|
On November 26 2016 02:52 Uvantak wrote:
Game's too volatile, be it because lotv economy, pathing, unit design, unit balancing. Yeah, some people might enjoy the volatility, but volatility is stressing on multiplayer game, and most people don't enjoy that when they are thinking of "playing video games". Yet the SC2 E-Sport ecosystem kinda needs said people.
baseball is extremely volatile and the solution to that is to play 7 days a week in a 162 game regular season. volatility can be mitigated by an alteration in the league design.
that said, i seem to see the same faces over and over again in the GSL.
|
On November 26 2016 03:08 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2016 02:52 Uvantak wrote:
Game's too volatile, be it because lotv economy, pathing, unit design, unit balancing. Yeah, some people might enjoy the volatility, but volatility is stressing on multiplayer game, and most people don't enjoy that when they are thinking of "playing video games". Yet the SC2 E-Sport ecosystem kinda needs said people. baseball is extremely volatile and the solution to that is to play 7 days a week in a 162 game regular season. volatility can be mitigated by an alteration in the league design. that said, i seem to see the same faces over and over again in the GSL.
Isn't baseball recognized to be a more in the boring side sport? I can't really say anything about baseball tho, I'm not #Murrican and the game is only really played in the US and other "US colonized" countries
Also, the thing with baseball and other RL sports is that they have people being raised on them, SC2 and other more modern games haven't permeated deep enough into a country's culture as to generate such a big and stable following, the only example I can think of that happening is BW in Korea, but even so, that's still not on the same scale as baseball in the US or Japan
|
Remember 3 months ago when they announced these changes and people said "they won't put many of these in the game, they'll listen to community feedback and remove a lot of them"? Yeah, about that...
This patch really just confirms that Blizzard doesn't care about making a well-balanced game, or a well-designed game, they just care about making a game that is flashy to watch. The problem with that is that it makes being good less of a factor in winning and just doing some stupid shit that surprises your opponent, which has been one of SC2's main problems since day 1, which Blizzard doesn't seem to acknowledge. Now the playerbase is dried up and Blizzard is trying to squeeze every last penny they can out of the corpse of this game by adding microtransactions and features that have been in other games for years. Just shows what happens when you put making the game fun to play behind making it fun to watch.
Going to be interesting to see what the feedback update is for this week. I wonder how David Kim will skirt around the massive problems the new patch has.
|
On November 26 2016 04:23 Solar424 wrote:
Remember 3 months ago when they announced these changes and people said "they won't put many of these in the game, they'll listen to community feedback and remove a lot of them"? Yeah, about that...
This patch really just confirms that Blizzard doesn't care about making a well-balanced game, or a well-designed game, they just care about making a game that is flashy to watch. The problem with that is that it makes being good less of a factor in winning and just doing some stupid shit that surprises your opponent, which has been one of SC2's main problems since day 1, which Blizzard doesn't seem to acknowledge. Now the playerbase is dried up and Blizzard is trying to squeeze every last penny they can out of the corpse of this game by adding microtransactions and features that have been in other games for years. Just shows what happens when you put making the game fun to play behind making it fun to watch.
Going to be interesting to see what the feedback update is for this week. I wonder how David Kim will skirt around the massive problems the new patch has.
Blizz also stated that they didn't get enough play-test feedback after the patch was released. this is a balance testing phase that we're in right now.
SC1, Brood War, WC3, and WoL were all badly out of balance upon the game's release. That is the stage we are in right now. This "big update patch" has the same scale of "massive problems" as these other releases listed.
Blizzard stated this is a once-a-year major update patch and not a standard mild balance tweak that occurs in the middle of a WCS season.
move along people ... stay away from the yellow police caution tape there is nothing to see here.
if you want to cherry pick Blizzard quotes you can of course make it appear that the sky is falling.
|
On November 26 2016 06:12 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2016 04:23 Solar424 wrote:
Remember 3 months ago when they announced these changes and people said "they won't put many of these in the game, they'll listen to community feedback and remove a lot of them"? Yeah, about that...
