|
On December 24 2014 00:18 Jornada wrote:
Its so sad.... how BAD blizzard has developed this game! I would work for blizzard for free to help change these peoples ideas as to what the community wants. Yeah, so bad that they developed the most popular RTS game yet.
On December 24 2014 00:18 Jornada wrote:Thank you Destiny for being you. I honestly dont know what the future holds for SC2 but i do hope it gets better.
If you would have the necessary skills as a game developer (not just felt by yourself, but provable) they would probably hire and pay you.
On December 24 2014 02:19 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:
It takes a lot of effort to be the voice of the community, and Destiny isn't even close.
On the other hand, I think he is more of the serious ones. I think his blog makes a good argument overall. While some of his proposals are in my opinion not as useful, his starting point is in my opinion totally correct: This games needs to be attractive for casual player as well, so that SC2 constantly gets (at least) some new blood.
|
On December 24 2014 03:44 [F_]aths wrote:Show nested quote +On December 24 2014 00:18 Jornada wrote:
Its so sad.... how BAD blizzard has developed this game! I would work for blizzard for free to help change these peoples ideas as to what the community wants. Yeah, so bad that they developed the most popular RTS game yet. Show nested quote +On December 24 2014 00:18 Jornada wrote:Thank you Destiny for being you. I honestly dont know what the future holds for SC2 but i do hope it gets better. If you would have the necessary skills as a game developer (not just felt by yourself, but provable) they would probably hire and pay you.
Everytime I join one of these controversial discussions where ppl try to develop some constructive criticism then I get slowly more and more frustrated by statements like the one you quoted. The categories are mostly:
1. Any pulled out of the ass comparison to BW or a straight up generalisation in that regard which doesn't hold any value or content. This is super meme like especially considering the fact that SC2 allready had more global success and tournaments than BW ever had. And considering that apparently SC2s main "problem" is the "small" playerbase (it's actually freaking huge. The numbers MOBAs are pulling off are a completely new phenomenon) then SC2 is miles ahead of its predecessor.
2. Balance whine. This one incredible since its in 99% of the time based on anectodes, narrow perceiption, lack of understanding and lack of research. SC2 is more balanced than it ever was. Its closer to balance than BW was at any given time in history especially considering the sheer amount of competitive games. But SC2 is not only balanced in terms of races but in terms of options as well. For each race and matchup there are different playstyles and compositions that are all viable and this is still developing and changing within the proscene. If we compare the best players in each race then we see vastly different styles and ways to win games. Think Life or Snute, Zest or sOs, ForGG or INnoVation etc.
3. Attacks directly at Blizzard. The only real issue. And tbh this was the case for more than 15 years in any given Blizzard game, is that they are very / often too careful when it comes to communication. That's really it! Their patching history is incredibly smart when it comes to balance (the result shows this). They have moved from patching races into focussing on Maps. They have toned down the frequency over the years. Those are all proven success receipts they learned from their older games and during sc2 development and also the hardcore community and the progamers have in general appreciated when Blizzard patched slower and more careful, while improving in that regard over time as well.
"The community" doesn't know how to balance and design games neither do progamers. It is very naive to think that your average Joe's random ass ideas and biased ways of thinking about the game are any more or even equally refined and smart than what Blizzard's. If you do "what the community wants" then you wont get a highly complex and beautifuly crafted game. Hell it isn't even clear what that would be because "the community" has wildly different and conflicting opinions about what "should be done" with the game. Have these guys posting shit like this ever checked out the battle.net forums or do they even read some of the posts on this board except OPs? Literally the only consensus we currently have is that we think something like skins and other monetisation models might be something that helps to grow a bigger casual player base. That is really all. The fact that Archon mode and periodic tournaments are way more exciting and creative features that work towards the same goal is beyond their grasp.
|
Canada11316 Posts
1. Any pulled out of the ass comparison to BW or a straight up generalisation in that regard which doesn't hold any value or content. This is super meme like especially considering the fact that SC2 allready had more global success and tournaments than BW ever had. And considering that apparently SC2s main "problem" is the "small" playerbase (it's actually freaking huge. The numbers MOBAs are pulling off are a completely new phenomenon) then SC2 is miles ahead of its predecessor.
