Bio Drops ? As for the new units - well #1 - Disruptor should be a relatively "expendable" unit, should cost like 150/75, or say 125/100 but do lesser AoE and a lesser Damage.. You'll ask - Banelings for Protoss ? - y, they could make the unit have 50/50 or even 40/40, but it's still something that would make the race work better (perhaps even without forcefields, or with 75 energy per FF) IMO #2 - Cyclone should have a "role", not kill everything.. Therefore I think it should have something like 9 (+ 9 vs Armored) damage and start with 5 latch and 8 max kiting range, and have it upgradeable for only later stages in the game for those radiuses to be like 7/13 respectively.. w.t.f. with the radiuses even from the early game, lol ============================================================================= And yes - would've liked for them to test if there were less workers per base saturation, not just the 12 on start.. Think the game would be much more fun if now when the armies are much more have-to-be-microable to require less economy management overall.. Surely - more options for harassment, but harassment as is now is actually brutal - like - GG outright and no chance to come back for-EVER.. If they made it like 12 workers per base (or even 16 to retain the 8 patches per base) - unless being committed to a multi-base harass - 12 (or even 16) workers aren't that much detrimental, so a better gameplay with more army-vs-army "skirmishing/domination" battles rather than army fight and one (or a couple) of drops Are you actually talking about stats ROFL, what you saw was just a pre-alpha they just showed how some of the units were, theres still a lot of changes coming before the beta, you are talking like they already released the game lol. Talking about range and cost and making stuff upgrades only comes once everything is already done and only balancing is left and I think that won't happen for several months I wasn't talking about stats, I was critisizing a bad approach.. But yes - stats were the arguments Still - doesn't require an expert to see how that's overall a very bad approach
No, you just whine about stuff you have no experience with, that's pretty much it.
|
On November 14 2014 23:04 LoneYoShi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2014 22:31 VArsovskiSC wrote:On November 14 2014 21:29 Lexender wrote:On November 14 2014 19:52 VArsovskiSC wrote:My 2 concerns is that DKim takes only "selective" and "gradual" approach in his creativity of new stuff: #1 - "gradual" approach mistake - when they said Banshee +1 range - we wanted to make them better vs Marines, Terran has the Cyclone to deflect harassment.. Well sure Mr. Kim, but what about the other 2 races ? , like - 5 range Queens surely won't be able to beat Banshees, and Stalkers already lose to them in a straight up engagement unless in very superior numbers.. ? I was SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO w.t.f. when listening to that - as if Starcraft was all about TvT, lol.. Ah sure - we'll see for the other two races later on.. well - w.t.f. - you can't make design gradual like that, means that further requriements will affect changes to current design, it's like 3 times the work required, lol #2 - "elitist" approach "mistake" - I don't like how DKim has an ALMOST EXCLUSIVE ELITIST approach.. Like - sure - they brought the Reaver micro back, but this is actually even harder , I mean w.t.f. - a unit that's 100/100 and costs 300 gas.. Really ? I mean the problem is - if you put units in the game that are only usable for pros - you surely won't have a greater playable audience.. ============================================================================= I mean - I'd be pretty satisfied EVEN NOW if there weren't a few w.t.f. factors in the game like: #1 - Banshee Range = biggest w.t.f. of them all #2 - Siege Tank Siege drop micro - again w.t.f. with this ?.. I'd be OK if this was an upgrade researchable, or even better some per-siege-tank "individual upgrade" for 25/25 or sth, but there's NO WAY this stays as is defendable.. Are