|
On May 02 2016 15:32 Parser wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2016 07:38 BaronVonOwn wrote:On May 02 2016 05:35 Comedy wrote:
You can get in the brain of david kim through these changes.
Unfortunately his thinking patterns are very wrong, but this is nothing new and he has proven it again and again.
At this point, I would love a new person doing the job. I'll be the first to admit, designing a really great game like BW is hard. But when you get everything right, you have a game so good it can create an entire new industry of sports. Which is why I think it's totally stupid to deviate so far from the formula and the things that made it successful. Odds are, you're going to fail and that's exactly what happened. Compare this with CSGO. Yes there are differences with 1.6 but it wasn't massively rebalanced and reshuffled like SC2. As a result it's huge and it's even getting a nationally televised league on TBS now. Unfortunately we are now in the glorious era of Activision Blizzard. Far from learning from their mistakes we get things like Nostalrius to rub salt in the wounds. Like SC2 it appears they are taking another once-great game and running it into the ground. Blizzard still has a lot of fanboys so I'm sure Overwatch will make some money and then be promptly forgotten like most other games, but I'm not one of them anymore. Well, BW was popular only in korea at the time that SC2 came out. If SC2 would have been like BW I think it would have seen no success in the western community. Sure BW was a great game, it had no deathball problem, maybe its economy was better (i personally do not think so) but the point is that in BW the player is costantly fighting the UI and today a game like that will never be a casual success. So something had to be changed. You can debate if SC2 had the right changes or not, but saying that Blizz should have simply remade BW does not seem the answer.
But he didnt say THEY SHOULD REMAKE BW.
He said they should make a RTS more like BW.
And this DOES NOT mean making it so you fight the u.i. Thats not what makes BW the good RTS it is/was.
|
It is hard to compare bw w sc2 given that it took years for bw to be developed and balanced for what it is. So unless you give the same time, to keep saying how good BW is comparing apples and oranges.
|
On May 02 2016 20:52 Foxxan wrote:
But he didnt say THEY SHOULD REMAKE BW.
He said they should make a RTS more like BW.
And this DOES NOT mean making it so you fight the u.i. Thats not what makes BW the good RTS it is/was.
Correct. There's a lot to like about SC2, especially the better interface. I even like a lot of the WoL units (HOTS and LOTV units can all go eat a dick). The problem is they went too far and changed core gameplay and balance. I pointed to CSGO as an example of how to do it right. I feel like some of the changes in SC2 would be the equivalent of nerfing the AWP below 100 damage or doubling the amount of money you get each round. That would be an abomination to the fans and CSGO would have died alone.
They obviously wanted SC2 to be an e$port game so they could rake in the sponsorship dollars but when they made SC2 they did it like a video game company rather than a governing body for a sport. If you look at real sports, there are little tweaks here and there but never any huge changes. For example the NFL changed the distance for extra points last year. It makes extra points a bit more interesting but it's not something that revolutionized the game and fractured the community. In fact it had broad acceptance by the football community unlike many SC2 changes.
|
On May 02 2016 16:06 Wrath wrote:Show nested quote +Believe it or not but some people do not agree with your opinion. To me SC2 got worse with each new iteration. It is true though that LotV tried to go back to the BW roots more then the other expansions. So perhaps it would have been more positively received if it came out first.
I completely disagree that in LotV they tried to go to BW roots. If anything they went further and further away from it. To me, the end of HotS was the best era. If only Vipers were fixed to help zerg vs Mech, Protoss death ball issue addressed along with Skytoss, together with Mech viability in TvP. HotS would have been the closest to BW among the 3 expansions.
Well, lets see:
Disruptor == Reaver
Liberator == Valkyrie + ?
Lurker == Lurker
It looks to me like all races have gotten some BW back.
|
So how is terran supossed to play vs Z lategame now? If it gets to a point where we're both heading towards maxed lategame scenario, what is T supossed to do?
Is this another 'don't let them get there :^)' era?
|
On May 02 2016 22:55 BigRedDog wrote:
It is hard to compare bw w sc2 given that it took years for bw to be developed and balanced for what it is. So unless you give the same time, to keep saying how good BW is comparing apples and oranges.
Oh yeah?
The last BW balance update was 1.08 (http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/Patch_1.08 ) which was released 2001-05-20 according to Liquipedia. This means balance was static after only 3 years (BW was released November 30, 1998). SC2 is now more then 5 years old and they are still changing the balance.
By your logic SC2 should be much more refined then BW by now.
|
On May 02 2016 23:05 RoomOfMush wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2016 22:55 BigRedDog wrote:
It is hard to compare bw w sc2 given that it took years for bw to be developed and balanced for what it is. So unless you give the same time, to keep saying how good BW is comparing apples and oranges. Oh yeah? The last BW balance update was 1.08 (http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/Patch_1.08 ) which was released 2001-05-20 according to Liquipedia. This means balance was static after only 3 years (BW was released November 30, 1998). SC2 is now more then 5 years old and they are still changing the balance. By your logic SC2 should be much more refined then BW by now.