Depends where you are looking. You are right that Moba's are blowing other games out of the water, but the playerbase of SC2 is not necessarily bigger than its predecessor- at least in Korea. Both Warcraft III and Starcraft are fairly consistently in the top 10 of games played in the Internet cafes, but you don't really see SC2 in the same lists.
https://www.techinasia.com/koreas-top-10-most-popular-pc-games-september-2014/
https://www.techinasia.com/south-koreas-top-10-most-popular-pc-games-august-2014/
https://www.techinasia.com/koreas-top-10-popular-pc-games-july-2013/
But you are likely correct in countries outside of Korea, but again it depends what you are looking at.
|
That is ofc true. But a large portion of the community up to the casters and pros want more competitive regions outside of korea. I personally couldn't care less from where the top players are comming from. The viewer numbers are apparently the highest when theres a korean vs forgeigner finals at a major tournament. Korea's Esports interests are now closer to the distribution we see globally (while still being the number 1 place for SC2 and now also LoL).
But Korea being more globalized in terms of Esports now (having the best LoL teams and the biggest LoL following) is a good thing because it gives more attention to the teams. They are also investing in more tournaments now such as the SSL and the Proleague, so in terms of competitive content SC2 has benefited from the general growth of the teams (the Proleague is sponsored by SKT and the production style and value as well as the on site fans are very similar to the BW Proleague).
Also the EU scene has a range of very consistent and successful tournaments, teams and organisations. Literally the only scene which is "struggling" and "on decline" is the NA scene but it has allways been the weakest in terms of competitive gameing throughout Esports history. Somehow NA manages to hype up really really fast and then falls off really fast. A weird phenomenon which probably has to be looked at more closely. The strong side of the NA scene is content creation surrounding Esports but less so winning competitions and maintaining a strong competitive scene apparently.
All that said, it is mindboggling for me to hear a couple terms such as "doom and gloom" / "dead game" etc. especially in comparison to BW, because in fact SC2 is a global Esports success. I have no idea where these terms come from but I assume they are NA inventions and as they have the best content creators and the most famous personalities, those terms get kind of broadcasted into the global english speaking scenes.
And in the bottom line is that most BW comparisons to critisize SC2 are just meme like below the belt attacks without any real value, reasoning or even content. Their only purpose is to be negative and come off as hipster because the cool kids like BW more than SC2. These people often don't even followed or played BW because if they would then they had actual things to say. SC2 made alot of very good steps away from BW and over time it also learned some of the things back (such as competitive maps). There are interesting relationships there we can explore though. For example the economy changes Blizzard is working on atm are things ppl on these boards have discussed and analyzed extensively and is largely influenced by what we know and learned from the differences of SC2 and BW, same for the maps. But we don't do that on the basis of saying "BW is generally better in any way so SC2 has to be more like it". The discussion goes way beyond that and I was amazed by the fact how deep and interesting it is. Poeple also seem to forget how many things SC2 has improved design wise. Apart from the better UI and Utility surrounding the game we also have more options as in units, upgrades and army compositions which are viable and competitive in the game which is largely exciting.
|
On December 17 2014 04:49 Destiny wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2014 04:46 The_Red_Viper wrote:On December 17 2014 04:31 Destiny wrote:On December 17 2014 04:05 Hider wrote:
Destiny's theory is that Blizzard should adopt a business model based on microtransactions -> this gives Blizzard a financial incentive to continue developing the game. I'm not sure if this makes sense, because for Blizzard to change business models they require financial incentive to begin with. I'm assuming that Blizzard's management is aware of the success of MOBAs & CS:GO (Heroes of the Storm takes many lessons from those games), and the reason that SC2 doesn't use a F2P model is because it's not a good fit / the game is too old.
