|
It does not fit a modern rts game. Yes the camping part is utterly boring, even in broodwar. What hider said though wasnt that the camping part was fun, he said the lategame was fun, when you have options where to attack and how and where to split your armee.
in my opinion the midgame should (generally) be about harass. Because you can't really have "army"-trading until the late game in a mobile vs immobile dynamic.
However the issue is that in LOTV the real "lategame" never takes place.
On the other hand BW midgame could often time be very passive. Hence why I believe combining some of the harass strenghts from LOTV with the BW late game is ideal.
|
On November 05 2016 10:29 -NegativeZero- wrote:
i hope they keep the thor as the main mech anti-air, but buff its anti-air attacks to an absurd degree, so it can used as a zoning/area control unit operating in small groups.
that's a good idea and congruent with DK's stated goals re: factory built AA.
|
On November 05 2016 22:48 Hider wrote:I am talking about Sc2 balance/design team. They surely are not spending any noticeable time on "maintaining" the multiplayer.
you are speculating. the seeing units behind barriers thing. resolving memory issues with the # of skins and voice packs. these are just a couple of the things they've dealt with in 2016. multiplayer servers require maintenance.
|
On November 06 2016 00:34 aQuaSC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2016 00:10 Hider wrote:
If we're talking about game design goals btw, I'm going to throw in my opinion; I don't even agree with making mech viable at all. The general idea of mech, sitting at your base throwing high burst damage things at your enemy every once in a while is utterly boring. So in that sense, the whole balance patch for Terran is a waste of time. But thats just my opinion, not a general rule.
Look through some Bw TvZ late game vods. Mech can be awesome if done correctly. The concept is that when you can split your army across multiple locations all over the map and the enemy can attack you and can army trade into you --> You get a great dynamic. But for such a dynamic to work you need reworks across the aboards. And I am pretty sure David Kim and his buddies doesn't really understand what needs to be done. To add to that I think some improvements to the UI could be made to make map awareness more of a standing out part of the game given how important it is to react much quicker in SC2 than in Brood War.
Please don't make assertions about a game you seemingly have never played. Reacting as fast as possible, both on the mini-map as on screen, is PIVOTAL in many match ups in brood war (dodging storms with drones, hydralisks, mutalisks, taking out drop ships with scourge, EMPing an arbiter that's planning a recall, killing scourge in ZvZ, blocking ramps with workers such as SCVs or probes against a zergling run-by, microing dragoons against vultures with spider mines...).
|
Lol, if the Goliath overlaps too much with the Thor, then remove the Thor. The Cyclone is a joke of a unit, a complete gimmick, and always will be. I'd much rather have a "mech marine" (why is that a bad thing?) than either the Thor or Cyclone. Just another huge letdown from the SC2 team. Oh well, looks like the game is winding down anyway. Had some good times in the past but good riddance.
|
On November 06 2016 03:36 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2016 22:48 Hider wrote:They have to maintain 6 games I am talking about Sc2 balance/design team. They surely are not spending any noticeable time on "maintaining" the multiplayer. you are speculating. the seeing units behind barriers thing. resolving memory issues with the # of skins and voice packs. these are just a couple of the things they've dealt with in 2016. multiplayer servers require maintenance.
Not related to balance/design.
|
On November 06 2016 04:33 coolman123123 wrote: I'd much rather have a "mech marine" (why is that a bad thing?)
Blizzard give you a mech skin for your marines.
|
On November 05 2016 10:29 -NegativeZero- wrote:
i hope they keep the thor as the main mech anti-air, but buff its anti-air attacks to an absurd degree, so it can used as a zoning/area control unit operating in small groups.
Doesn't that cause problems in large groups?
|
On November 05 2016 10:33 xTJx wrote:
Nothing they can do for SC2 now, just bring the Broodwar remastered.
You will have to wait for the starcraft anniversary which is i think next year
|
On November 06 2016 04:33 coolman123123 wrote:
Lol, if the Goliath overlaps too much with the Thor, then remove the Thor. The Cyclone is a joke of a unit, a complete gimmick, and always will be. I'd much rather have a "mech marine" (why is that a bad thing?) than either the Thor or Cyclone. Just another huge letdown from the SC2 team. Oh well, looks like the game is winding down anyway. Had some good times in the past but good riddance.
