EPTCactus Valley though? That was another map that needed more time.
Meanwhile, Daybreak never dies xD
Community Feedback Update - November 2 - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
FrostedMiniWheats
United States30730 Posts
Cactus Valley though? That was another map that needed more time. Meanwhile, Daybreak never dies xD | ||
|
jinjin5000
United States1547 Posts
On November 03 2016 06:21 Beelzebub1 wrote: This could be the case, I'm a high diamond player but it's more then feasible that my macro is too weak to fully exploit Hydralisks vs Terran, they seem absurdly powerful vs. Protoss but even in their current format they feel not exactly worth the money vs. Terran because stimmed bio still murders them and the new tanks extra murder them and of course they are immobile compared to zerglings and Mutalisks so drop play is still the go to answer. Vs bio, ling bling muta should be fine since liberator nerf, baneling buff and infestor burrow cast I am talking about mech Vs zerg though. Having good spread and surround makes a world of difference Vs clumped up ball of units with hydra especially. Mitigates splash and gets full dps out in 7 range in pretty rapid phase being slightly lower than hellion on creep. What me and my friends found out that it's better to skip making other units for army and just go straight to pure hydralisks, with vipers in good amount later on to mass abduct/binding cloud. Transition into mass bl is also good but not when there are less than 6 bls as bls only really work well on critical number, much like new hydra Unless you are doing a timing, roaches seem to largely be a liability since it takes huge bonus damage from tanks. Critical amount of hydra should be able to take care of hellbats | ||
|
jackacea
66 Posts
| ||
|
AnathemAbw
23 Posts
On November 03 2016 06:40 JimmyJRaynor wrote: an interesting red flag from DK. people have 2 choices... the current released version of the game or the more experimental version of the game. i guess people like the current version better. Thats because of how bullshit tempest new ability is/was, I didn't play anymore after seeing that. | ||
|
Odowan Paleolithic
United States232 Posts
On November 03 2016 06:40 JimmyJRaynor wrote: an interesting red flag from DK. people have 2 choices... the current released version of the game or the more experimental version of the game. i guess people like the current version better. There is simply not enough people playing the test map for the matchmaking to work. The wait is at least 5 min for me. (I'm only bottom of the diamond and I either stomp my opponent (more than half the time) or I get stomped (less than 1 in 4 games if I even get 4 games in a roll). Right now if it is just to gather data it is better just play with someone you are familiar with (and develop from there). This make it worse for people who want to use the test feature but have limited time to do so. The less player in the ranking system the less efficient the matchmaking goes. I doubt they actually have enough player to fill the bare minimum. (It irritates me how people talks about balance and testing yet themselves do not actual play. So far no one has even bother to notice and post about how strong the 5 mineral interceptors are.) | ||
|
Odowan Paleolithic
United States232 Posts
On November 03 2016 07:29 AnathemAbw wrote: Thats because of how bullshit tempest new ability is/was, I didn't play anymore after seeing that. If you have that mindset as a QA specialist... http://randsinrepose.com/archives/the-qa-mindset/ | ||
|
FoxDog
170 Posts
We haven’t received as much testing as we had hoped Well maybe thats because you gave protoss an absurd aoe ability that made the testmap unplayable while not even testing to give mech anti air supremacy once for balance?! if you just tested giving mech the hyperballistic missile from niceusernames map you would get so much testing you wouldnt have any doubts about balance whatsoever, but because you dont change anything for mech (its not our anti ground thats bad, its our lack of anti air!) the testmap is only really interesting for gm level mech players that strive for tiny improvements you need to give MUCH better anti air, and if you dont know what i am talking about you need to ask players like immvp, gumiho, innovation or mario/ruff/avilo why theyd rather play bio over mech i would start off with giving thors 13 range so the javelin missiles can actually travel to the targets that have 10 range before they abduct you instantly or blinding cloud you, and likewise so that you can stack thors on the ground against carriers instead of having only one line of thors able to shoot while the entire golden armada fires back again the only thing this map changes is TvT where tankivac removal and tank buff makes mech players a lot stronger, we want weaker ground stronger anti air! | ||
|
BronzeKnee
United States5221 Posts