BW was an expansion, like LoTV. SC2 LOTV balance is still in its infant stages by comparison.
|
On May 02 2016 23:00 ihatevideogames wrote:
So how is terran supossed to play vs Z lategame now? If it gets to a point where we're both heading towards maxed lategame scenario, what is T supossed to do?
Is this another 'don't let them get there :^)' era?
it remains to be seen if you can beat broodlords with thors
|
On May 02 2016 20:43 Salteador Neo wrote:
Also, the Hydra is the most glaring example of a unit that has a very narrow window of time where it's useful. Zerg suffers a lot from this: Roaches/ravagers become just meatshields in the lategame because they have slow rate of fire; lings and hydras are just too squishy. Would love to see this generalist midgame unit become something useful in the lategame instead of being phased out by specialist units (corruptors, ultras, vipers, broodlors, infestors...). To achieve that, Hydras could get a Hive tech upgrade that gives them like +15hp, allowing them to survive a Lib shot.
Hydras and ling (+banes) is the current meta vs. protoss (zealot, archon, immortal). Very nice! Squishy? That's zerg in a nutshell (except ultras). And in ZvZ hydras can be really important mid-late game.
|
On May 02 2016 23:48 Legobiten wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2016 20:43 Salteador Neo wrote:
Also, the Hydra is the most glaring example of a unit that has a very narrow window of time where it's useful. Zerg suffers a lot from this: Roaches/ravagers become just meatshields in the lategame because they have slow rate of fire; lings and hydras are just too squishy. Would love to see this generalist midgame unit become something useful in the lategame instead of being phased out by specialist units (corruptors, ultras, vipers, broodlors, infestors...). To achieve that, Hydras could get a Hive tech upgrade that gives them like +15hp, allowing them to survive a Lib shot. Hydras and ling (+banes) is the current meta vs. protoss (zealot, archon, immortal). Very nice! Squishy? That's zerg in a nutshell (except ultras). And in ZvZ hydras can be really important mid-late game.
hydra/bane is an all-in vs double stargate openings, hydras have always sucked outside of the timing windows and now that ravagers do almost everything they do but better, their sucking is more visible
having said that, they do have their uses in all matchups indeed, so why change them?
|
United States572 Posts
On May 02 2016 23:48 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2016 23:00 ihatevideogames wrote:
So how is terran supossed to play vs Z lategame now? If it gets to a point where we're both heading towards maxed lategame scenario, what is T supossed to do?
Is this another 'don't let them get there :^)' era? it remains to be seen if you can beat broodlords with thors
I don't think this isn't going to be the biggest problem and I hope and pray that I'm not wrong about that. It's going to be corruptors mopping up liberators and then ultras plowing through everything.
If I'm wrong and we have literally lotv style infestor/broodlord gameplay, it will do immense damage to the game.
|
On April 30 2016 15:50 Topdoller wrote:
Going down the same route as previous expansions. Strange fixes and +10 to this and +5 that that against various units in order to fix perceived problems
This game is dead
Comments like this should just lead to a straight up ban.
|
On May 02 2016 23:00 ihatevideogames wrote:
So how is terran supossed to play vs Z lategame now? If it gets to a point where we're both heading towards maxed lategame scenario, what is T supossed to do?
Is this another 'don't let them get there :^)' era?
that's what ZvP is like. and I agree with you this nerf to liberators makes them too bad vs corrupters 100%.
------- David Kim does not understand it's not the immortal that might be the problem ( he keeps repeating this) It's the tempest/oracle/templar/archon air death ball thats way too cost efficient vs Zerg. 
|
|
|
On April 30 2016 22:19 Mojzii1 wrote:
Every expansion its like: T being quite OP, and win tournaments *nerfs* T being balanced, and getting into finals by some good players like mvp etc. *nerfs*, T being underpowered and rarely getting into tournaments *nerfs* and then PvZ, PvP, ZvZ on every single stream. AND THEN YOU ARE LIKE "WHY SPONSORS DOES NOT SUPPORT SC2 TEAM AND VIEWERSHIP SO LOW" ..
At least in Korea, T almost never gets to the finals. It's only Innovation...
|
Why is everything focused on balance. This sucked the fun out of the game, at least for me. I would love to see new mechanics, new units, new spells and reworked units ... a vision going forward. I tuned into gsl/proleague the past days and i saw the same old maps/buildorder and units. :/
|
On May 01 2016 10:02 TheFish7 wrote:
damn this patch is a bunch of nonsensical band-aids. It's like lotv never made it out of beta.
Can we revert back to hots please? not even kidding, i would definitely play more if we all went back to hots
LOTV is fucking incredible. Don't know why the hell you'd want to downgrade.
|
I love reading the comments and based on the content you can tell who still plays and watches the game and who just hangs around to comment.
|
Don't know why people make such a big deal out of the liberator nerf. In my experience once you have to fight corruptors with liberators the game is lost anyways because then the libs aren't sieged and ultras can roll over everything.
I don't remember the last time I fought corruptors with liberators and won the game.
the only thing that this really effects is marus (and avilos :D) mass liberator style.
the thor buff is nice and might even enable mech in tvz if the numbers are strong enough. in tvp there's still no answer to tempests for mech.
+ Show Spoiler +I'm salty because I used thors vs ling bane muta which isn't possible anymore but I guess I have to adapt..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