Zergs really committed to Ravager/Queen being the only option to defend this ?, are they supposed to rush to Mutas every game or what ?? #3 - Nydus change - sure it sounds fun when Zerg has one Nydus network, but what to do as Protoss if Zerg has 3 networks or more ? #4 - Warp-in mechanic change.. How on Earth is Protoss supposed to defend vs Ling runbies and vs Bio Drops ? As for the new units - well #1 - Disruptor should be a relatively "expendable" unit, should cost like 150/75, or say 125/100 but do lesser AoE and a lesser Damage.. You'll ask - Banelings for Protoss ? - y, they could make the unit have 50/50 or even 40/40, but it's still something that would make the race work better (perhaps even without forcefields, or with 75 energy per FF) IMO #2 - Cyclone should have a "role", not kill everything.. Therefore I think it should have something like 9 (+ 9 vs Armored) damage and start with 5 latch and 8 max kiting range, and have it upgradeable for only later stages in the game for those radiuses to be like 7/13 respectively.. w.t.f. with the radiuses even from the early game, lol ============================================================================= And yes - would've liked for them to test if there were less workers per base saturation, not just the 12 on start.. Think the game would be much more fun if now when the armies are much more have-to-be-microable to require less economy management overall.. Surely - more options for harassment, but harassment as is now is actually brutal - like - GG outright and no chance to come back for-EVER.. If they made it like 12 workers per base (or even 16 to retain the 8 patches per base) - unless being committed to a multi-base harass - 12 (or even 16) workers aren't that much detrimental, so a better gameplay with more army-vs-army "skirmishing/domination" battles rather than army fight and one (or a couple) of drops Are you actually talking about stats ROFL, what you saw was just a pre-alpha they just showed how some of the units were, theres still a lot of changes coming before the beta, you are talking like they already released the game lol. Talking about range and cost and making stuff upgrades only comes once everything is already done and only balancing is left and I think that won't happen for several months I wasn't talking about stats, I was critisizing a bad approach.. But yes - stats were the arguments Still - doesn't require an expert to see how that's overall a very bad approach Stats are not final. No point in using them as arguments since they are going to change wildly. Even the design is not final, as it showed with the HotS announcement (ultralisk burrow charge, replicant, baneling burrow movement, warhound, the initial mines and oracles, etc). The only process Blizzard seems to have is the following: - Think about crazy, ridiculously over-the-top things that sound/seem really FUN. Based on what they showed, I'd say this is where they're at in LotV. - Actually try it in game, see if the FUN is still there and if doesn't ruin the FUN for the other player too. Based on this outcome, either keep the "design" of the change, or redesign/scrap it. - Once they have a good view of what they think will really improve the FUN of the game, then, and only finally then, do they start to worry about balancing. See how the the balance, the stats and even the design really only appear at the end of the process ? You're arguing about stuff that isn't even relevant yet. So please, don't go any further.
Exactly. The blizzcon preview was what they called a "snapshot" of the game's current development state. They said that they still have a good list of units they want to try out for each race still.
The design direction is indeed the only thing that will remain constant as listed here - http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/16654945/legacy-of-the-void-multiplayer-preview-11-8-2014
After playing the game at blizzcon, I can definitely say that the game is indeed very fun, and it all feels very different. I am excited to see what things Blizz comes up with.