On November 03 2016 12:18 Odowan Paleolithic wrote: If you have that mindset as a QA specialist... http://randsinrepose.com/archives/the-qa-mindset/ Don't blame the player base. Blizzard is offloading their testing onto the player base, who do it for free. Designing the game so that some people can't have fun testing it is Blizzard's fault, not the players, who are again doing it for free and play the game only because they think it is fun and enjoyable. So don't blame the players and expect them to change their mindset. Blizzard is getting exactly what they paid for. The solution to this issue is more appealing game design, more work done internally. And honestly, good game design ideas work, and bad ones don't. Balance is last piece of polishing, and constantly fluctuates as new things are added into the game and new strategies discovered. But this isn't about balance of course, it is about game design ideas. Blizzard really shouldn't need this kind of testing to understand what ideas work, and which ones don't, idea development should be an internal initiative done by the game designers who get paid to do that. But Blizzard continues their strategy of throwing out ideas and seeing which ones the community thinks are good. In fact, I think the last piece of the article you linked us to sums it up well: It’s not that QA can discover what is wrong, they intimately understand what is right and they unfailingly strive to push the product in that direction. Blizzard doesn't have a QA department that handles testing effectively and thus fails to intimately understand what is right about SC2, and so Blizzard has no ability to push SC2 in a positive direction. Using the community as the QA department to tell you what is right or wrong, is exactly why SC2 had been in a downward spiral since WOL. Especially when the most important parts of the community are ignored, like the Korea pro-gamers who recently said the game was too hard, which was followed by an explanation from David Kim telling us why the pro-gamers were wrong. | ||
|
Odowan Paleolithic
United States232 Posts
On November 03 2016 14:48 BronzeKnee wrote: Don't blame the player base. Blizzard is offloading their testing onto the player base, who do it for free. Designing the game so that some people can't have fun testing it is Blizzard's fault, not the players, who are again doing it for free and play the game only because they think it is fun and enjoyable. So don't blame the players and expect them to change their mindset. Blizzard is getting exactly what they paid for. The solution to this issue is more appealing game design, more work done internally. And honestly, good game design ideas work, and bad ones don't. Balance is last piece of polishing, and constantly fluctuates as new things are added into the game and new strategies discovered. But this isn't about balance of course, it is about game design ideas. Blizzard really shouldn't need this kind of testing to understand what ideas work, and which ones don't, idea development should be an internal initiative done by the game designers who get paid to do that. But Blizzard continues their strategy of throwing out ideas and seeing which ones the community thinks are good. In fact, I think the last piece of the article you linked us to sums it up well: Blizzard doesn't have a QA department that handles testing effectively and thus fails to intimately understand what is right about SC2, and thus Blizzard has no ability to push SC2 in a positive direction. Using the community as the QA department to tell you what is right or wrong, is exactly why SC2 had been in a downward spiral since WOL. Especially when the most important parts of the community are ignored, like the Korea pro-gamers who recently said the game was too hard, which was followed by an explanation from David Kim telling us why the pro-gamers were wrong. In the very beginning, Dustin Browder at least had overall design goals, however controversial it is. Now most of those goals are neglected. In other games, the open testing will have enough players to "polish" it. I agree with you the open testing for free should not be used as a design testing ground (unless Starcraft 2 is open source). Starcraft 2 right now does not have that large enough a player base to effectively open test for design. Maybe for numerical balancing (I am even questioning that but I don't have numbers so I cannot make such claim.) Compare to Blizz's own other product, say WoW's PTR, there isn't enough incentive for player to test for free and be compensated. I would compare the current Starcraft to EVE Online before CCP Seagull. Until CCP Seagul come along (with the help of CSM) give EVE Online a direction, the patches are random and the game is quite stale. We do not need a visionary. We just need a direction. I understand we cannot have Starcraft players have something similar to the CSM (or maybe we could). Most of the testing should be forecast and minor tweaks. Mass test are done because the emergence simply cannot be tested otherwise. The design decision should be made months ahead. | ||
|
SCHWARZENEGGER
206 Posts
| ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
| ||
|
Elentos
55579 Posts
On November 03 2016 17:50 opisska wrote: Can somebody explain me, why are they testing balance on the dreampool? What's wrong with current or new maps? Are the dozens of maps people make really not enough, so that we have to use the same old maps over and over and over again? I won't load the balance test for the sheer panic of playing on Daybreak ... These are gonna be ladder maps so just veto it  I don't think there's much of a point to it. Maybe they wanted to see what kinds of maps work without going out of their way and looking at all the community maps that are out. That would be kinda lazy but also not surprising. | ||
|
hiroshOne
Poland425 Posts
