|
On July 31 2016 06:14 KeksX wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2016 02:28 BronzeKnee wrote:On July 31 2016 01:56 The_Red_Viper wrote:On July 31 2016 01:53 ejozl wrote:On July 31 2016 01:16 [PkF] Wire wrote:
Yeah let's have everyone say what he thinks should or should not be in the game without taking even slightly what DK said in the last community update (their stance -> slow and few changes and let the meta evolve, which I tend to agree with in the current state of the game modulo negligible things). As for me I think we should go back to WoL with projectile fungal and 4 range phoenix. Congrats boys, we're being very productive. I agree with David Kim's approach from a pure balance approach, but I strongly think that this should not prevent design changes that better the game, just because it's not a horrible meta currently. Keep on improving the game, if balance is an issue, give credit to the players that they can solve it, before changing numbers which would go against said design. Their approach is this: Hey sc2 is kinda good atm, don't do anything because we might fuck it up badly. Well said. When are we going to get a design team that knows how to actually improve this game? I already said it in the other thread, but if you think the issue here that they have no idea then you're delusional. The reality is that currently, there is no financial incentive for them to do any big changes. They make big changes and then what? People keep playing? Where's the money coming from? This might change with microtransactions. No guarantee of course, but way more likely than currently.
As i said before, one incentive is to keep a good reputation. With your logic there would be no point to have "big" team working on sc2, as far as we know blizzard plans on supporting it for "years to come" though.
I agree that making actual money RIGHT NOW would be a better scenario, but considering that they seem to still work on it with a reasonably big team you kinda could expect them to do more.
And even if all that wouldn't be true the actual reasoning for the rather lacking support is rather meaningless to the disappointed end consumer. It might be true and make sense but in the end the product has to make people happy, not reasonings on why the product isn't moving in the right direction.
|
On July 30 2016 02:36 Beelzebub1 wrote:
- Ultralisks rofl stomping bio but being utterly useless vs Protoss is a weird dynamic for a tier 3 unit
- Liberators cancelling out the amazing skill and micro it takes to use Mutalisks in ZvT is just bad/lazy design
- Liberators being mandatory for Terrans against Protoss doesn't feel very fun or strategic for Terrans
- Vikings and Banshees being pushed to the way side because the Liberator does both of their jobs better then them (Just like the Adept making Stalkers and Zealots seem like a waste of supply)
- The Cyclone being the new retard unit in the game next to the Swarm Host due to having unbalance able gimmick ability instead of just good raw stats. Just make the unit a foot man for mech or something it has zero role or identity in the Terran army.
- All spell casters suck besides the High Templar and Viper, Ghosts and Ravens are unwieldy at best and Infestors are a very very fragile easy to focus down 150 gas sink while the High Templar is a standard unit in every match up.
I think its ok for Ultras to be dominant in only one match up. I think that was the intended goal for Blizzard.
About the Liberator, I think mandatory in PvT is acceptable. In fact, I think its viable in all matchups, but the weakest in TvT. It does overlap roles with the Viking and Banshee (understandable as there all air units), but it isn’t better than both. Viking and banshee have uses that the Lib just can’t compete. Vikings are great at chasing away dropships/warp prisms/over lords; meanwhile libs aren’t that useful in that role. Banshee are much more microable, create exciting interaction, and much better at harass; something the lib can’t really do.
I don’t think the cyclone is much of an issue at the moment. I’ve seen them used solely on defense, and if they fit that role (or if Blizzard wants them used more defensively) then I think they accomplish it really well. You want the Cyclone to be a footman, but I think the hellbat fits that role. In fact, if you compare them to the WC3 footman, I would say they are comparable units.
I agree with the spellcasters comment, but I think number tweaking can fix most spell casters. They don’t need redesign.
On July 30 2016 02:50 petro1987 wrote:
One way to address tanks is to do what many people have suggested before: 1) Increase the damage a bit 40 (60 vs armored) and 2) tanks can be picked up sieged, but are dropped unsieged, transitioning to sieged state (which takes some seconds).
I guess this would be a good alternative to try.
They want to try delaying attack time after a sieged tank is dropped, which essentially is your second suggestion.
On July 30 2016 06:24 sc2_him wrote:
It's been a month+ since the last test map.I am not saying patch just a test map. In that period we could have explored at least 2 potential changes to the game even if they weren't implemented we could have iterated over many different solutions with those changes and let the community come up with different solutions. We need test maps every 2-3 weeks,patches are the result of many iterations in testing.I think that it's really bad for the game that blizzard is just willing to test many changes internally leaving the community out of the loop in regards to specific changes and test maps.I hope this approach changes in the coming weeks so we don't feel ignored and that our feedback is getting ignored.