|
On November 15 2014 00:55 spoonmaster wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2014 23:04 LoneYoShi wrote:On November 14 2014 22:31 VArsovskiSC wrote:On November 14 2014 21:29 Lexender wrote:On November 14 2014 19:52 VArsovskiSC wrote:My 2 concerns is that DKim takes only "selective" and "gradual" approach in his creativity of new stuff: #1 - "gradual" approach mistake - when they said Banshee +1 range - we wanted to make them better vs Marines, Terran has the Cyclone to deflect harassment.. Well sure Mr. Kim, but what about the other 2 races ? , like - 5 range Queens surely won't be able to beat Banshees, and Stalkers already lose to them in a straight up engagement unless in very superior numbers.. ? I was SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO w.t.f. when listening to that - as if Starcraft was all about TvT, lol.. Ah sure - we'll see for the other two races later on.. well - w.t.f. - you can't make design gradual like that, means that further requriements will affect changes to current design, it's like 3 times the work required, lol #2 - "elitist" approach "mistake" - I don't like how DKim has an ALMOST EXCLUSIVE ELITIST approach.. Like - sure - they brought the Reaver micro back, but this is actually even harder , I mean w.t.f. - a unit that's 100/100 and costs 300 gas.. Really ? I mean the problem is - if you put units in the game that are only usable for pros - you surely won't have a greater playable audience.. ============================================================================= I mean - I'd be pretty satisfied EVEN NOW if there weren't a few w.t.f. factors in the game like: #1 - Banshee Range = biggest w.t.f. of them all #2 - Siege Tank Siege drop micro - again w.t.f. with this ?.. I'd be OK if this was an upgrade researchable, or even better some per-siege-tank "individual upgrade" for 25/25 or sth, but there's NO WAY this stays as is defendable.. Are Zergs really committed to Ravager/Queen being the only option to defend this ?, are they supposed to rush to Mutas every game or what ?? #3 - Nydus change - sure it sounds fun when Zerg has one Nydus network, but what to do as Protoss if Zerg has 3 networks or more ? #4 - Warp-in mechanic change.. How on Earth is Protoss supposed to defend vs Ling runbies and vs Bio Drops ? As for the new units - well #1 - Disruptor should be a relatively "expendable" unit, should cost like 150/75, or say 125/100 but do lesser AoE and a lesser Damage.. You'll ask - Banelings for Protoss ? - y, they could make the unit have 50/50 or even 40/40, but it's still something that would make the race work better (perhaps even without forcefields, or with 75 energy per FF) IMO #2 - Cyclone should have a "role", not kill everything.. Therefore I think it should have something like 9 (+ 9 vs Armored) damage and start with 5 latch and 8 max kiting range, and have it upgradeable for only later stages in the game for those radiuses to be like 7/13 respectively.. w.t.f. with the radiuses even from the early game, lol ============================================================================= And yes - would've liked for them to test if there were less workers per base saturation, not just the 12 on start.. Think the game would be much more fun if now when the armies are much more have-to-be-microable to require less economy management overall.. Surely - more options for harassment, but harassment as is now is actually brutal - like - GG outright and no chance to come back for-EVER.. If they made it like 12 workers per base (or even 16 to retain the 8 patches per base) - unless being committed to a multi-base harass - 12 (or even 16) workers aren't that much detrimental, so a better gameplay with more army-vs-army "skirmishing/domination" battles rather than army fight and one (or a couple) of drops Are you actually talking about stats ROFL, what you saw was just a pre-alpha they just showed how some of the units were, theres still a lot of changes coming before the beta, you are talking like they already released the game lol. Talking about range and cost and making stuff upgrades only comes once everything is already done and only balancing is left and I think that won't happen for several months I wasn't talking about stats, I was critisizing a bad approach.. But yes - stats were the arguments Still - doesn't require an expert to see how that's overall a very bad approach Stats are not final. No point in using them as arguments since they are going to change wildly. Even the design is not final, as it showed with the HotS announcement (ultralisk burrow charge, replicant, baneling burrow movement, warhound, the initial mines and oracles, etc). The only process Blizzard seems to have is the following: - Think about crazy, ridiculously over-the-top things that sound/seem really FUN. Based on what they showed, I'd say this is where they're at in LotV. - Actually try it in game, see if the FUN is still there and if doesn't ruin the FUN for the other player too. Based on this outcome, either keep the "design" of the change, or redesign/scrap it. - Once they have a good view of what they think will really improve the FUN of the game, then, and only finally then, do they start to worry about balancing. See how the the balance, the stats and even the design really only appear at the end of the process ? You're arguing about stuff that isn't even relevant yet. So please, don't go any further. Exactly. The blizzcon preview was what they called a "snapshot" of the game's current development state. They said that they still have a good list of units they want to try out for each race still. The design direction is indeed the only thing that will remain constant as listed here - http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/16654945/legacy-of-the-void-multiplayer-preview-11-8-2014After playing the game at blizzcon, I can definitely say that the game is indeed very fun, and it all feels very different. I am excited to see what things Blizz comes up with.