This patch really just confirms that Blizzard doesn't care about making a well-balanced game, or a well-designed game, they just care about making a game that is flashy to watch. The problem with that is that it makes being good less of a factor in winning and just doing some stupid shit that surprises your opponent, which has been one of SC2's main problems since day 1, which Blizzard doesn't seem to acknowledge. Now the playerbase is dried up and Blizzard is trying to squeeze every last penny they can out of the corpse of this game by adding microtransactions and features that have been in other games for years. Just shows what happens when you put making the game fun to play behind making it fun to watch.
Going to be interesting to see what the feedback update is for this week. I wonder how David Kim will skirt around the massive problems the new patch has. Blizz also stated that they didn't get enough play-test feedback after the patch was released. this is a balance testing phase that we're in right now. SC1, Brood War, WC3, and WoL were all badly out of balance upon the game's release. That is the stage we are in right now. This "big update patch" has the same scale of "massive problems" as these other releases listed. Blizzard stated this is a once-a-year major update patch and not a standard mild balance tweak that occurs in the middle of a WCS season. move along people ... stay away from the yellow police caution tape there is nothing to see here. if you want to cherry pick Blizzard quotes you can of course make it appear that the sky is falling.
So instead of breaking the balance of the game ever 2-3 years, they want to do it every year? Nice logic there.
|
On November 26 2016 06:17 Solar424 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2016 06:12 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On November 26 2016 04:23 Solar424 wrote:
Remember 3 months ago when they announced these changes and people said "they won't put many of these in the game, they'll listen to community feedback and remove a lot of them"? Yeah, about that...
This patch really just confirms that Blizzard doesn't care about making a well-balanced game, or a well-designed game, they just care about making a game that is flashy to watch. The problem with that is that it makes being good less of a factor in winning and just doing some stupid shit that surprises your opponent, which has been one of SC2's main problems since day 1, which Blizzard doesn't seem to acknowledge. Now the playerbase is dried up and Blizzard is trying to squeeze every last penny they can out of the corpse of this game by adding microtransactions and features that have been in other games for years. Just shows what happens when you put making the game fun to play behind making it fun to watch.
Going to be interesting to see what the feedback update is for this week. I wonder how David Kim will skirt around the massive problems the new patch has. Blizz also stated that they didn't get enough play-test feedback after the patch was released. this is a balance testing phase that we're in right now. SC1, Brood War, WC3, and WoL were all badly out of balance upon the game's release. That is the stage we are in right now. This "big update patch" has the same scale of "massive problems" as these other releases listed. Blizzard stated this is a once-a-year major update patch and not a standard mild balance tweak that occurs in the middle of a WCS season. move along people ... stay away from the yellow police caution tape there is nothing to see here. if you want to cherry pick Blizzard quotes you can of course make it appear that the sky is falling. So instead of breaking the balance of the game ever 2-3 years, they want to do it every year? Nice logic there.
DK stated if the game is in a really good state at the end of 2017 it'll only be balance tweaked from then on. SO there is no guarantee of annualized major changes.
Blizzard's diverse race RTS games take a long time to balance. Most other diverse race RTS games never do get properly balanced.
i respect how tough a problem it is to balance diverse race RTS games. it would appear many posters in this thread do not share my sentiments.
Has any diverse race RTS game ever been released in a solid balanced state? If any one would like to list all the games that managed that difficult feat i'd be happy to read it.
i'm 100% on board with DK's publicly stated process for improving the SC2 1v1 experience. its a good process and makes sense.
|
On November 26 2016 06:24 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2016 06:17 Solar424 wrote:On November 26 2016 06:12 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On November 26 2016 04:23 Solar424 wrote:
Remember 3 months ago when they announced these changes and people said "they won't put many of these in the game, they'll listen to community feedback and remove a lot of them"? Yeah, about that...
This patch really just confirms that Blizzard doesn't care about making a well-balanced game, or a well-designed game, they just care about making a game that is flashy to watch. The problem with that is that it makes being good less of a factor in winning and just doing some stupid shit that surprises your opponent, which has been one of SC2's main problems since day 1, which Blizzard doesn't seem to acknowledge. Now the playerbase is dried up and Blizzard is trying to squeeze every last penny they can out of the corpse of this game by adding microtransactions and features that have been in other games for years. Just shows what happens when you put making the game fun to play behind making it fun to watch.