On November 03 2016 12:39 FoxDog wrote: Well maybe thats because you gave protoss an absurd aoe ability that made the testmap unplayable while not even testing to give mech anti air supremacy once for balance?! if you just tested giving mech the hyperballistic missile from niceusernames map you would get so much testing you wouldnt have any doubts about balance whatsoever, but because you dont change anything for mech (its not our anti ground thats bad, its our lack of anti air!) the testmap is only really interesting for gm level mech players that strive for tiny improvements you need to give MUCH better anti air, and if you dont know what i am talking about you need to ask players like immvp, gumiho, innovation or mario/ruff/avilo why theyd rather play bio over mech i would start off with giving thors 13 range so the javelin missiles can actually travel to the targets that have 10 range before they abduct you instantly or blinding cloud you, and likewise so that you can stack thors on the ground against carriers instead of having only one line of thors able to shoot while the entire golden armada fires back again the only thing this map changes is TvT where tankivac removal and tank buff makes mech players a lot stronger, we want weaker ground stronger anti air! Yeah, because that's what mech needs- to be uncounterable. I loved this 13 range Thor part, where u wrote that Thor needs to kill Vipers before they come in range of abduct or blinding cloud. Yrah- let's make mech auto win again haha. That was hilarious. In that case, Zerg needs a unit that can kill siegetanks before they shoot once, or a unit that kills medivack before it leaves Terran base. Hahaha my god, i love that kind of "balance specialists" | ||
|
JackONeill
861 Posts
The main issue with HOTS and LOTV units design is that many of them rely on "free" damage. Tempest outranging any unit in the game, viper abduct, SH. Any unit should be about trading, trading well or trading poorly. Overwhelm a tank with 20 lings you'll trade favorably, but the tank will still kill a ling or three. And that's one of the most specialised unit in WOL. However, having tempest + revelation kill stuff for free is not ok. Having the viper pickoff units without any risk is not ok. | ||
|
insitelol
845 Posts
Playerbase dropping to 100k after patch hits live. "Remember this post". | ||
|
hiroshOne
Poland425 Posts
On November 03 2016 19:02 JackONeill wrote: On the one hand, people considering the thor should obliterate the viper before it can do anything is stupid, on the other people considering that the viper should be able to pick off units for free and disable entire positions for 75 energy without any risk is stupid too. The main issue with HOTS and LOTV units design is that many of them rely on "free" damage. Tempest outranging any unit in the game, viper abduct, SH. Any unit should be about trading, trading well or trading poorly. Overwhelm a tank with 20 lings you'll trade favorably, but the tank will still kill a ling or three. And that's one of the most specialised unit in WOL. However, having tempest + revelation kill stuff for free is not ok. Having the viper pickoff units without any risk is not ok. What are utalking about? Vipers are perfectly counterable by ghosts snipes or emp or HT with feedback. And even if u use ball of viper to mass abduct u will always lose some of them. But Mechh ball with 13 range Thors, buffed siegetank, ravens and hellbats for tanking damage will have no counter. And every time i read a whining mech player they always demand same thing- no counter for their army composition. I mean, isn't enough that mech is dominant on the ground? Their proposals don't even make room for other players to fight that. It's lije- once i leave my basr with army there should be nothing to stop that. Thats retarded indeed. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17567 Posts
On November 03 2016 12:12 Odowan Paleolithic wrote: There is simply not enough people playing the test map for the matchmaking to work. ... (It irritates me how people talks about balance and testing yet themselves do not actual play. So far no one has even bother to notice and post about how strong the 5 mineral interceptors are.) ya you make a good point. its become a chicken/egg thing. i'm on the NA server and i don't get well suited opponents via the test map matchmaker. On November 03 2016 15:42 Odowan Paleolithic wrote: Starcraft 2 right now does not have that large enough a player base to effectively open test for design. Maybe for numerical balancing (I am even questioning that but I don't have numbers so I cannot make such claim.) Compare to Blizz's own other product, say WoW's PTR, there isn't enough incentive for player to test for free and be compensated. DK/Blizz is hoping the "love of the game" will be enough compensation. He mentioned in an earlier weekly update about how great everything will be when the game is finally well balanced AND well designed. | ||
|
InfCereal
Canada1759 Posts
On November 03 2016 22:52 JimmyJRaynor wrote: ya you make a good point. its become a chicken/egg thing. i'm on the NA server and i don't get well suited opponents via the test map matchmaker. I search it pretty regularly, but it usually takes some 10 minutes to find a game, and half the time the opponent just asks me to leave so they can get the portrait. Very rarely do I get someone at my skill level. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17567 Posts
i wonder if this has ever succeeded with any RTS game post sale? it probably has worked several times pre-sale with a strong enough franchise. On November 03 2016 20:23 insitelol wrote: Calling it. Playerbase dropping to 100k after patch hits live. "Remember this post". you're that same guy that predicted "the internet will get bigger" back in 1997 so i listen carefully when you make a projection. | ||
|
KeksX
Germany3634 Posts
| ||
| ||