Well yea but they do significantly rely on feedback for this sort of thing. My thoughts:
-Ravager looks awesome but has a stupid name (seriously it's the most generic name for a unit)
-I don't understand the Cyclone's role in Terran (except to be a Mech Marauder), and I think they should consider giving it to Protoss instead
-Disruptor looks like it could be fun but they have to make sure it has a good feel (frankly, I think it needs to be faster but IDK)
|
I don't understand the Cyclone's role in Terran (except to be a Mech Marauder), and I think they should consider giving it to Protoss instead
Initally I didn't either, but if this unit along with the Hellion can give terarn mech some harass potential vs armored units/static defense + it's stats can be tweaed somewhat so it interacts better --> This could be really awesome.
|
On November 15 2014 02:02 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +I don't understand the Cyclone's role in Terran (except to be a Mech Marauder), and I think they should consider giving it to Protoss instead Initally I didn't either, but if this unit along with the Hellion can give terarn mech some harass potential vs armored units/static defense + it's stats can be tweaed somewhat so it interacts better --> This could be really awesome.
You're supposed to be able harass armored units and static defense??? So how are you supposed to defend against them harassing you?
|
Some thoughts on the possible switch to real-time.
Jakatak made a video about this, but I think he missed some points. He had a possible solution which involved simply displaying the calculated real-time on the tooltip depending on the game speed. There is a dilemma he alluded to whether Blizzard should round to the nearest integer, accepting a small discrepancy between displayed and actual duration, or whether Blizzard should use the rounded values for engine input removing the discrepancy. I don't know if I interpreted the latter correctly, which sounds like a clumsy solution, so maybe he meant something different like recalibrating the values on Normal Speed so that there is no need to round when giving the real-time values on Faster Speed.
If you frame the issue this way then Blizzard looks negligent for not implementing rounding the real-time values, but imo Jakatak's examples were a bit misleading. He said that no person has the circadian rhythm to be able to notice the subtle difference between an SCV taking 12.325 or 12 seconds to build. Well, I think it's probably noticeable but he's correct in that it's not significant and that the effects will be drowned out by human error & any the rebalancing act required in LotV. However, there is also ability duration. Many abilities last anywhere between 2 and 5 seconds, so now 2 becomes 1.42, while 5 becomes 3.57. It's no longer true that these differences are negligible invalidating the example.
By switching to these real-time values you lose a lot of granularity for the tuning. Fungal growth currently lasts four seconds, but you're going to have to choose between values of two and three seconds with nothing in between if you switch to a recalibrated real-time display system.
Also, Blizzard likes multiples of five and in some cases 0.25 or 0.125. For the purposes of tuning it's no longer going to be possible to use clean looking numbers like that in most cases and this will almost entirely need to be sacrificed. I think the difference between overlords that build in 15 or 20 seconds is too significant to dismiss as part of the necessary balance work for LotV, so Blizzard will have to compromise to the value of 18 seconds. Stats like unit speed will change too and I don't think you can trivially mess with rounding the newly calculated speed values because so many unit relationships depend on them. You'll have a lot of obscure looking numbers and it will impact how clean the game looks.
Summarizing possible solutions:
- recalibration, will mess with balance due to lack of granularity and will result in ugly numbers regardless
- only displaying real-time values: intrusive and ugly numbers even if you round (not always possible)
- still displaying real-time values but as an option in the display settings that's off by default and therefore won't be intrusive. This is actually still not a perfect solution as the inconsistencies remain. If someone tells you his game lasted ten minutes you still won't know what happened.
- taking Faster Speed as the default or sacrificing clean looking values on Normal Speed, -- this won't happen because Blizzard needs to create a welcoming experience for new players. Similarly, they're never going to rename Faster to Normal because it's not good business to have new players start on Slow Speed because it makes them feel slow.
Personally I think there are better uses of development time.
|
On November 15 2014 03:10 DoubleReed wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2014 02:02 Hider wrote:I don't understand the Cyclone's role in Terran (except to be a Mech Marauder), and I think they should consider giving it to Protoss instead Initally I didn't either, but if this unit along with the Hellion can give terarn mech some harass potential vs armored units/static defense + it's stats can be tweaed somewhat so it interacts better --> This could be really awesome. You're supposed to be able harass armored units and static defense??? So how are you supposed to defend against them harassing you?