Going to be interesting to see what the feedback update is for this week. I wonder how David Kim will skirt around the massive problems the new patch has. Blizz also stated that they didn't get enough play-test feedback after the patch was released. this is a balance testing phase that we're in right now. SC1, Brood War, WC3, and WoL were all badly out of balance upon the game's release. That is the stage we are in right now. This "big update patch" has the same scale of "massive problems" as these other releases listed. Blizzard stated this is a once-a-year major update patch and not a standard mild balance tweak that occurs in the middle of a WCS season. move along people ... stay away from the yellow police caution tape there is nothing to see here. if you want to cherry pick Blizzard quotes you can of course make it appear that the sky is falling. So instead of breaking the balance of the game ever 2-3 years, they want to do it every year? Nice logic there. DK stated if the game is in a really good state at the end of 2017 it'll only be balance tweaked from then on. SO there is no guarantee of annualized major changes. Blizzard's diverse race RTS games take a long time to balance. Most other diverse race RTS games never do get properly balanced. i respect how tough a problem it is to balance diverse race RTS games. it would appear many posters in this thread do not share my sentiments. Has any diverse race RTS game ever been released in a solid balanced state? If any one would like to list all the games that managed that difficult feat i'd be happy to read it. i'm 100% on board with DK's publicly stated process for improving the SC2 1v1 experience. its a good process and makes sense.
Have you seen David Kim's attempt to balance the game so far? There's no way he gets the game to only need minor tweaking by the end of 2017, and if says he has than he's even more foolish than anyone thinks.
|
balancing a diverse race RTS game with 3 or more races is never easy... and i think that is why DK didn't guarantee anything about how he would approach game balance at the end of 2017.
|
On November 26 2016 04:23 Solar424 wrote:
Remember 3 months ago when they announced these changes and people said "they won't put many of these in the game, they'll listen to community feedback and remove a lot of them"? Yeah, about that...
This patch really just confirms that Blizzard doesn't care about making a well-balanced game, or a well-designed game, they just care about making a game that is flashy to watch. The problem with that is that it makes being good less of a factor in winning and just doing some stupid shit that surprises your opponent, which has been one of SC2's main problems since day 1, which Blizzard doesn't seem to acknowledge. Now the playerbase is dried up and Blizzard is trying to squeeze every last penny they can out of the corpse of this game by adding microtransactions and features that have been in other games for years. Just shows what happens when you put making the game fun to play behind making it fun to watch.
Going to be interesting to see what the feedback update is for this week. I wonder how David Kim will skirt around the massive problems the new patch has.
I think you're being incredibly pessimistic and unreasonable. There's a lot of incredibly good stuff in the patch, even if there are questionable decisions.
|
making the game fun to play behind making it fun to watch.
The game isn't fun to watch either .. It was, but Lotv just bring random bullshit games.
Very sad, this patch brought hope, it's worse than ever.
|
Worst patch ive seen. It forces banshe and doom drop play in tvt. and 30 min mech games where the one that attack first, loses. Tvz is diffuclt. its stil bio vs ling muta ultra.. mech isnt good. 4 muta win vs 4 cyclones almost. banelings are so incredible strong now. whit no offencive play when the tanks nerfed.. its really really hard.. the great tvz era is over.
TVP? toss is so bad atm that they all inn every game. no fun at all.
|
On November 26 2016 21:15 MiCroLiFe wrote:
Worst patch ive seen. It forces banshe and doom drop play in tvt. and 30 min mech games where the one that attack first, loses. Tvz is diffuclt. its stil bio vs ling muta ultra.. mech isnt good. 4 muta win vs 4 cyclones almost. banelings are so incredible strong now. whit no offencive play when the tanks nerfed.. its really really hard.. the great tvz era is over.
TVP? toss is so bad atm that they all inn every game. no fun at all.
"the great tvz era is over." What great TvZ, its been shit since the back end of WoL 5 years ago?
TvZ when the game was first released was the dream match up to watch, so dont know why you are bleating about it now
|
On November 26 2016 21:56 Topdoller wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2016 21:15 MiCroLiFe wrote:
Worst patch ive seen. It forces banshe and doom drop play in tvt. and 30 min mech games where the one that attack first, loses. Tvz is diffuclt. its stil bio vs ling muta ultra.. mech isnt good. 4 muta win vs 4 cyclones almost. banelings are so incredible strong now. whit no offencive play when the tanks nerfed.. its really really hard.. the great tvz era is over.