They just can't acknowledge they fkced up. They whole design concept of SC2 was "not copying BW", as if they were afraid people would accuse them in releasing bw 2.0. In terms of marketing and maintining the blizzard's image of making only solid, stand-alone projects it was absolutely right though. So vulture became hellion, goliath merged with wrath to become a viking, they couldn't let the viking be invisible so they passed the ability to banshee. To ensure noone would say they blindly copied bw they removed lurker and reaver saying they got no place in the meta only to reintroduce them later (in reavers case in form of a horrid abomination), etc etc. Right from the start these "improvements" were nothing but futile and artificial attempts to make SC2 look fresh and not bw-like. But in reality Bw was just too good to be surpassed in terms of design. And then everything started to fall apart. They started adding units left and right, all of them were badly designed and overlapped with each other, got no distinct role but w.e. Now it's just out of hand. Noone remembers exactlty what role did thor have. He was rebalanced so many times anyways. Who came up with cyclone and with what purpose? Noone explained that. Ever. Forget it. I'll remind you they wanted to add herk in the lotv beta. They are thinking about adding goliath now... Like. Why not?
|
On November 06 2016 20:53 InfCereal wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2016 10:29 -NegativeZero- wrote:
i hope they keep the thor as the main mech anti-air, but buff its anti-air attacks to an absurd degree, so it can used as a zoning/area control unit operating in small groups. Doesn't that cause problems in large groups?
should be ok if it's still weak to ground anti-armor in large groups imo
|
It will be interesting to see where they take the game next year, it is generally going in a pretty good direction and they seem to be interested in continuing to tweak and improve multiplayer. which is cool Making mech better is not easy because LotV is all about mobile harassment, multitasking and low econ, ByuN is the exact example of the ideal LotV terran and he rarely plays mech (never?). Can there be a new faster version of mech? The cyclone is a good start I hope they keep its speed where it is right now, the new one feels slow.
|
I'm so confused by this. Isn't the point of mech that it isn't bio? But it should be like bio and get mech units that are comparable to marines?
Do you actually want mech?
|
On November 07 2016 08:50 Probe1 wrote:
Do you actually want mech?
Do you want bio all the time? Even after 6 years nonstop bio, from early to late stage bio everywhere. It would be good if mech is at least possible.
|
South Korea2106 Posts
On November 07 2016 19:13 Dingodile wrote:Do you want bio all the time? Even after 6 years nonstop bio, from early to late stage bio everywhere. It would be good if mech is at least possible.
Bio all the time? #2014-2015 TvZ
|
tbh if goliath feels to much like a thor, just delete the thor.... its useless since wol anyways...
|
On November 07 2016 07:39 insitelol wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2016 04:33 coolman123123 wrote:
Lol, if the Goliath overlaps too much with the Thor, then remove the Thor. The Cyclone is a joke of a unit, a complete gimmick, and always will be. I'd much rather have a "mech marine" (why is that a bad thing?) than either the Thor or Cyclone. Just another huge letdown from the SC2 team. Oh well, looks like the game is winding down anyway. Had some good times in the past but good riddance. They just can't acknowledge they fkced up. They whole design concept of SC2 was "not copying BW", as if they were afraid people would accuse them in releasing bw 2.0. In terms of marketing and maintining the blizzard's image of making only solid, stand-alone projects it was absolutely right though. So vulture became hellion, goliath merged with wrath to become a viking, they couldn't let the viking be invisible so they passed the ability to banshee. To ensure noone would say they blindly copied bw they removed lurker and reaver saying they got no place in the meta only to reintroduce them later (in reavers case in form of a horrid abomination), etc etc. Right from the start these "improvements" were nothing but futile and artificial attempts to make SC2 look fresh and not bw-like. But in reality Bw was just too good to be surpassed in terms of design. And then everything started to fall apart. They started adding units left and right, all of them were badly designed and overlapped with each other, got no distinct role but w.e. Now it's just out of hand. Noone remembers exactlty what role did thor have. He was rebalanced so many times anyways. Who came up with cyclone and with what purpose? Noone explained that. Ever. Forget it. I'll remind you they wanted to add herk in the lotv beta. They are thinking about adding goliath now... Like. Why not?