This is what has driven me crazy about Destiny. He is somewhat smart person, but when he gets on to one thought, he is just absolutely convinced he is right, and never assesses his own position by attempting to evaluate its assumption or do more research on the subject. This kind of thinking that "RTS is a special butterfly" needs to absolutely die ASAP. BW was hugely successful. WC3 was hugely successful. A year ago people said "FPS just isn't what it used to be back in the Quake and 1.6 days, we just have to accept that MOBAs are where it's at now" and boom, look at CS:GO now. Please stop with this "RTS is such a special, unique type of gameplay that could never be mainstream again!" You ignore decades of history with such an absolutely ignorant statement by being so incredibly short-sighted. But it kinda is. I think we all can agree that reaching for the masses practically means "make it as easy as possible to enjoy". Do you think sc2 fits there? What exactly can blizzard do about the gameplay to attract the average joe? Skins and voice packs might be interesting to think about as soon as we have a large enough playerbase to keep them playing, but there is no way these additions would help getting people to play the game in the first place (at least not longterm DUE to the gameplay) Some people say the arcade and therefore custom games are the easy solution here, but i srsly doubt that as well. Sure, years and years ago some mini games might have been a strong reason to keep playing that rts game (BW, Wc3), but would that be the same today? We have easy access to a lot of different games (via steam for example), would custom games really be enough for people to care about sc2? I think the archon mode was included for lotv exactly cause of this "problem", but will it be enough? TBF blizzard announced another game mode, but i think we don't have any real informations about that yet What about making it so that from bronze to gold, your main building automatically produces workers until you're at 16 on each base? Maybe you can set up a file before-hand to automatically create gasses at x number of workers? Then new players can simply focus on making units and attacking? Maybe up until silver league you can right click on a unit in a building and the building will automatically produce that unit, assuming you have the resources/supply to do so? Maybe in bronze/silver/gold leagues there are rocks outside of your natural expansion every game that have to be brought down to prevent people from early rushing you? Maybe through platinum league EVERY CC/hatchery/nexus has some sort of built-in defense system that lasts until 8 minutes have passed? There are ways to make the game more "casual friendly" at lower levels while still keeping the higher levels in tact.
I don't think these suggestions are very good, but I like the way you are thinking. Here are some of my ideas:
# In addition to A-move add an E-move that targets workers first.
# In Red Alert 1 there were two hotkeys that I miss, one was X to scatter your troops (they spread out slighty every time you press it) and the other was F to lock the selected units in formation.
# Instead of the totally bullshit and inane bronze/silver/gold/plat/etc.. leagues break it up by region (in an opt in way) to people select say a country or a state or a city and are ranked inside that. They could also compare rank to those on firends list, clan, etc.
# Put up like $500 dollars into a 3 palyer and 4 player make making compition so we can actually get decent maps there.
# I would love to see a 3v3 tournament. The way to make it balanced is to enforce TPZ vs TPZ only.
# I do like the auto-build worker one though, very nice.
The general problem with SC2 is that the multi-tasking is fucking difficult.
|
I agree with Destiny in his praise for how Valve treats its games turning them into very successful and profitable esport games.
SC2 doesnt need to be free to play, however, I agree with destiny that blizzard should attract casual gamers with hats and skins. Skinning and pimping out your Terran army would be absolutely amazing.
I love Dota 2 for having those items to pimp out your favorite heroes. SC2 should have that and will benefit the game tremendously.
Valve's advantage is that they have the market place and the virtual items in place.
Blizzard doesnt have a market place of its own so it will have to sell premade skins just like LoL.
If I had a choice, Blizzard should implement aesthetic customization just like Dota 2.
|
another advantage Valve has it is not a publicly traded company.
if uncle gabe wants to assign 500 employees to a game that has a player base of 5,000 he just does it.
Blizzard answers to ATVI.
so its one thing to "blue sky" these solutions... its a whole other ball game selling these "solutions" to management.
and if u sell a "solution" that you claim will result in 100s of millions of dollars of new income.. .and then it does not happen you are either unemployed or moved to a different assignment.
middle managers generally play it safe because they have their own bills to pay and lives to live.
|
i think the tldr of it all, is that Blizzard doesnt care about SC2 anymore, and just want to make enough money now since they can.
It's been how many years since HOTS and LOTV? And they still have to 'think' of a new protoss unit, or 'realise' that certain units may be crap? Heck if they got any of the TL staff members who work on SC, they could have come up with better stuff for LOTV.
|
On December 24 2014 11:15 worosei wrote:
i think the tldr of it all, is that Blizzard doesnt care about SC2 anymore, and just want to make enough money now since they can.
