EPTCommunity Feedback Update - July 15 - Page 5
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
PinoKotsBeer
Netherlands1385 Posts
| ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
On July 17 2016 08:27 Edowyth wrote: Gotta say I'm really disappointed in this potential change as well. Warp prisms are not meaty, and they don't typically carry units which can defend the warp-prism. A more interesting change would be reducing the range of pick-ups by 1 (possibly 2) so that even picking up units, the prism is vulnerable to counter-fire. Nerfing the health just makes all prism harass more risky. It's not a way to differentiate skill. Nerfing the range allows better players to make interesting decisions (do I go back to pick up one unit? two? Can I only escape with the damage from picking up one? two? three? Where do I drop to get in and have safety to get out? Am I safe enough to drop here, allow the dropping units to tank some, and still get out with pick-up?). Moreover, I'd argue that the warp-prism's current "strength" is really just that adepts are so difficult to counter due to the shade. Why not address shades first (since they're a problem that almost everyone hates anyway) and then see if anything needs to change for the prism? It's just that you always only have one warp prism: one warp prism is sufficient to warp in units and it's its only purpose so you don't have any back-ups. If your single one is destroyed your drop capability is destroyed for a while because there is no fallback plan. And there are some units out there that are strong dropship deterrents like mutalisks and vikings. So they have to become ridiculously survivable to be able to be reliable. In my opinion, bad things always happen when units become unique or too expensive, they become hit-and-miss and lead to gimmicky gameplay. | ||
|
BronzeKnee
United States5219 Posts
On July 16 2016 03:17 MockHamill wrote: I do not even know what to say. It is like 10 engineers are locked in a room for 2 days discussing the engine problems of a car and then concluding that the car's default colour should be changed from light blue to dark blue. I've been calling for a new design team since the HOTS beta, when I realized Blizzard was clueless. Everyone needs to demand that and nothing else. David Kim is the Roger Goodell of SC2. It isn't about the design team being able to act alone or listen to the community (either too much or not enough), this is about the design team being unable to understand their own game, unable to see and reject bad ideas or implement good ideas when they see them. Literally they've been throwing ideas at the game and seeing if they stick. No ability to recognize a good idea for their own game. And that is why the Warhound used up valuable beta test time when it should have never made it out of the designers head, why the Tempest suddenly went from a Muta-killer to a siege unit (nevermind the fact Protoss already had a flying siege range massive unit, the Carrier, that was so poorly balanced it had no place in the game) why we had to live through BFH TvT twice, once with Hellions in WOL and once in HOTS with Hellbats. There is no learning from the past, no ability to predict how a change could affect the game in the future. It is truly laughable, the ease at which someone experienced in game design can predict how the game will be affected by the design decisions resulting in the people who actually make said decisions to do what you told them to months later. Let's just take one example... Adepts too strong? So many people including myself predicted that, months before the change. How about Warp Prisms? Oh yeah a suggestion to reduce HP/Shields was mentioned back in November: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/legacy-of-the-void/498748-the-warp-prism-creates-a-mediocre-dynamic?page=1 Sure, not everyone agreed the Warp Prism was OP then, but that is where a good design team comes in, looks at the issue and addresses it when it comes up. Not 8 months late. These are amateur mistakes. Scratch that, they are the mistakes of incredibly ignorant designers, as I've seen plenty of amatuer designers not make these kinds of mistakes. | ||
|
Glorfindel!