Very well said. The one thing i'll add to that is a shooting pylon which is the best indicator of how a game design can become a victim of patching the issue, but not finding the reason.
Tell a person 10 years ago: hey imagine in SC2 pylons are going to shoot! He would die from laughter.
|
On November 07 2016 22:30 fLyiNgDroNe wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2016 07:39 insitelol wrote:On November 06 2016 04:33 coolman123123 wrote:
Lol, if the Goliath overlaps too much with the Thor, then remove the Thor. The Cyclone is a joke of a unit, a complete gimmick, and always will be. I'd much rather have a "mech marine" (why is that a bad thing?) than either the Thor or Cyclone. Just another huge letdown from the SC2 team. Oh well, looks like the game is winding down anyway. Had some good times in the past but good riddance. They just can't acknowledge they fkced up. They whole design concept of SC2 was "not copying BW", as if they were afraid people would accuse them in releasing bw 2.0. In terms of marketing and maintining the blizzard's image of making only solid, stand-alone projects it was absolutely right though. So vulture became hellion, goliath merged with wrath to become a viking, they couldn't let the viking be invisible so they passed the ability to banshee. To ensure noone would say they blindly copied bw they removed lurker and reaver saying they got no place in the meta only to reintroduce them later (in reavers case in form of a horrid abomination), etc etc. Right from the start these "improvements" were nothing but futile and artificial attempts to make SC2 look fresh and not bw-like. But in reality Bw was just too good to be surpassed in terms of design. And then everything started to fall apart. They started adding units left and right, all of them were badly designed and overlapped with each other, got no distinct role but w.e. Now it's just out of hand. Noone remembers exactlty what role did thor have. He was rebalanced so many times anyways. Who came up with cyclone and with what purpose? Noone explained that. Ever. Forget it. I'll remind you they wanted to add herk in the lotv beta. They are thinking about adding goliath now... Like. Why not? Very well said. The one thing i'll add to that is a shooting pylon which is the best indicator of how a game design can become a victim of patching the issue, but not finding the reason. Tell a person 10 years ago: hey imagine in SC2 pylons are going to shoot! He would die from laughter.
I bet similar type of laughter would happen if people were told you will be able to warp dark templars directly into opponent's base.
Or being able to pick up and move sieged tanks for that matter, which is regarded by significant amount of players as a dynamic and exciting mechanic (while others think it's too hard). Imagine it happening in BW, the response would be "imba imba imba imba imba imba imba imba" while recent WCS finals were played with it in the game and it was fine.
Mocking such stuff because they don't really tick with the lore and the franchise overall is rather a poor argument against it on its own. Photon overcharge existed in the game since Heart of the Swarm, an expansion that arguably provided best games over its longer lifespan, it was nerfed in LotV and it's going to be nerfed even more in PvT with cyclone changes. Getting rid of it would mean a need for redesign of basically everything Protoss has and it would mean changing all other matchups as well. In a perfect world probably Blizzard could do it, but making a different game from ground up, and probably it just meant too much of an effort to funnel all their resources to.
While being a band-aid, it provides more positional gameplay and decision-making to Protoss while leaving the army interactions revolving around Protoss unchanged. Removing overcharge would mean much more danger to Protoss with even more mobility other races got, forcing a lot of forces left around bases making the main army much weaker, photon cannons as an alternative are a joke compared to their older brothers from BW, regarding how armies look number-wise and how they engage into them in both games, in SC2 they are overrun and die instantly, they should have at least small aoe if overcharge was to be removed (I think so while thinking about it right now).
Missile turrets have almost 40 dps - two of them well positioned basically prevent drops coming into the base, with cannons little over 20 dps. Two of them won't make a medivac take much damage before they get destroyed by dropped bio because most of the time players don't focus medivacs or just medivacs can easily avoid the shots.
|
On November 07 2016 19:13 Dingodile wrote:Do you want bio all the time? Even after 6 years nonstop bio, from early to late stage bio everywhere. It would be good if mech is at least possible.