Blink stalkers can still be good against cyclone. Immortals can to.
Zealots can be good.
I see lots of things for toss here.
|
By the way, would it be a good idea to give access to replay overlays during live-games for the players? Obviously you would hide any information that relates to your opponent, but you could still look at the production, income and units tab and get a lot of use out of it. Perhaps you want to have a look at your army composition or your income or you want to check on when your upgrades will be ready, and so on.
It makes the game easier to play, but these are the sort of statistics that enable weaker players to play at a much higher level since they'll be constantly reminded of when to build units and such.
I've always wanted interface mods being allowed on the ladder, but disallowed on tournaments forcing top players to play with the standard interface. But for average ladder players it would still be nice to have the production tab.
|
On November 15 2014 03:41 Foxxan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2014 03:10 DoubleReed wrote:On November 15 2014 02:02 Hider wrote:I don't understand the Cyclone's role in Terran (except to be a Mech Marauder), and I think they should consider giving it to Protoss instead Initally I didn't either, but if this unit along with the Hellion can give terarn mech some harass potential vs armored units/static defense + it's stats can be tweaed somewhat so it interacts better --> This could be really awesome. You're supposed to be able harass armored units and static defense??? So how are you supposed to defend against them harassing you? Blink stalkers can still be good against cyclone. Immortals can to. Zealots can be good. I see lots of things for toss here.
No, just no.
You shouldn't be able to "harass" static D. Thats the POINT of static D, is to defend harass.
Also, Zealots are melee, I'm not sure how you expect them so be useful against something that moves and shoots at the same time.
|
On November 15 2014 03:42 Grumbels wrote:
By the way, would it be a good idea to give access to replay overlays during live-games for the players? Obviously you would hide any information that relates to your opponent, but you could still look at the production, income and units tab and get a lot of use out of it. Perhaps you want to have a look at your army composition or your income or you want to check on when your upgrades will be ready, and so on.
It makes the game easier to play, but these are the sort of statistics that enable weaker players to play at a much higher level since they'll be constantly reminded of when to build units and such.
I've always wanted interface mods being allowed on the ladder, but disallowed on tournaments forcing top players to play with the standard interface. But for average ladder players it would still be nice to have the production tab.
Maybe a practice mode with that stuff could be good.
But I wouldn't want it in the game.
|
On November 15 2014 03:47 DinoMight wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2014 03:41 Foxxan wrote:On November 15 2014 03:10 DoubleReed wrote:On November 15 2014 02:02 Hider wrote:I don't understand the Cyclone's role in Terran (except to be a Mech Marauder), and I think they should consider giving it to Protoss instead Initally I didn't either, but if this unit along with the Hellion can give terarn mech some harass potential vs armored units/static defense + it's stats can be tweaed somewhat so it interacts better --> This could be really awesome. You're supposed to be able harass armored units and static defense??? So how are you supposed to defend against them harassing you? Blink stalkers can still be good against cyclone. Immortals can to. Zealots can be good. I see lots of things for toss here. No, just no. You shouldn't be able to "harass" static D. Thats the POINT of static D, is to defend harass. Also, Zealots are melee, I'm not sure how you expect them so be useful against something that moves and shoots at the same time.
You clearly missed blizzards goal with lotv if this is your say.
Toss has warpgate->great for defence. In lotv, more brain might be needed but i dont see how this will make toss not want to use it.
Zealots can get increased speed. Plus, they tank damage nice against cyclone.
Stalkers with blink could work well. Its about time they need to use blink well against units with microthemself against stalkers.
|
On November 15 2014 03:48 DinoMight wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2014 03:42 Grumbels wrote:
By the way, would it be a good idea to give access to replay overlays during live-games for the players? Obviously you would hide any information that relates to your opponent, but you could still look at the production, income and units tab and get a lot of use out of it. Perhaps you want to have a look at your army composition or your income or you want to check on when your upgrades will be ready, and so on.