It's been how many years since HOTS and LOTV? And they still have to 'think' of a new protoss unit, or 'realise' that certain units may be crap? Heck if they got any of the TL staff members who work on SC, they could have come up with better stuff for LOTV.
No thats not the tldr of it all. You clearly didn't read the thread. That is just you being negative and hostile.
|
On December 24 2014 02:08 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:Show nested quote +On December 24 2014 00:08 [F_]aths wrote:On December 23 2014 02:16 fruity. wrote:On December 22 2014 21:27 Dapper_Cad wrote:
When it comes to chat Blizzard is like the passive aggressive flat share you had when you first moved out of your parents. All you want is for them to do the washing up once in a while and when you talk to them about it, they say "Yea, of course I'll do it, no problem" and maybe you catch them waving a brillo at a dish the next day then ... nothing, so you bring it up again ... and again ... and again. Eventually you just stop bringing it up because somehow now you're the asshole.
This. This analogy is spot on. As Destiny himself said; at least we can hear it and go from there, instead of constantly being dragged around by the dick with these answers of "well, the dev team will look at it, guys!"And it's this aspect of how bliztard deal with community interactions that irks me the most. In the recent arcade marathon cast there was a dev on at one point called Tim (don't recall his surname). Spontaneously some questions about Arcade bugs were asked, it was interesting to hear Tim's thoughts, yet this scrap of interaction was hidden away in the 7th odd hour of a 12 hour cast, and missed by 99.9% of the community. Why cant Kim Phan (bliztards Senior Manager of eSports) Have a fortnightly or monthly video blog and address issues the community have been raising (or get one of her underpaid and overworked minions to do it). How about David Kim doing the same? The number of people who would be interested in this - especially as we approach LotV - would be very very high. At blizcon, he had a all too brief interview and even though it was short, it was still interesting. Because, Kim could only address so many questions, leaving enough unanswered to have many guys still complaining. Because Kim would have to have discussion with the right developers, which takes much more time than the video itself. Because if Blizzard would explain all the little steps and considerations, they would get a lot of random input which is not helpful. Because it would cost more in time and money to develop a monthly video or state of the game blog; which could take away from developing more/better games. Because there would be only a small beneficial gain, but the problems would still persist. Because it doesn't provide real solutions to the problems. Here is the thing, I have complete confidence that Blizzard can turn everything around. I know a lot of people here have been bashing or doubting Blizzard. It seems like they aren't reading this thread; Destiny's blog; Battlenet forum; or even reddit. However, they have proven time and time they read a lot of stuff published on the Internet about SC2. I am sure Blizzard read Destiny's blog. It was no coincidence they posted their blog shortly afterwards. Psione has consistenly been on reddit and TL. Guys, Blizzard is communicating with us. Lets please stop bashing them by saying "Blizzard doesn't listen to the community." They do read a lot of the stuff here and everywhere around the web. Can they respond to all of it? Hell no, there are way too many of us out there for them to respond to. What I want from them is just a little bit more communication. Not a whole lot, but a bit more smaller updates. We are getting into LotV, and I really want to see where the game is heading. I am sure all of us is eager to hear about any balance updates on Hots and LotV. I feel like Blizzard has a bigger opportunity to develop some content that we will eat up like pancakes at IHOP. Instead they give us meagre scraps to leave us starving for more.
I feel like people are talking about something I said that I didn't. "When it comes to chat Blizzard is like the passive aggressive ... " etc. etc. I wasn't making a sweeping attack on Blizzard's fan face. I was specifically responding to this quote
On December 22 2014 03:41 fruity. wrote:
The chat / channels thing seems to be a constant grip since roughly 800BC.
from this post. The social aspect of the SC2 client has always been terrible despite constant complaints and suggestions.
Personally, it wouldn't take much to make me happy, better clan chat support would be great, IRC type commands would also be good, but mainly what I would like to see is the client gently funnelling users into a chat room populated by people from the same rough geographical area just as WC3 did. You log on, first question:
"Enter chat? (blizzard is not responsible for statements, claims, offers of a sexual nature made by the various subhuman animals you might encounter) P.S. never give anyone your password."