.. mech is entirely possible right now. That did not answer my question however.
On November 07 2016 22:34 aQuaSC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2016 22:30 fLyiNgDroNe wrote:On November 07 2016 07:39 insitelol wrote:On November 06 2016 04:33 coolman123123 wrote:
Lol, if the Goliath overlaps too much with the Thor, then remove the Thor. The Cyclone is a joke of a unit, a complete gimmick, and always will be. I'd much rather have a "mech marine" (why is that a bad thing?) than either the Thor or Cyclone. Just another huge letdown from the SC2 team. Oh well, looks like the game is winding down anyway. Had some good times in the past but good riddance. They just can't acknowledge they fkced up. They whole design concept of SC2 was "not copying BW", as if they were afraid people would accuse them in releasing bw 2.0. In terms of marketing and maintining the blizzard's image of making only solid, stand-alone projects it was absolutely right though. So vulture became hellion, goliath merged with wrath to become a viking, they couldn't let the viking be invisible so they passed the ability to banshee. To ensure noone would say they blindly copied bw they removed lurker and reaver saying they got no place in the meta only to reintroduce them later (in reavers case in form of a horrid abomination), etc etc. Right from the start these "improvements" were nothing but futile and artificial attempts to make SC2 look fresh and not bw-like. But in reality Bw was just too good to be surpassed in terms of design. And then everything started to fall apart. They started adding units left and right, all of them were badly designed and overlapped with each other, got no distinct role but w.e. Now it's just out of hand. Noone remembers exactlty what role did thor have. He was rebalanced so many times anyways. Who came up with cyclone and with what purpose? Noone explained that. Ever. Forget it. I'll remind you they wanted to add herk in the lotv beta. They are thinking about adding goliath now... Like. Why not? Very well said. The one thing i'll add to that is a shooting pylon which is the best indicator of how a game design can become a victim of patching the issue, but not finding the reason. Tell a person 10 years ago: hey imagine in SC2 pylons are going to shoot! He would die from laughter. I bet similar type of laughter would happen if people were told you will be able to warp dark templars directly into opponent's base. Or being able to pick up and move sieged tanks for that matter, which is regarded by significant amount of players as a dynamic and exciting mechanic (while others think it's too hard). Imagine it happening in BW, the response would be "imba imba imba imba imba imba imba imba" while recent WCS finals were played with it in the game and it was fine.Mocking such stuff because they don't really tick with the lore and the franchise overall is rather a poor argument against it on its own. Photon overcharge existed in the game since Heart of the Swarm, an expansion that arguably provided best games over its longer lifespan, it was nerfed in LotV and it's going to be nerfed even more in PvT with cyclone changes. Getting rid of it would mean a need for redesign of basically everything Protoss has and it would mean changing all other matchups as well. In a perfect world probably Blizzard could do it, but making a different game from ground up, and probably it just meant too much of an effort to funnel all their resources to. While being a band-aid, it provides more positional gameplay and decision-making to Protoss while leaving the army interactions revolving around Protoss unchanged. Removing overcharge would mean much more danger to Protoss with even more mobility other races got, forcing a lot of forces left around bases making the main army much weaker, photon cannons as an alternative are a joke compared to their older brothers from BW though regarding how armies engage into them in both games, they are overrun and die instantly, they should have at least small aoe if overcharge was to be removed (I think so while thinking about it right now).
There is a great difference between "close to 50% win rate in matchups" and "fine". Starcraft 2 is not at its lowest point because this is fine. Brood War isn't as popular and increasing because Starcraft 2 is "fine". There is not a balance patch due shortly to remove some of these things that are said to be fine.. because they are "fine".