Sweden1815 Posts
On July 18 2016 05:08 PinoKotsBeer wrote: Tempest 4 supply, you can build 2 in the (aprox) same time of 1 bc and thats without chrono. Seems correct blizzard.... This is just... I dont even know what to say. People complain about MMM+Lib being stale. Well. What the option with tech-switches like this? | ||
|
junkdrop
26 Posts
| ||
|
RaFox17
Finland4581 Posts
On July 18 2016 17:55 junkdrop wrote: new maps suck (exception made for the hots ones like frost). Zerg is getting stronger and stronger..... OP.... Luckily it´s a long road ahead as zerg was the weakest race before the patch and not likely to be OP after the patch. | ||
|
Salteador Neo
Andorra5591 Posts
On July 18 2016 19:56 RaFox17 wrote: Luckily it´s a long road ahead as zerg was the weakest race before the patch and not likely to be OP after the patch. Zerg was only the weakest at the top korean level. Ladder is a whole different world. I'd say that at the top foreigner level, zerg is the strongest and terran probably the weakest. For masters and GM the race % representation is a strong indicator that zerg is again the strongest, and protoss probably the weakest. All oppinions of course, except this one is based off some numbers  | ||
|
RaFox17
Finland4581 Posts
On July 18 2016 20:20 Salteador Neo wrote: Zerg was only the weakest at the top korean level. Ladder is a whole different world. I'd say that at the top foreigner level, zerg is the strongest and terran probably the weakest. For masters and GM the race % representation is a strong indicator that zerg is again the strongest, and protoss probably the weakest. All oppinions of course, except this one is based off some numbers The top Korean level is the most important for the e-sport scene in my opinion. Foreign level is different but it is quite ok at the moment. For casuals balance is not that important but whether the game is fun to play. (balance affects that yes.) Thats why they should fix some of the idiotic/dumb units and interactions in the game. (Ultra vs. ghost, WP, tempest, liberators, zerg having no air presence for most of the game etc) | ||
|
Gwavajuice
France1810 Posts
On July 18 2016 20:20 Salteador Neo wrote: Zerg was only the weakest at the top korean level. Ladder is a whole different world. I'd say that at the top foreigner level, zerg is the strongest and terran probably the weakest. For masters and GM the race % representation is a strong indicator that zerg is again the strongest, and protoss probably the weakest. All oppinions of course, except this one is based off some numbers I'll give you a hint : in one case players have practiced enough to understand and play the game (almost) at his best, in the other case they are doing big mistakes that have much more consequence that any balance issues that may or may not exist at the moment. | ||
|
Gwavajuice
France1810 Posts
On July 18 2016 14:59 BronzeKnee wrote: I've been calling for a new design team since the HOTS beta, when I realized Blizzard was clueless. Everyone needs to demand that and nothing else. David Kim is the Roger Goodell of SC2. It isn't about the design team being able to act alone or listen to the community (either too much or not enough), this is about the design team being unable to understand their own game, unable to see and reject bad ideas or implement good ideas when they see them. Literally they've been throwing ideas at the game and seeing if they stick. No ability to recognize a good idea for their own game. And that is why the Warhound used up valuable beta test time when it should have never made it out of the designers head, why the Tempest suddenly went from a Muta-killer to a siege unit (nevermind the fact Protoss already had a flying siege range massive unit, the Carrier, that was so poorly balanced it had no place in the game) why we had to live through BFH TvT twice, once with Hellions in WOL and once in HOTS with Hellbats. There is no learning from the past, no ability to predict how a change could affect the game in the future. It is truly laughable, the ease at which someone experienced in game design can predict how the game will be affected by the design decisions resulting in the people who actually make said decisions to do what you told them to months later. Let's just take one example... Adepts too strong? So many people including myself predicted that, months before the change. How about Warp Prisms? Oh yeah a suggestion to reduce HP/Shields was mentioned back in November: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/legacy-of-the-void/498748-the-warp-prism-creates-a-mediocre-dynamic?page=1 Sure, not everyone agreed the Warp Prism was OP then, but that is where a good design team comes in, looks at the issue and addresses it when it comes up. Not 8 months late. These are amateur mistakes. Scratch that, they are the mistakes of incredibly ignorant designers, as I've seen plenty of amatuer designers not make these kinds of mistakes. on the other hand you're a true professional of shitposting, I ll give you that. | ||
|
Sapphire.lux
Romania2620 Posts