If "yes" then /joinchannel #SC2-UserCountryCode-1
else vanilla SC2 frontend
It was such a great and simple way to put a gentle pressure on players towards socialising. At the moment the client seems designed to achieve the opposite. Now I understand why this might be the case -cost of having to deal with user complaints over the actions of other users for one- but that doesn't mean I can't be disappointed they've picked this route, nor that I can't be peeved at how they've handled requests for a better social experience.
In more general terms Blizzard is as good at customer service and fan interaction as they always have been. Which is to say great. I think the problem we're facing more than anything is that SC2 is their lowest priority right now and that the corporate plan is ... or... well wait. I'm about to make some huge assumptions, I can't claim to know the truth, all I can really talk about is what I guess is happening and how I feel given what I've seen following SC2 since "Hell, it's about time".
What I think I see is that there are people at Blizzard right this second who have a deep and abiding love of the starcraft 2 universe and RTSs in general and that they want nothing more than to see us grow and flourish. However I also see that from a pure money perspective there are 2 possibilities for LotV
-a very safe win.
-a risky and sudden change which features a million different ways to screw up and a slim chance of a "LoL miracle".
And if this is the case, then there is no choice at all. Not only that, but they have their "LoL miracle" set up and ready to rock in the form of HotS. So what we will see is a high quality single player campaign with a couple new units for each race, because this is essentially expected. We will also see a few other adjustments which are cheap to implement like a rebalancing of the economy and archon mode.
My honest opinion is that this sort of stuff from Destiny is actually counter productive. While it's really great to listen to someone articulate who clearly cares a great deal about SC2, the result will be that a lot of time and energy is spent discussing vague irrelevancy because it's all pie in the sky. If we want change, what we need are suggestions that are clearly stated, cheap to implement and garner popular support "SC2 shop with skins and voice packs" might be popular but it's also both vague and expensive and so pretty much doomed to failure.
So now we get to have another failed mob action which we can point to in future days while wailing, rending our clothes and rolling our eyes "Bliiizzzzaaaarrrddd! Whhhhyyyy!". Which I'm sure will make us all feel like we did our best but they just wouldn't listen.
On the upside... Proleague's started again, so that's at least one more season of the best sporting experience available to a human in the second decade of the 21st century.
|
Hey Dapper_Cad, I agree that Blizzard could have incorporated more social features built into the client.
Instead they relied on current social tools (Facebook), but this left the game client feeling barren and empty.
|
On December 24 2014 06:01 clickrush wrote:+ Show Spoiler +That is ofc true. But a large portion of the community up to the casters and pros want more competitive regions outside of korea. I personally couldn't care less from where the top players are comming from. The viewer numbers are apparently the highest when theres a korean vs forgeigner finals at a major tournament. Korea's Esports interests are now closer to the distribution we see globally (while still being the number 1 place for SC2 and now also LoL). But Korea being more globalized in terms of Esports now (having the best LoL teams and the biggest LoL following) is a good thing because it gives more attention to the teams. They are also investing in more tournaments now such as the SSL and the Proleague, so in terms of competitive content SC2 has benefited from the general growth of the teams (the Proleague is sponsored by SKT and the production style and value as well as the on site fans are very similar to the BW Proleague). Also the EU scene has a range of very consistent and successful tournaments, teams and organisations. Literally the only scene which is "struggling" and "on decline" is the NA scene but it has allways been the weakest in terms of competitive gameing throughout Esports history. Somehow NA manages to hype up really really fast and then falls off really fast. A weird phenomenon which probably has to be looked at more closely. The strong side of the NA scene is content creation surrounding Esports but less so winning competitions and maintaining a strong competitive scene apparently. All that said, it is mindboggling for me to hear a couple terms such as "doom and gloom" / "dead game" etc. especially in comparison to BW, because in fact SC2 is a global Esports success. I have no idea where these terms come from but I assume they are NA inventions and as they have the best content creators and the most famous personalities, those terms get kind of broadcasted into the global english speaking scenes. And in the bottom line is that most BW comparisons to critisize SC2 are just meme like below the belt attacks without any real value, reasoning or even content. Their only purpose is to be negative and come off as hipster because the cool kids like BW more than SC2. These people often don't even followed or played BW because if they would then they had actual things to say. SC2 made alot of very good steps away from BW and over time it also learned some of the things back (such as competitive maps). There are interesting relationships there we can explore though. For example the economy changes Blizzard is working on atm are things ppl on these boards have discussed and analyzed extensively and is largely influenced by what we know and learned from the differences of SC2 and BW, same for the maps. But we don't do that on the basis of saying "BW is generally better in any way so SC2 has to be more like it". The discussion goes way beyond that and I was amazed by the fact how deep and interesting it is. Poeple also seem to forget how many things SC2 has improved design wise. Apart from the better UI and Utility surrounding the game we also have more options as in units, upgrades and army compositions which are viable and competitive in the game which is largely exciting.