Even Blizzard has accepted a stance of no faith in their own design this time.
|
On November 07 2016 23:15 Probe1 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2016 19:13 Dingodile wrote:On November 07 2016 08:50 Probe1 wrote:
Do you actually want mech? Do you want bio all the time? Even after 6 years nonstop bio, from early to late stage bio everywhere. It would be good if mech is at least possible. .. mech is entirely possible right now. That did not answer my question however. Show nested quote +On November 07 2016 22:34 aQuaSC wrote:On November 07 2016 22:30 fLyiNgDroNe wrote:On November 07 2016 07:39 insitelol wrote:On November 06 2016 04:33 coolman123123 wrote:
Lol, if the Goliath overlaps too much with the Thor, then remove the Thor. The Cyclone is a joke of a unit, a complete gimmick, and always will be. I'd much rather have a "mech marine" (why is that a bad thing?) than either the Thor or Cyclone. Just another huge letdown from the SC2 team. Oh well, looks like the game is winding down anyway. Had some good times in the past but good riddance. They just can't acknowledge they fkced up. They whole design concept of SC2 was "not copying BW", as if they were afraid people would accuse them in releasing bw 2.0. In terms of marketing and maintining the blizzard's image of making only solid, stand-alone projects it was absolutely right though. So vulture became hellion, goliath merged with wrath to become a viking, they couldn't let the viking be invisible so they passed the ability to banshee. To ensure noone would say they blindly copied bw they removed lurker and reaver saying they got no place in the meta only to reintroduce them later (in reavers case in form of a horrid abomination), etc etc. Right from the start these "improvements" were nothing but futile and artificial attempts to make SC2 look fresh and not bw-like. But in reality Bw was just too good to be surpassed in terms of design. And then everything started to fall apart. They started adding units left and right, all of them were badly designed and overlapped with each other, got no distinct role but w.e. Now it's just out of hand. Noone remembers exactlty what role did thor have. He was rebalanced so many times anyways. Who came up with cyclone and with what purpose? Noone explained that. Ever. Forget it. I'll remind you they wanted to add herk in the lotv beta. They are thinking about adding goliath now... Like. Why not? Very well said. The one thing i'll add to that is a shooting pylon which is the best indicator of how a game design can become a victim of patching the issue, but not finding the reason. Tell a person 10 years ago: hey imagine in SC2 pylons are going to shoot! He would die from laughter. I bet similar type of laughter would happen if people were told you will be able to warp dark templars directly into opponent's base. Or being able to pick up and move sieged tanks for that matter, which is regarded by significant amount of players as a dynamic and exciting mechanic (while others think it's too hard). Imagine it happening in BW, the response would be "imba imba imba imba imba imba imba imba" while recent WCS finals were played with it in the game and it was fine.Mocking such stuff because they don't really tick with the lore and the franchise overall is rather a poor argument against it on its own. Photon overcharge existed in the game since Heart of the Swarm, an expansion that arguably provided best games over its longer lifespan, it was nerfed in LotV and it's going to be nerfed even more in PvT with cyclone changes. Getting rid of it would mean a need for redesign of basically everything Protoss has and it would mean changing all other matchups as well. In a perfect world probably Blizzard could do it, but making a different game from ground up, and probably it just meant too much of an effort to funnel all their resources to. While being a band-aid, it provides more positional gameplay and decision-making to Protoss while leaving the army interactions revolving around Protoss unchanged. Removing overcharge would mean much more danger to Protoss with even more mobility other races got, forcing a lot of forces left around bases making the main army much weaker, photon cannons as an alternative are a joke compared to their older brothers from BW though regarding how armies engage into them in both games, they are overrun and die instantly, they should have at least small aoe if overcharge was to be removed (I think so while thinking about it right now). There is a great difference between "close to 50% win rate in matchups" and "fine". Starcraft 2 is not at its lowest point because this is fine. Brood War isn't as popular and increasing because Starcraft 2 is "fine". There is not a balance patch due shortly to remove some of these things that are said to be fine.. because they are "fine". Even Blizzard has accepted a stance of no faith in their own design this time.
On a side note, do you have statistics proving that Brood War's popularity is increasing besides stream numbers? Popularity doesn't equal size of a playerbase. True, SC1 is more popular as a PC bang game and it has been for a long time, but is it rising to use it as an argument against design choices like overcharge? "Korean sources" as quoted in community feedback say that the game is too hard, and they are removing medanks ( ) because of that. Terran will be back to more leapfrogging armies with less possibilities of abusing them offensively with tanks overall being more bw-like again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