On July 18 2016 14:59 BronzeKnee wrote: I've been calling for a new design team since the HOTS beta, when I realized Blizzard was clueless. Everyone needs to demand that and nothing else. David Kim is the Roger Goodell of SC2. It isn't about the design team being able to act alone or listen to the community (either too much or not enough), this is about the design team being unable to understand their own game, unable to see and reject bad ideas or implement good ideas when they see them. Literally they've been throwing ideas at the game and seeing if they stick. No ability to recognize a good idea for their own game. And that is why the Warhound used up valuable beta test time when it should have never made it out of the designers head, why the Tempest suddenly went from a Muta-killer to a siege unit (nevermind the fact Protoss already had a flying siege range massive unit, the Carrier, that was so poorly balanced it had no place in the game) why we had to live through BFH TvT twice, once with Hellions in WOL and once in HOTS with Hellbats. There is no learning from the past, no ability to predict how a change could affect the game in the future. It is truly laughable, the ease at which someone experienced in game design can predict how the game will be affected by the design decisions resulting in the people who actually make said decisions to do what you told them to months later. Let's just take one example... Adepts too strong? So many people including myself predicted that, months before the change. How about Warp Prisms? Oh yeah a suggestion to reduce HP/Shields was mentioned back in November: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/legacy-of-the-void/498748-the-warp-prism-creates-a-mediocre-dynamic?page=1 Sure, not everyone agreed the Warp Prism was OP then, but that is where a good design team comes in, looks at the issue and addresses it when it comes up. Not 8 months late. These are amateur mistakes. Scratch that, they are the mistakes of incredibly ignorant designers, as I've seen plenty of amatuer designers not make these kinds of mistakes. They kind of did change the team, at least the lead designer i think; it used to be dustin and now it's dk. The new team had good ideas IMO, the problem is that when it becomes clear that they failed in implementation, they do not work on fixing stuff. They just do this little shity patches while ignoring all the big problems, and it's been a year of this so there is no excuse of not enough time here. Now i hear that the size of the team is as big as it ever was, so it's not a question of money either. The SC2 situation is truly baffling to me. It's like they are trying to see how many people they can piss of and for how long will people stick around lol. It's really twilight zone material this | ||
|
Wohodix
France34 Posts
I like the game right now, maybe it has to do with the fact that Im playing protoss, maybe not. Obviously they will never release patch every week, and they wont fire all the balance team because you find something who doesnt work with the way you play your video game Also why mech only should be viable ? Who say that ? Terran is about flexibility so I dont think it HAS to be an option, why mech couldnt be tools for bio ? I do think that Protoss need small nerf for lots of units. In my opinion Protoss is supposed to be hard tech choices and hard micro, but right now every tech is almost good vs everything in early game, and with massive damage protoss are too safe to go to let game My suggestions are Adepts shade are too spammable and you got 2 unit for one : - much higher cooldown to shade, but adept can build up 2 charge (obviously you cannot use 2 charge at one time ) - and/or adept looses shield (50?) or life (20 ? ) when you cancel your shade. Oracles are too strong in early game, i can totaly see coming the mass oracle cancer. maybe : remove energy from oracle, capacities cost shield, wards last something like 1 minute. Prism is op, but is needed because protoss units are the most expensive. reducing hp will not change anything since when you micro your prism you always want him to be out of range. so my suggestions are : - reducing range pick up by 1, and the warping area or - prism only have range pick up on warp mode or - reducing cargo size by 2 and a small delay on dropping so the micro is harder Mc should be mainly for defence : so overcharge doesnt target building is a good idea (happy bunker rush ? ) I dont know if Tempest is too strong but it is boring. Something like a 15 range aoe slow projectile with small radius and 1.5 s channelling time would be more fun. | ||
|
Ace1123
Philippines1187 Posts
Can see that there is a pro scene at SC2 so that they can see how multiplayer is played. A lot of people who try multiplayer doesnt know where to start guides arent available you need to dig deep for them. | ||
|
baabaa
Canada29 Posts
On July 16 2016 03:10 Finnz wrote: What an underwhelming and dissapointing summit. When 90% of our community is pissed off and annoyed by balance and design issues and only 1 thing can be discussed as a potential issue, then i just think to myself what is the actual point of a community summit. I said last time, the people that came out of the last community summit that said stuff like "blizzard are going to release an incredible game with many changes coming to the near future. They are going to be as active as ever before and really redesign issues and balance flaws that are currently in the game". Those things did not really happen, 3 balance changes that have been rather minimal to the game since release (nearly a year ago) and a couple of UI changes with bug fixes and a new ladder revamp. Not really my