I want to address many of these types of comments. I think Blizzard needs more time to analyze the data before making any decisions based on test patches. 2-3 weeks is not enough to determine if the test patch is good or not. Also, they can’t put too many changes in a test patch, because that would make it hard to determine which changes are the most viable. When doing multi-variate testing, you try to limit variable to a few. A system can’t be analyzed if we have too many changes.
On July 30 2016 10:12 hitokoroshi wrote:Show nested quote +And like we’ve discussed in the past couple weeks, we believe the current issues we are looking at such as the Ultralisk, Adept, Liberator, or Warp Prism are all issues within the first category. The problem with that is the following.. Ultralisks OP-ness is the 8 armor that's completely passive, the only micro you could argue is Queen healing. Liberator siege is a toggled mode state, so while not completely passive it creates a very safe area for terran aggrresion and defense and may be too strong for cost in its zoning ability. Adepts are strong but not necessarily in a bad way, they force responses and both the adept and shade are micro-able (especially with prism) which adds to its strength. Whereas MSC, is strong in the bad way - its existence justifies the current nerfed state of gateway units, warp gate, and the technical compositions that are required of protoss. B/c really from a design POV Adept should probably have slightly further range (5) and deal +Bio damage instead of +Light. Warp Prism is strong because decent units (HT, Immortal, Disruptor, Adept, DT) utilized with it are strong. I could see a pickup range nerf from 6 to 5 here though.
Ultralisks: 8 armor that is passive may seem OP, but Ultralisks have a glaring weakness, that is chokes. I would argue that they should be a non-micro unit, and that a Queen/Ultralisk interaction is enough micro for both units. I think its ok for each race to have non-micro units, and zerg arguably has only a small few of those types of units. You are essentially asking for Ultralisks should be a microable unit, but I have to say they should stay as a set and forget. Zerg has enough on their plates to micro, let’s not add the Ultra.
Liberators: They are very strong at zoning, along with tanks can sometimes create a kill zone for nearly any matchup. They are balanced by immobility (a common theme with Terran units), a weak air to air, and map specific. Do they need changes? Perhaps but I think it’s more numbers.
Adepts: I agree with your sentiment on adepts and the MSC, but not sure about your change suggestions for the adept. Giving it an increase to range and +bio attack would make early adept harass against T and Z very difficult to stop. More range would make kiting easier, along with shade would make 3-4 early adepts really difficult to handle. At least with + light you make marauders/roachs/stalkers viable against adepts.
Warp prism: Your suggestion would help balance out the WP, but I think we should see if a health nerf is enough first. Their goal is to make warp prism harder to use, so to differentiate between good and bad protoss.
|
If ultras were smaller and could close the distance more easily, then i could go with an armor reduction.
Libs i still feel are a bit strong. Removal of range plus either ground dmg reduction or health would work. Also they need to be less like wol immortals vs tanks to mutas. Its a bit silly that mutas are completely unmade anymore in tvz. Either an overall dmg reduction or fix the splash.
|
I actually could see a warp prism nerf where they go to 0 shields/200 health or something drastic like that. One issue is that because they have 100 shields and shields regen so fast out of combat, it's easy to take a few hits from a spore/turret to quickly drop your load and then maneuver around where the static D aren't at, pick up when the units come, and then get out and wait for shields to come back, and your warp prism still remains at full or near-full HP after the harass (and of course with the pick up range it's easy to not lose any units)
at least with medivacs the damage dealt to them is "permanent" until you return home to repair (or bring an scv in the medivac but I've never seen pro players do that), plus medivacs have 150 HP vs the 100/100 of the warp prism
0 shields/200 health would be drastic, but I don't think something like 40 shields/160 health would be bad. You can take 2-3 hits form static D to shields, meaning you could fly in, see a static D, take a few hits but quickly turn around to not take hull damage if you're paying attention, or you could hover over the static D to drop your units but you start taking permanent damage. You can still differentiate between the good and bad players; who pays attention to the static D and who just goes full on leeroy jenkins.
|
On July 31 2016 00:21 JackONeill wrote:
Yeah, but as long as we're making suggestions...