TVP? toss is so bad atm that they all inn every game. no fun at all. "the great tvz era is over." What great TvZ, its been shit since the back end of WoL 5 years ago? TvZ when the game was first released was the dream match up to watch, so dont know why you are bleating about it now
fungal and broodlord beein unbeatable wasn the good era.. good era was intense micro whole game.
|
Look at IEM. no terrans at all in top8. and when a terran won, it was TvT. great job
|
I have done some games on the new patch now. For me not much has changed.
Buffs over nerfs. ZvT is still all about defending all the bullshit that terran throws at you. Any kind of offense that requires units to commit against T remains useless before the killing blow, even and especially to trade units off against terran eco (SCV/mule). So stuff that is rather immobile remains unappealing to play when you have to split up your army to defend all kind of combinations of multiple drops, drop + main attack or main attack only. It feels just stupid to have the defenders disadvantage. It is not really about imbalance, I just don't wanna experience that with the arsenal of units that zerg has and run behind boosted medivacs with roach/ravager or anything similar. It kills it for me. It would fit better to the terran arsenal where you can keep a single tank, 2 mines or 4 marines in a bunker back at some location and have some decent anti-harrassment defence with a defenders advantage, while as zerg it feels like you always need double investment to defend against what is inside a medivac.
From what I have seen, which isn't really that much yet, its still about 70%+ bio units but now coplemented more with tanks.
Protoss air feels too strong still, especially the mothership.
New banelings really feel op vs. protoss. Hydras are strong but still come in so late. I feel like the game required earlier option for hydras but not as strong/expensive as it is. Having no option against protoss air other than hydras which take forever to build and upgrade and then are extremely immobile e.g. against phoenixes makes games odd. It feels more appealing here as well to stay on mobility units like ling/bane and all-in/basetrade the protoss in alot of situations.
Not quite motivated to continue to play I am sorry to say. But lets see how the metagames develop over the upcoming weeks and months.
|
On November 26 2016 23:26 LSN wrote:
I have done some games on the new patch now. For me not much has changed.
Buffs over nerfs. ZvT is still all about defending all the bullshit that terran throws at you. Any kind of offense that requires units to commit against T remains useless before the killing blow, even and especially to trade units off against terran eco (SCV/mule). So stuff that is rather immobile remains unappealing to play when you have to split up your army to defend all kind of combinations of multiple drops, drop + main attack or main attack only. It feels just stupid to have the defenders disadvantage. It is not really about imbalance, I just don't wanna experience that with the arsenal of units that zerg has and run behind boosted medivacs with roach/ravager or anything similar. It kills it for me. It would fit better to the terran arsenal where you can keep a single tank, 2 mines or 4 marines in a bunker back at some location and have some decent anti-harrassment defence with a defenders advantage, while as zerg it feels like you always need double investment to defend against what is inside a medivac.
From what I have seen, which isn't really that much yet, its still about 70%+ bio units but now coplemented more with tanks.
Protoss air feels too strong still, especially the mothership.
New banelings really feel op vs. protoss. Hydras are strong but still come in so late. I feel like the game required earlier option for hydras but not as strong/expensive as it is. Having no option against protoss air other than hydras which take forever to build and upgrade and then are extremely immobile e.g. against phoenixes makes games odd. It feels more appealing here as well to stay on mobility units like ling/bane and all-in/basetrade the protoss in alot of situations.
Not quite motivated to continue to play I am sorry to say. But lets see how the metagames develop over the upcoming weeks and months. zerg is clearly much stronger than before. what are you complaining about? no terrans winning. check IEM
|
On November 27 2016 01:34 MiCroLiFe wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2016 23:26 LSN wrote:
I have done some games on the new patch now. For me not much has changed.