idea of "active" or "balancing and creating great design to the gameplay and its units". Once again people came out of the summit saying that blizzard have so many huge changes planned and design and balance fixes to the game. And this is all that they announce. Disgusting really, those people that come out and say that stuff should be ashamed. I prefer honesty, i prefer someone that can come out of the summit and say it as it is such as: "discussions were made about the game and its future, we talked about design and balance and unfortunately could only come up with 1 potential balance issue which was the warp prism hp/shields possibly being too much at the moment." Now if the people came out and actually were just honest about the summit then i would be much happier, ofcourse i would be disappointing because i would of been hoping for some really cool and potentially brilliant ideas to help change the design and balance of certain units within the game that are quite clearly an issue at this moment. But to just basically be lied to and then find out from a community feedback thread is just so aggravating. Guess we are not going to have fixes to major problems to our gameplay once again. completely agree and I've posted about this kind of b s before. Zerg buff to queen and spore clearly means they know that liberators are a big problem (not to mention medivac boost, widow mine drops etc,) but rather than admit the truth they make these other changes to avoid having to say that they made a ridiculous unit and have refused to nerf it. instead of queen buff and spore rooting time reduction, why not reduce the radius of the liberation zone and increase the time it takes liberators to change modes. that would be the right thing to do, address the actual problem instead of consistently refusing to acknowledge major gaffes and making other changes that wouldn't be necessary if they hadn't made OP warp prism pickup abilities and OP liberators. all it is is playing a transparent political game to try to save face by consistently presenting the view that there is nothing wrong with the new units by messing around with other things that clearly DIDN'T need to be messed around with until the new units got added. | ||
|
Wohodix
France34 Posts
On July 19 2016 13:57 Ace1123 wrote: They should haul the UI again imo, make spectating other games easier and at will like dota. Make it so that we can watch tournaments ingame and thus more new people Can see that there is a pro scene at SC2 so that they can see how multiplayer is played. A lot of people who try multiplayer doesnt know where to start guides arent available you need to dig deep for them. I agree, also they should advertise that the game is already in free to play. | ||
|
Jaedrik
113 Posts
Define overreaction? At this point, it just seems like an excuse and a tool used to try and direct conversation to what Blizzard wants, not an honest plea against fiery sentiment. Also, a curious appeal to... I'm not sure what. To Blizzard's authority? The deeper assertion seems to be 'we may not know the results of any such balance changes until we try it.' A sort of logical positivism. Yet, I disagree. Thought experiment and analysis can prove well enough what would happen in a great deal of cases. | ||
|
TheWinks
United States572 Posts
On July 18 2016 20:27 RaFox17 wrote: The top Korean level is the most important for the e-sport scene in my opinion. Foreign level is different but it is quite ok at the moment. For casuals balance is not that important but whether the game is fun to play. (balance affects that yes.) Thats why they should fix some of the idiotic/dumb units and interactions in the game. (Ultra vs. ghost, WP, tempest, liberators, zerg having no air presence for most of the game etc) With separate tournaments and with most of the premier broadcast games being foreigner tournaments you can't ditch balance in the foreigner scene and sit content. You have to balance around both. | ||
|
blade55555
United States17423 Posts
On July 20 2016 00:08 TheWinks wrote: With separate tournaments and with most of the premier broadcast games being foreigner tournaments you can't ditch balance in the foreigner scene and sit content. You have to balance around both. Except how do you do that without screwing up the top level even more? only way would be, if you play on NA server Terran has these stats, Zerg has these, Protoss has these, but if they are in Korea they are different. That would be retarded if done. The game should be balanced around the highest level of play always. In theory, foreign Terran's could get as good as Korean Terrans (will never happen, but theoretically they could). So unless you have a magical solution to balancing both without making Terran more OP in KR, the game should remain balanced at the highest levels of play. (As a note, I don't know if TvP is balanced or not, I can only speak about TvZ). | ||
|
Elentos
55567 Posts
On July 20 2016 00:08 TheWinks wrote: With separate tournaments and with most of the premier broadcast games being foreigner tournaments you can't ditch balance in the foreigner scene and sit content. You have to balance around both. Easy to say, hard to do. Can you really always fix one without breaking the other? | ||
|
MperorM1
90 Posts
sorry for the whiny ramble, but I am just so god damn tired of playing bio every single game. | ||
| ||