TERRAN
- medivac : during afterburners, every attack deals 1.5x more damage to the medivac
Nerfs doom drops and YOLO drops
- reaper : reaper grenade doesn't deal damage, just a stun/bounce effect
The full micro potential, without the abuse
- Widow mine : can't target workers
Kind of a no brainer
- Vikings : able to land and take off while moving, bio tag when landed (to be coherent with hellbat)
A little versatility for the viking
- Thor : 150/150 upgrade, takes a while to research, armory required, allows the thor to attack ground and air simultaneously
Thor will finally be strong in late game to deal with a multitude of threats
- cyclone : 2 population, 150 HP, damage upgrade removed, max lock on range brought down to 12 range from 15. Trains quicker, but still requires tech lab
Cyclone will become the mech footman it was ment to be
- ghost : cost from 200/100 to 50/150
Synergizes better with bio
- tank : remove tankivac, damage from 35+15 to 40+20. Unsieged damage from 15+10 to 15+15.
No brainer too
- liberator : AG damage reduced to 65. Range upgrade removed.
Making the liberator less of the ultimate terran weapon
ZERG
- queen : revert range buff, transfusion energy cost increased to 75
Mass queens => snowball ultra transfuses in late game is stupid
- ravager : ravager den required (T1, 50/50 cost). Able to shoot air with auto attack, auto attack damage from 16 to 14. Bile damage reduced to 40 flat
To compensate for the queen nerf, giving zerg a versatile unit that can finally give zerg options to deal with drops
- ultra : chitinous from +4 to +2, health from 500 to 600
No brainer
- nydus : can attack the nydus during the initial animation if detection is available
No brainer
- SH : complete rework. 150/150, 3 population, moves as fast as a roach without speed. Can build scourges for 10 minerals. Just like a reaver, it can store scourges (up to 4). Scourges have limited life spawn, 40 HPs, move at mutalisk speed, but deal 40 damage (+10 vs light) AoE damage on impact.
SH will be the true zerg AA in mid/late game, instead of a gimmicky harass tool
- viper : parasitic bomb removed. Abduct can't target massive.
PB was a terrible design to begin with. Indirect buff to the battlecruiser
- infestor : HPs up to 120
Will make them less snipable by bio
- broodlord : 10 range instead of 11
no brainer
PROTOSS
- prism : pickup range decreased to 2
no brainer
- adepts : twilight required. 100 hp 60 shield. Shade ability does not give vision, cooldown start at the end of the shading. Shade duration from 7 to 4 seconds.
No brainer
- photon overcharge : reworked. Overcharge targets a pylon, for 50 energy. The pylon gains the ability to heal shields like a medivac, with 7 range, for 15 seconds. No energy limitation. Can be targeted/microed. Can target buildings to protect critical tech structures. Non stackable on a single unit/building. Heals shield at medivac heal rate.
Will make protoss defense more fair. You'll need to have units in place, but an overcharge can help your hold, or heal your army between two engages
- tempest : 6 supply, 10 range, attack speed x1.5, 200/150 HPs
No brainer. With the liberator nerf, tempest will be much better at killing liberators, but much less massable and abusive with the range
- revelation : only applies to a single non massive unit. Gives the protoss vision what the unit sees, plus detection. Opponent still has a visual effect marking the revealed unit.
Not sure about this one, but it seems much more elegant that simply 60 sec reveal on a whole army
>90% of these suggestions are great, and even the ones that I don't completely agree with I at least agree with the concept
oops double post, my bad.
|
On July 31 2016 08:45 IMPrime wrote:
I actually could see a warp prism nerf where they go to 0 shields/200 health or something drastic like that. One issue is that because they have 100 shields and shields regen so fast out of combat, it's easy to take a few hits from a spore/turret to quickly drop your load and then maneuver around where the static D aren't at, pick up when the units come, and then get out and wait for shields to come back, and your warp prism still remains at full or near-full HP after the harass (and of course with the pick up range it's easy to not lose any units)
at least with medivacs the damage dealt to them is "permanent" until you return home to repair (or bring an scv in the medivac but I've never seen pro players do that), plus medivacs have 150 HP vs the 100/100 of the warp prism
0 shields/200 health would be drastic, but I don't think something like 40 shields/160 health would be bad. You can take 2-3 hits form static D to shields, meaning you could fly in, see a static D, take a few hits but quickly turn around to not take hull damage if you're paying attention, or you could hover over the static D to drop your units but you start taking permanent damage. You can still differentiate between the good and bad players; who pays attention to the static D and who just goes full on leeroy jenkins.