Gosh, SC2 was riding on the back of starcraft franchise and blizzard reputation. It would be close to nothing if its name was something random and developed by some unknown company. In fact, community and organizations tried hard to make it succesfull and prolong hype as much as possible. Which resulted in better HoTS sales, but game didn't improve much. Luckily hype is dying off now (thank god), and blizzard won't be getting free marketing for lotv and maybe they'll learn something and do better job next time.
Note that Dota 2 and CS GO were in same exact spot. They were kinda meh in the beginning, but valve worked hard to improve them and now the community is happy as ever.
|
Maybe some individuals never were into BW but like to bring it up because it holds status in the community but a lot of people also did/do play BW a lot and tried to switch to SC2 but simple couldn't get into it because of its shortcomings.
|
SC2 feels hard, harsh and unfair. Like BW, but BW is almost gone in the western world. It is easy to praise BW when you no longer play it.
The thing is, the game feels hard, harsh and unfair for every player. In the end, it is me coming to the wrong conclusion "My all-in worked, am I not a clever player?" "His all-in worked. Why does the game still allows to build marines?"
Or "After this long macro phase, I smartly got to a final, but powerful push to deal critical damage" versus "After I held for 35 minutes, which proves that I am the better player here, that damn guy just needed to drop a single medivac with marines to kill my tech. Why does the game allows for such cheap tactics to win?"
The constant stress on active players takes it toll. "Why accepting that I am not as good as I think when I could live my fantasy with a moba? If I lose, it was of course the team which lost, not me personally."
Even harder is to get into SC. You will get whacked for umpteen games. Even when you finally won a game or two, you will still lose a lot to one quick cheese after another. And when you finally held for 35 minutes, you will get doom-dropped.
|
On December 25 2014 19:49 [F_]aths wrote:
SC2 feels hard, harsh and unfair. Like BW, but BW is almost gone in the western world. It is easy to praise BW when you no longer play it.
The thing is, the game feels hard, harsh and unfair for every player. In the end, it is me coming to the wrong conclusion "My all-in worked, am I not a clever player?" "His all-in worked. Why does the game still allows to build marines?"
Or "After this long macro phase, I smartly got to a final, but powerful push to deal critical damage" versus "After I held for 35 minutes, which proves that I am the better player here, that damn guy just needed to drop a single medivac with marines to kill my tech. Why does the game allows for such cheap tactics to win?"
The constant stress on active players takes it toll. "Why accepting that I am not as good as I think when I could live my fantasy with a moba? If I lose, it was of course the team which lost, not me personally."
Even harder is to get into SC. You will get whacked for umpteen games. Even when you finally won a game or two, you will still lose a lot to one quick cheese after another. And when you finally held for 35 minutes, you will get doom-dropped.
Actually, that's exactly what makes it easier for me. If my team fucks up in a moba game, there is honestly not much to be done. If it happens again, I'll just lose again.
If I mess up in SC2, I can watch the replay and fix my mistake  Next time I win.
|
I've got nothing against skins, voice packs and monetization (as long as it comes with the option to disable them for the players who wish to have a "standardized" game) but I highly doubt it would rejuvenate SC2.