It makes the game easier to play, but these are the sort of statistics that enable weaker players to play at a much higher level since they'll be constantly reminded of when to build units and such.
I've always wanted interface mods being allowed on the ladder, but disallowed on tournaments forcing top players to play with the standard interface. But for average ladder players it would still be nice to have the production tab. Maybe a practice mode with that stuff could be good. But I wouldn't want it in the game.
Well, it would be optional. Do you think those sort of tools are too powerful or only useful for beginning players?
|
On November 15 2014 03:54 Foxxan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2014 03:47 DinoMight wrote:On November 15 2014 03:41 Foxxan wrote:On November 15 2014 03:10 DoubleReed wrote:On November 15 2014 02:02 Hider wrote:I don't understand the Cyclone's role in Terran (except to be a Mech Marauder), and I think they should consider giving it to Protoss instead Initally I didn't either, but if this unit along with the Hellion can give terarn mech some harass potential vs armored units/static defense + it's stats can be tweaed somewhat so it interacts better --> This could be really awesome. You're supposed to be able harass armored units and static defense??? So how are you supposed to defend against them harassing you? Blink stalkers can still be good against cyclone. Immortals can to. Zealots can be good. I see lots of things for toss here. No, just no. You shouldn't be able to "harass" static D. Thats the POINT of static D, is to defend harass. Also, Zealots are melee, I'm not sure how you expect them so be useful against something that moves and shoots at the same time. Show nested quote +On November 15 2014 03:54 Foxxan wrote:
You clearly missed blizzards goal with lotv if this is your say.
There are some red lines that no matter what shouldn't be crossed.. That's why I'm against if anything to the Banshee range of +1 --> how the f*ck should Zerg defend vs Banshees with 7 range with Queens with an AA range of 5 ? - should Zerg be EVERY ZvT game doing the following - scouting Starport - making 3 spores in each base, lol
Don't say that that Ravager thing is gonna hit Banshees, cause that thing is outright unreliable vs moving targets, lol
On November 15 2014 03:54 Foxxan wrote:
Toss has warpgate->great for defence. In lotv, more brain might be needed but i dont see how this will make toss not want to use it.
Either more brain, or more like - not having an option to defend at all
On November 15 2014 03:54 Foxxan wrote:
Zealots can get increased speed. Plus, they tank damage nice against cyclone.
How you mean increased speed ?, tank damage nice ? - you mean each surviving 5 seconds on average ? - if it was even 5 seconds lol
On November 15 2014 03:54 Foxxan wrote:
Stalkers with blink could work well. Its about time they need to use blink well against units with microthemself against stalkers.
w.t.f. is that supposed to mean, lol
===============================================================================
OK - regardless - what Terran lacks/ed is a Key-Priority-Target sniper unit.. THAT IS (or at least should be) the main role of the Cyclone.. Prior to LotV Terran needed like 12, 15 or even 20 Vikings to snipe Colossi vs Protoss which ended in a disaster scenario of investing 1500 gas into fights that most of the time were gonna die anyway though.. Like - Terran used to have to use nearly 70% of it's total gas resource in Vikings to snipe the Colossus ball..
Now - with the Cyclone - that's a very elegant solution superior option.. That's why I like the unit's design/concept overall, because it's main role in fact is "Deathball Disassembler" beside it's "key priority target" unit main role..