Buffs over nerfs. ZvT is still all about defending all the bullshit that terran throws at you. Any kind of offense that requires units to commit against T remains useless before the killing blow, even and especially to trade units off against terran eco (SCV/mule). So stuff that is rather immobile remains unappealing to play when you have to split up your army to defend all kind of combinations of multiple drops, drop + main attack or main attack only. It feels just stupid to have the defenders disadvantage. It is not really about imbalance, I just don't wanna experience that with the arsenal of units that zerg has and run behind boosted medivacs with roach/ravager or anything similar. It kills it for me. It would fit better to the terran arsenal where you can keep a single tank, 2 mines or 4 marines in a bunker back at some location and have some decent anti-harrassment defence with a defenders advantage, while as zerg it feels like you always need double investment to defend against what is inside a medivac.
From what I have seen, which isn't really that much yet, its still about 70%+ bio units but now coplemented more with tanks.
Protoss air feels too strong still, especially the mothership.
New banelings really feel op vs. protoss. Hydras are strong but still come in so late. I feel like the game required earlier option for hydras but not as strong/expensive as it is. Having no option against protoss air other than hydras which take forever to build and upgrade and then are extremely immobile e.g. against phoenixes makes games odd. It feels more appealing here as well to stay on mobility units like ling/bane and all-in/basetrade the protoss in alot of situations.
Not quite motivated to continue to play I am sorry to say. But lets see how the metagames develop over the upcoming weeks and months. zerg is clearly much stronger than before. what are you complaining about? no terrans winning. check IEM
This post highlights pretty well the problem with this community and blizzard in general. All about balance which is mostly meta dependant anyway if nothing is way too strong. What about the design? What about the game being fun? What about the game being enjoyable even when you lose? The game might be perfectly balanced and people would still complain about units/strategies which they preceive as too strong. A good example was the forcefield for a lot of sc2's lifespan. In certain situations it simply felt overpowered even if it probably was not.
Yes not everyone has the same opinions but i am fairly certain that you can appeal to a majority of people when you try to get rid of certain mechanics which simply feel bad and design the game with a few key elements in mind (like defenders advantage being incredibly important, sc2 violates this in a lot of ways)
But yeah this was said a million times in countless posts, articles and videos already.
|
and we just went through the "radical big patch" with the Forcefield still in place. so you know for almost certain the forcefield remains in the game. i'm fine with the forcefield, however, for those who strongly dislike the mechanic i suggest they play a different game. i don't think the forcefield is going away and a mountain of evidence suggests i am right.
|
On November 27 2016 03:24 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
and we just went through the "radical big patch" with the Forcefield still in place. so you know for almost certain the forcefield remains in the game. i'm fine with the forcefield, however, for those who strongly dislike the mechanic i suggest they play a different game. i don't think the forcefield is going away and a mountain of evidence suggests i am right.
The point was that forcefields were regarded as a mechanic which doesn't belong in the game. While i personally think it's mainly a problem of smartcasting (every spell which felt too strong at one point in time was due to smartcasting imo) in general people didn't enjoy the mechanic at all. Neither watching nor playing against it. Why? There wasn't much counterplay and the spell itself limited mapmaking and unit balance greatly.
Why would you want such a mechanic be part of your game?
It is nice that you are always fine with everything blizzard is doing and yes people can simply play another game. That's hardly the point though. The point is to remove mechanics which feel bad for a large playerbase and add something more rewarding instead. It is a discussion about gamedesign. It is no list for blizzard because blizzard doesn't care, they shown this multiple times over the years. Blizzard cares for doing the least amount of work possible gameplay wise, give the community just enough to please it somewhat, but all this "we wanna create the best game possible" talk is bs.
Is it extremely constructive to discuss the same things over and over again? No probably not, but you replying to it over and over again with your rhetoric isn't either. At least the discussion about design might be interesting, but apparently the community is more interested to read that the "balance" is 52:48 rather than 53:47, because it makes a big difference for most guys apparently, no matter how this balance is achieved.
|
i'm not fine with everything Blizzard does. They are mediocre at best when it comes to running competitive leagues and they need to grow some balls and write a cheque and hand WCS off to the new ATVI subsidiary that specializes in eSPorts.
the game itself has been great fun the last 6 years and now that we're in the early stages of a total revamp i expected the game would be as imbalanced as brood war was in 1999 with $200 academies and larva that spawns too fast. or as imba as WoL was in 2010... remember Marauder concussion shells didn't need an upgrade? this is the stage we are in right now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