I think they see Warp Prism as a micro unit for pro players to utilize the most, so I'd think they'd go about nerfing the Health Pool instead actually.
|
Eight Zergs were in the IEM ro16. One was in the quarters and none in the finals ._.
|
On July 31 2016 11:02 Soke wrote:
Eight Zergs were in the IEM ro16. One was in the quarters and none in the finals ._.
only zergs would complain about balance in a tournament with 8 zergs in ro16.
|
On July 31 2016 11:27 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2016 11:02 Soke wrote:
Eight Zergs were in the IEM ro16. One was in the quarters and none in the finals ._. only zergs would complain about balance in a tournament with 8 zergs in ro16.
Not complaining. Pointing it out. And, 3 were invited. Hydra got through the Oceania server qualifier with a 3-2 over Khelazur. Snute got second in the EU qualifier. Nerchio got through the server quali where the toughest opponent he faced was Bly and the notable terran he faced was Khelazur. And it's hard to judge China and SEA hard to measure playstyles. Not to belittle it, but it's not like the 8 zergs rolled over everyone to get in, and performing in the actual tournament matters, and it's not like IEM or all of the qualis had top tier players consistently duking it out.
|
On July 31 2016 00:21 JackONeill wrote:
Yeah, but as long as we're making suggestions...
TERRAN
- medivac : during afterburners, every attack deals 1.5x more damage to the medivac
Nerfs doom drops and YOLO drops
- reaper : reaper grenade doesn't deal damage, just a stun/bounce effect
The full micro potential, without the abuse
- Widow mine : can't target workers
Kind of a no brainer
- Vikings : able to land and take off while moving, bio tag when landed (to be coherent with hellbat)
A little versatility for the viking
- Thor : 150/150 upgrade, takes a while to research, armory required, allows the thor to attack ground and air simultaneously
Thor will finally be strong in late game to deal with a multitude of threats
- cyclone : 2 population, 150 HP, damage upgrade removed, max lock on range brought down to 12 range from 15. Trains quicker, but still requires tech lab
Cyclone will become the mech footman it was ment to be
- ghost : cost from 200/100 to 50/150
Synergizes better with bio
- tank : remove tankivac, damage from 35+15 to 40+20. Unsieged damage from 15+10 to 15+15.
No brainer too
- liberator : AG damage reduced to 65. Range upgrade removed.
Making the liberator less of the ultimate terran weapon
ZERG
- queen : revert range buff, transfusion energy cost increased to 75
Mass queens => snowball ultra transfuses in late game is stupid
- ravager : ravager den required (T1, 50/50 cost). Able to shoot air with auto attack, auto attack damage from 16 to 14. Bile damage reduced to 40 flat
To compensate for the queen nerf, giving zerg a versatile unit that can finally give zerg options to deal with drops
- ultra : chitinous from +4 to +2, health from 500 to 600
No brainer
- nydus : can attack the nydus during the initial animation if detection is available
No brainer
- SH : complete rework. 150/150, 3 population, moves as fast as a roach without speed. Can build scourges for 10 minerals. Just like a reaver, it can store scourges (up to 4). Scourges have limited life spawn, 40 HPs, move at mutalisk speed, but deal 40 damage (+10 vs light) AoE damage on impact.
SH will be the true zerg AA in mid/late game, instead of a gimmicky harass tool
- viper : parasitic bomb removed. Abduct can't target massive.
PB was a terrible design to begin with. Indirect buff to the battlecruiser
- infestor : HPs up to 120
Will make them less snipable by bio
- broodlord : 10 range instead of 11
no brainer
PROTOSS
- prism : pickup range decreased to 2
no brainer
- adepts : twilight required. 100 hp 60 shield. Shade ability does not give vision, cooldown start at the end of the shading. Shade duration from 7 to 4 seconds.
No brainer
- photon overcharge : reworked. Overcharge targets a pylon, for 50 energy. The pylon gains the ability to heal shields like a medivac, with 7 range, for 15 seconds. No energy limitation. Can be targeted/microed. Can target buildings to protect critical tech structures. Non stackable on a single unit/building. Heals shield at medivac heal rate.
Will make protoss defense more fair. You'll need to have units in place, but an overcharge can help your hold, or heal your army between two engages
- tempest : 6 supply, 10 range, attack speed x1.5, 200/150 HPs
No brainer. With the liberator nerf, tempest will be much better at killing liberators, but much less massable and abusive with the range
- revelation : only applies to a single non massive unit. Gives the protoss vision what the unit sees, plus detection. Opponent still has a visual effect marking the revealed unit.