However - It's straight-up a TERRIBAD design to make the unit work well vs everything else as well TBH.. The cyclone should be pretty bad before the time when Key units start entering in the game - i.e. - have lesser Latch range and lesser Max range before things like Colossi start to emmerge IMO
That's what I'd do to the unit lol.. For example - make it at the start be a 5/8 range, and then later on make it with an upgrade a unit of 7/12.. The damage - instead of being 18 flat - which is w.t.f. by it's own - should be something like 9 (+9 vs armored + 7 vs Massive) IMO
Therefore the unit should probably do 9 damage to things like Lings/Zealots/Sentries/Marines, should do 18 (it's current damage) vs Queens/Roaches/Stalkers/Immortals/Ravagers.. And should do perhaps even a bit more vs things like Colossus/Archon/Carrier/Mothership/Ultralisk/Broodlord/BC/Thor
Like - THAT's a unit right there that has a specific role and with it's high 200hp it's decent vs everything that's not a unit of light armor
|
On November 15 2014 03:41 Foxxan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2014 03:10 DoubleReed wrote:On November 15 2014 02:02 Hider wrote:I don't understand the Cyclone's role in Terran (except to be a Mech Marauder), and I think they should consider giving it to Protoss instead Initally I didn't either, but if this unit along with the Hellion can give terarn mech some harass potential vs armored units/static defense + it's stats can be tweaed somewhat so it interacts better --> This could be really awesome. You're supposed to be able harass armored units and static defense??? So how are you supposed to defend against them harassing you? Blink stalkers can still be good against cyclone. Immortals can to. Zealots can be good. I see lots of things for toss here.
So that's the same as hellions, isn't it? I assume cyclones will be good against either stalkers or immortals, or once again relatively pointless.
It sounds like the same issue as reapers with the anti-building grenades. Static defense is already at a disadvantage for being static against a super mobile unit.
I just don't get it.
|
On November 15 2014 03:47 DinoMight wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2014 03:41 Foxxan wrote:On November 15 2014 03:10 DoubleReed wrote:On November 15 2014 02:02 Hider wrote:I don't understand the Cyclone's role in Terran (except to be a Mech Marauder), and I think they should consider giving it to Protoss instead Initally I didn't either, but if this unit along with the Hellion can give terarn mech some harass potential vs armored units/static defense + it's stats can be tweaed somewhat so it interacts better --> This could be really awesome. You're supposed to be able harass armored units and static defense??? So how are you supposed to defend against them harassing you? Blink stalkers can still be good against cyclone. Immortals can to. Zealots can be good. I see lots of things for toss here. No, just no. You shouldn't be able to "harass" static D. Thats the POINT of static D, is to defend harass. Also, Zealots are melee, I'm not sure how you expect them so be useful against something that moves and shoots at the same time.
That's what Siege units are for.
I think the Cyclone is a Goliath in the Anti Air department that can also harass.
Still looks like a silly unit though and even adopts something that makes Protoss special, the move-while-shoot, making it less special.
|
VArsovskiSC,
you're flat out balance whining over a pre-alpha. Stop it.
On November 15 2014 03:47 DinoMight wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2014 03:41 Foxxan wrote:On November 15 2014 03:10 DoubleReed wrote:On November 15 2014 02:02 Hider wrote:I don't understand the Cyclone's role in Terran (except to be a Mech Marauder), and I think they should consider giving it to Protoss instead Initally I didn't either, but if this unit along with the Hellion can give terarn mech some harass potential vs armored units/static defense + it's stats can be tweaed somewhat so it interacts better --> This could be really awesome. You're supposed to be able harass armored units and static defense??? So how are you supposed to defend against them harassing you? Blink stalkers can still be good against cyclone. Immortals can to. Zealots can be good. I see lots of things for toss here. No, just no. You shouldn't be able to "harass" static D. Thats the POINT of static D, is to defend harass. Also, Zealots are melee, I'm not sure how you expect them so be useful against something that moves and shoots at the same time.
I want to disagree with that. There is nothing wrong with Static D that can be destroyed in harassment. The worst thing I could think of is Static Defense that completely shuts down harassment without any attention required whatsoever (see: Photon Cannon vs Hellion, Mine; TurretS(!) vs Oracle) with a one-time investment of a couple of minerals you secure your mineral line with SD?
