|
On November 07 2016 23:26 aQuaSC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2016 23:15 Probe1 wrote: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. 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.
Would you consider the sidebar right now to be a valuable source of statistics?
When Destiny started streaming SC2 last night he had double the viewers than SC2 averages all month. Right now EffOrt has nearly as many viewers as the entire SC2 streaming scene. Surely that puts it beyond argument and I don't need to dredge up the repeated articles from 2016 on how BW is increasing in popularity while SC2 is holding or decreasing.
My point wasn't that I was opening an invitation to argue about what game was better. I really am not interested in that. I am very interested in making Starcraft 2 a better game and to do that we all must acknowledge SC2 is not a great game and needs to be changed.
For this particular point of discussion, tankivacs, we have discussed it and even Blizzard agrees at this point that they were a bad addition. Which returns me to my original point - If you guys want a mech marine then why don't you play bio? The purpose of bio is high mobility high fragility. The purpose of mech is not high mobility high fragility. So asking mech to be like bio is both bad for the game and ultimately once you realize what you've asked for, bad for your own enjoyment.
|
To be fair, the only thing that the sidebar proves is that BW is more popular in Korea than SC2 which was the case ... pretty much always.
In terms of actual playerbase though BW isn't rising, at least not in Korea. It's sitting at like 2.3~2.7% market share for the last few years. The big difference to SC2 is that it's staying there. It hasn't gone below 2%, whereas SC2 right now is at a laughable 0.30%(down from 0.7~1%) after the KeSPA doom.
And I don't think any design change will ever change that.
|
Yes, I agree. A lost Starcraft 2 player does not equate to a gained Brood War player. We have had this discussion countless times and I don't have interest in having it nth + 1
|
On November 08 2016 00:26 Probe1 wrote:
Yes, I agree. A lost Starcraft 2 player does not equate to a gained Brood War player. We have had this discussion countless times and I don't have interest in having it nth + 1
No need to, but it puts things into perspective in terms of design. The big point here is that Koreans don't care about the things we are complaining. They don't want SC2 to be more like Brood War, they just play Brood War instead.
So asking to have SC2's design to be more like Brood War in hopes of fixing anything in Korea or with the Brood War fans worldwide is meaningless. Instead, SC2 should find a way to be fun on its own.
|
Not sure what you are asking probe, if we want goliath - Then whats the problem? Goliath isnt as a marine at all.
Its when the attackspeed got reduced they said it played like a marine or something. Still its not a marine, it has high health, much lower movementspeed and cost for cost bad versus zerglings etc
To put "mobility" on top of immobile units is fine as long as the "finesse" is there.
Tankivacs didnt have this finesse since flying away was to low risk - Makes it for bad interaction.
Chess is a good game, because you interact with your opponent from the get go till the end in general.
I wanna bring up the fun aspect again - If goliath overlap with viking and thor - Then why not change thor and viking?
IMO - Thor isnt fun to use, nor play against since when you win over mass thors for example you usually do it composition wise and a-move.
Vikings with bio vs gateway units and pure colossus(no hts) can be fun actually, i found that a fun "trait", when you need to build vikings, how many, how many starports?
Its a fun dynamic deciding how many starports even.
The control is fluid here as well with the vikings and bio vs gateway units/colossus.
When HTs come into the picture it just goes out the wood the fluidness and the better of the interaction.
Vikings against anything else doesnt have any big gameplay advantages i can think of, so why not change viking then?
If goliath came into the picture, its still "how many factories", "how many goliaths", which can be a fun dynamic if u can scout and its not rng
|
Sc2 and broodwar are two separate and different games. The only thing that binds them is that both are rts with storyline based in same universe with same heroes.
Mechanics are different, interface and pathing are different and units are different. Design is different and interactions between units are different too. U have no guarantee that goliath would work in sc2 as you don't have guarantee that Broodlord or adept would work in BW. Its not logical.
From the same reason it's not reasonable to choose which game is better as the one and only conclusion will be who LIKES which game better. It's all about that person taste. I played BW since its premiere and sc2 since its premiere. As i respect BW I must admit that i prefer sc2 despite its flaws which i still believe will be fixed some day. But that only tells the story of my taste. I'm sure that there are many ppl who prefer BW over sc2 and i respect that.
|
On November 08 2016 00:52 hiroshOne wrote:
Sc2 and broodwar are two separate and different games. The only thing that binds them is that both are rts with storyline based in same universe with same heroes.
Mechanics are different, interface and pathing are different and units are different. Design is different and interactions between units are different too. U have no guarantee that goliath would work in sc2 as you don't have guarantee that Broodlord or adept would work in BW. Its not logical.
From the same reason it's not reasonable to choose which game is better as the one and only conclusion will be who LIKES which game better. It's all about that person taste. I played BW since its premiere and sc2 since its premiere. As i respect BW I must admit that i prefer sc2 despite its flaws which i still believe will be fixed some day. But that only tells the story of my taste. I'm sure that there are many ppl who prefer BW over sc2 and i respect that.
I agree so much. After all comparing BW and SC2 with differences between them is like comparing basketball and volleyball and trying to judge which is better simply on a base that both of them involve a single ball in play. Which doesn't mean that comparisons or stuff from BW can't help SC2 be a more fun game.
I wrote it some time ago somewhere, SC2 always had this problem of being a continuation of SC1, expected to be better, while it never had a chance to be a game on its own and was criticized so heavily by so many people for so long for being different, cleaner game for current technology with no "being better" things for die-hard BW fans. All that alongside Blizzard - KeSPA tensions in the end making Blizzard look as the bad guy who hates BW because of its rampant piracy going on and wants to increase sales by pushing newer product - one of the funny drawbacks was the fact that you had to buy the game, Koreans play the game "for free" (why doing business is bad?). I prefer SC2, I played very little of BW and personally never made comparisons between the two, just started being with SC2 since its infancy as it was so exciting and stuck with it with no regrets. I may check out BW someday though for fun
This game had it hard for esentially forever, some people even now suspect that Deepmind deciding to do their next AI is just a Blizzard PR stunt for the game and they should make it work in BW, the "true RTS".
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