Not sure about this one, but it seems much more elegant that simply 60 sec reveal on a whole army
This! So much this! I agree with 99% of the things in this. Honestly think I could enjoy the game like I did heart of the swarm if these went through!
|
On July 31 2016 11:32 Soke wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2016 11:27 Charoisaur wrote:On July 31 2016 11:02 Soke wrote:
Eight Zergs were in the IEM ro16. One was in the quarters and none in the finals ._. only zergs would complain about balance in a tournament with 8 zergs in ro16. Not complaining. Pointing it out. And, 3 were invited. Hydra got through the Oceania server qualifier with a 3-2 over Khelazur. Snute got second in the EU qualifier. Nerchio got through the server quali where the toughest opponent he faced was Bly and the notable terran he faced was Khelazur. And it's hard to judge China and SEA hard to measure playstyles. Not to belittle it, but it's not like the 8 zergs rolled over everyone to get in, and performing in the actual tournament matters, and it's not like IEM or all of the qualis had top tier players consistently duking it out.
They just didn't happen to make it to the finals for the first time in a WCS tournament this year. If your measure of success is based purely on reaching the finals, terrans have a much better case to make than zergs do. They were overrepresented in the RO16 and RO8 and represented normally in the RO4. In the RO4 when all three races are represented, there's always going to be 2 of one and 1 of each of the others. uThermal actually benefited from the lack of terran representation I think. He's always been stronger in the non-mirrors.
|
a few months ago someone suggested no Medivac Speed Boost for Medivacs carrying items like Thor and SiegeTank that are picked up outside the Medivac.
i still think its a great idea and i wish DK would consider it. And then in turn buff the Tank and Thor in some way to compensate.
In general, i want less air play and more ground play with Terran.
|
On July 31 2016 16:49 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
a few months ago someone suggested no Medivac Speed Boost for Medivacs carrying items like Thor and SiegeTank that are picked up outside the Medivac.
i still think its a great idea and i wish DK would consider it. And then in turn buff the Tank and Thor in some way to compensate.
In general, i want less air play and more ground play with Terran.
No boost is a great idea.
Because it's a great idea, Blizzard will never, ever listen to it.
|
I actually don't see how that would change too much tbh. Sure it would be easier to snipe the medivac here and there but overall?
|
On July 31 2016 16:53 The_Red_Viper wrote:
I actually don't see how that would change too much tbh. Sure it would be easier to snipe the medivac here and there but overall?
Tankivacs forever stuck in queen range sounds fun
|
Sure, but i don't think that the main problem about tankivacs is the boost. Would it help a little balance wise? (if that is actually a problem) Sure.
Would it make the design better? No
|
On July 31 2016 17:03 The_Red_Viper wrote:
Sure, but i don't think that the main problem about tankivacs is the boost. Would it help a little balance wise? (if that is actually a problem) Sure.
Would it make the design better? No
We'll see, maybe a year in they'll consider having tanks unsieged when they get picked up, as has been proposed by the community since about forever.
|
In the spirit of posting changes which have no hope of ever seeing the light of day (no matter how reasonable)  ... here's what I would like to see.
Protoss
- Stalker
Change: flat 14 DMG per shot (instead of 10 + 4 vs. armored). Cost increased to 150/75.
Reasoning: Stalkers with 14 flat DMG are a better counter to Oracle rushes and 1G/ 2G Phoenix builds in PvP. In PvZ Stalkers might be able to replace Phoenix as a counter/ deterrent to heavy Mutalisk builds and therefore allow a broader range of builds. In PvT nothing I can think of would change significantly other than Stalkers killing light units like SCVs, Marines, Widow Mines and Banshees more quickly which is balanced by their higher cost.
- Adept
Change: move Psionic Transfer upgrade to Twilight Council. Revert damage reduction (so that Adepts two shot all workers again).
Reasoning: the harassment potential of this ability is too high considering how early it's available. Also — not to be forgotten — it's more or less a free scout in PvP and PvZ. I would like to see a change to Psionic Transfer itself at some point but this is the next best thing to do (and more simple to implement and balance). Adept eco-harass is still possible but would likely rely only on warp prisms (since the added research for the upgrade is not warranted). This is good because it increases the defender's advantage.
Terran
- Liberator
Change: Tech lab and fusion core requirement. Can only attack while deployed. A2A damage reverted. Range upgrade removed (Liberator now comes with increased range).