There's 2 better options:
a) Oracle vs one Turret: with good micro and enough attention, the Turret limits damage, but does not nullify the Oracle. Same happens with Banshee vs Turret. These are interesting interactions because SD limits the amount of damage dealt, but doesn't block it.
b) 12 Mutalisk vs one Turret: with a quick repair the Mutalisk will have to commit to the harassment. They can kill the Turret, but it'll be expensive.
Bad interactions:
c) DT vs Defense. If there is SD, DT's will not deal any reasonable damage.
d) Photon/Spine vs Hellions: if there is 2 or 3 defenses, you can throw any number of Hellions in there, it'll never be even remotely cost effective.
The last 2 situations are bad. SD should either limit damage dealt OR buy time for additional defense. Because of that, it is no problem if the Cyclone can kill a cannon - as long as the Cannon buys Protoss the time to warp in or get defenses in place.
|
On November 15 2014 04:54 SC2Toastie wrote:VArsovskiSC, you're flat out balance whining over a pre-alpha. Stop it. Show nested quote +On November 15 2014 03:47 DinoMight wrote:On November 15 2014 03:41 Foxxan wrote:On November 15 2014 03:10 DoubleReed wrote:On November 15 2014 02:02 Hider wrote:I don't understand the Cyclone's role in Terran (except to be a Mech Marauder), and I think they should consider giving it to Protoss instead Initally I didn't either, but if this unit along with the Hellion can give terarn mech some harass potential vs armored units/static defense + it's stats can be tweaed somewhat so it interacts better --> This could be really awesome. You're supposed to be able harass armored units and static defense??? So how are you supposed to defend against them harassing you? Blink stalkers can still be good against cyclone. Immortals can to. Zealots can be good. I see lots of things for toss here. No, just no. You shouldn't be able to "harass" static D. Thats the POINT of static D, is to defend harass. Also, Zealots are melee, I'm not sure how you expect them so be useful against something that moves and shoots at the same time. I want to disagree with that. There is nothing wrong with Static D that can be destroyed in harassment. The worst thing I could think of is Static Defense that completely shuts down harassment without any attention required whatsoever (see: Photon Cannon vs Hellion, Mine; TurretS(!) vs Oracle) with a one-time investment of a couple of minerals you secure your mineral line with SD? There's 2 better options: a) Oracle vs one Turret: with good micro and enough attention, the Turret limits damage, but does not nullify the Oracle. Same happens with Banshee vs Turret. These are interesting interactions because SD limits the amount of damage dealt, but doesn't block it. b) 12 Mutalisk vs one Turret: with a quick repair the Mutalisk will have to commit to the harassment. They can kill the Turret, but it'll be expensive. Bad interactions: c) DT vs Defense. If there is SD, DT's will not deal any reasonable damage. d) Photon/Spine vs Hellions: if there is 2 or 3 defenses, you can throw any number of Hellions in there, it'll never be even remotely cost effective. The last 2 situations are bad. SD should either limit damage dealt OR buy time for additional defense. Because of that, it is no problem if the Cyclone can kill a cannon - as long as the Cannon buys Protoss the time to warp in or get defenses in place.
First of all - NO - I'm not
Second of all - I'm sick and tired of Terran f*cks telling me things "words of wisdom" cause I KNOW what I'm talking about
If you wanna "check" what I'm talking about - consider for a second the following option
About your a) - Consider Oracle with a range of 7 ? - how you like that Terran f*cker ?
Seriously stop doing that sh*t of "wisening everyone else" cause it's downright outright ignorrant and dreadful
Imagine the Oracle having a range of 7 and then having Protosses telling you - relax - it's pre-alpha, it's gonna get better, you can't be sure with 4 games in a showmatch series - YES YOU CAN
Sick and tired of Terran apathy jerkness accross the board.. And that Mr. Kim himself having the worst thought process EVER and having his ridiculous sh*t justified by "cool to watch"
No offense - only a sick mental Terran mindset can defend a cause that a "harassment unit should kill static D as well", every other "sane" person outright KNOWS that there should be a different unit for each of those two causes.. That's just outright ignorrant and jerk thought process to defend upon
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