MOBAs are labelled as more fun simply because it's easier to blame your team than to blame yourself. LoL is actually pretty hard, but at the end of the game you can just harp on every mistake your partners made while forgetting your owns -which may very well be the ones that actually cost the game. When playing SC2's most polished mode -1v1- you can't do that. You're alone and you're the only one to blame. You lost. Most people are afraid of failure nowadays and they would do anything rather than admit they did something wrong (I lagged, my race is shit and yours is OP, etc).
You won't change that.
I think we should accept the 1v1 RTS genre we're -I think ?- hardcore fans of isn't going to dominate the esports scene like we once hoped it would. And that's fine. Soccer being popular has not kept archery competitions to exist all over the world.
What SC2 lacks in comparison to archery to be more welcoming to new players and remain lively is circles, clubs and teachers. As suggested by some in this thread, training tools that learn good build orders would be great. Official tutorials on Youtube would be great too. Real-life SC2 clubs with actual teachers and courses would be amazing, but I doubt they would be popular.
One thing I read in the thread and sounded amazing : customizable profiles. Yes, one thousand times yes. For the rest, weekly league tournaments + easier teaching resources should really help, far more than the shitty units they will release for LotV and we don't need.
|
On December 24 2014 04:23 clickrush wrote:
Their patching history is incredibly smart when it comes to balance (the result shows this).
I nearly had a heart attack.
Of course the results show this ; when a race is doing well, it gets nerfed, when a race is doing bad, it gets buffed, so that the percentages become balanced again. Smart, huh ? What the 33%-33%-33% obsession forgets is whether those patches are actually good for the game. I don't think the game in its current state has improved a lot over WoL : mothership core, muta regen, speed medivacs... are bad things that happened to the game (for the sake of "more action packed games and abilities based units, hurray"), and the game is being balanced around them today. It's a catastrophe.
|
On December 27 2014 01:09 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On December 24 2014 04:23 clickrush wrote:
Their patching history is incredibly smart when it comes to balance (the result shows this). I nearly had a heart attack. Of course the results show this ; when a race is doing well, it gets nerfed, when a race is doing bad, it gets buffed, so that the percentages become balanced again. Smart, huh ? What the 33%-33%-33% obsession forgets is whether those patches are actually good for the game. I don't think the game in its current state has improved a lot over WoL : mothership core, muta regen, speed medivacs... are bad things that happened to the game (for the sake of "more action packed games and abilities based units, hurray"), and the game is being balanced around them today. It's a catastrophe.
I cant remember when it was, but earlier this year when terrans were struggling they randomly buffed oracle speed? Might not have been that one particularly but I remember couple of patches which came completely out of the blue.
|
On December 27 2014 01:32 Hadronsbecrazy wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2014 01:09 [PkF] Wire wrote:On December 24 2014 04:23 clickrush wrote:
Their patching history is incredibly smart when it comes to balance (the result shows this). I nearly had a heart attack. Of course the results show this ; when a race is doing well, it gets nerfed, when a race is doing bad, it gets buffed, so that the percentages become balanced again. Smart, huh ? What the 33%-33%-33% obsession forgets is whether those patches are actually good for the game. I don't think the game in its current state has improved a lot over WoL : mothership core, muta regen, speed medivacs... are bad things that happened to the game (for the sake of "more action packed games and abilities based units, hurray"), and the game is being balanced around them today. It's a catastrophe. I cant remember when it was, but earlier this year when terrans were struggling they randomly buffed oracle speed? Might not have been that one particularly but I remember couple of patches which came completely out of the blue.
This is true as well. Hence I don't really understand how one can call their patching history "incredibly smart". Their passivity during the broodlord infestor era was also infuriating and HotS additions were unneeded and in the end mostly harmful.
|
I also hope Blizzard would change starcraft II in many ways for it to get hyper popular for a long time. One thing i would like a ton would be a matchmaking system where you would me put against your oponents based on machup specific mmr, not your flat mmr. This is cause sometimes you get like 20 of one race in a row. Then you get good against that, but soon there will be a match against some other race and you feel bad about yourself. I dont know if you think this would be a good idea, but i would like it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