Reasoning: The liberator overlaps with the Viking, the Thor and the Banshee. All of which are (somewhat at least) mobile units. The major point of distinction with this change is the power and the mobility of the Liberator: it is much more powerful out of the box, but it's a lot less mobile and comes out later. Muta plays in TvZ — especially Ling/Bling/Muta — would be possible until the Fusion Core is done and Liberators come out. After that Mutas are getting shreked by Liberators and substantially lose value in army fights (harass potential is still there ofc). I think this would be a great change since we don't see heavy Muta builds in TvZ a lot any more and they are fun to watch.
- Siege Tank
Change: damage changed to flat 25 (tank mode)/ flat 50 damage (siege mode)
Reasoning: Siege Tanks simply need to be more powerful considering how easily they are countered (even with the addition of Tankivacs). This change helps against heavy Ravager compositions in TvZ and heavy adept compositions in TvP.
- Medivac
Change: Boost costs energy (say 50 energy).
Reasoning: Creates a trade off between healing and saving units. If you just let a drop sit in the enemy base, energy may be depleted from healing units once you eventually want to boost out.
Zerg
- Nydus Worm
Change: as many have suggested — cloaked but not untargetable while constructing.
Reasoning: it's easier to pull off than the HotS Nydus but may be countered using detection. This should have been patched a long time ago tbh. It's the mother of all no-brainer SC2 balance change proposals.
All comments are welcome! 
|
On July 31 2016 06:22 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2016 06:14 KeksX wrote:On July 31 2016 02:28 BronzeKnee wrote:On July 31 2016 01:56 The_Red_Viper wrote:On July 31 2016 01:53 ejozl wrote:On July 31 2016 01:16 [PkF] Wire wrote:
Yeah let's have everyone say what he thinks should or should not be in the game without taking even slightly what DK said in the last community update (their stance -> slow and few changes and let the meta evolve, which I tend to agree with in the current state of the game modulo negligible things). As for me I think we should go back to WoL with projectile fungal and 4 range phoenix. Congrats boys, we're being very productive. I agree with David Kim's approach from a pure balance approach, but I strongly think that this should not prevent design changes that better the game, just because it's not a horrible meta currently. Keep on improving the game, if balance is an issue, give credit to the players that they can solve it, before changing numbers which would go against said design. Their approach is this: Hey sc2 is kinda good atm, don't do anything because we might fuck it up badly. Well said. When are we going to get a design team that knows how to actually improve this game? I already said it in the other thread, but if you think the issue here that they have no idea then you're delusional. The reality is that currently, there is no financial incentive for them to do any big changes. They make big changes and then what? People keep playing? Where's the money coming from? This might change with microtransactions. No guarantee of course, but way more likely than currently. As i said before, one incentive is to keep a good reputation. With your logic there would be no point to have "big" team working on sc2, as far as we know blizzard plans on supporting it for "years to come" though. I agree that making actual money RIGHT NOW would be a better scenario, but considering that they seem to still work on it with a reasonably big team you kinda could expect them to do more. And even if all that wouldn't be true the actual reasoning for the rather lacking support is rather meaningless to the disappointed end consumer. It might be true and make sense but in the end the product has to make people happy, not reasonings on why the product isn't moving in the right direction.
The reality is though that Blizzard already has a great reputation, even if they only balance the game and fix bugs/exploits. They're already doing a lot of work with the ladder revamp and so on. They don't need to do big gameplay changes to ensure what they need to ensure.
Big gameplay changes are basically just risk with limited (if any) reward right now.
|
balancing 3 diverse races is very difficult. its why a multi-race diverse race RTS was avoided until SC1 came along. C&C had 2 races with ying-yang type unit differences. And that was difficult to balance.
in general, the people complaining the loudest about DK's alleged stupidity underestimate how difficult the problem is.
On July 31 2016 06:22 The_Red_Viper wrote:
As i said before, one incentive is to keep a good reputation. With your logic there would be no point to have "big" team working on sc2, as far as we know blizzard plans on supporting it for "years to come" though.
Blizzard takes care of my time and money investment into their franchises better than any other company in the world by a large margin.
The majority of SC2 owners just bought WoL. i know several people who only own WoL. They bought it 6 years ago. Look at all the new stuff WoL people are getting. The majority of SC2 WoL buyers have gotten more support and new content than any other non-Blizz RTS by 87 bazillion light years.
In terms of pure fun I think RA2 and RA3 are slightly better than BW and SC2. and yet here i am.. playing SC2 for years. All due to Blizzard's support.
This is why Blizzard has a stellar reputation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
