|
On January 28 2017 02:22 DeadByDawn wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2017 01:02 LSN wrote:On January 28 2017 00:36 Gullis wrote:
I cannot comprehend how anyone can look at the current state of the game and through out starcraft 2 history and say "yeah, the core problem is bio".
It really makes me understand why it is hard for blizzard to take any feedback..
You do not because your main concern probably is to have a perfectly balanced pro-level SC2, not an SC2 with fun and strategical mechanics and interactions. Also when you play terran yourself of course your problem is not bio but what is built around and against it. You fail to see the connection and lack the vision. http://www.rankedftw.com/player/519255/Terran player. Nuff said. Pathetic. He has no valid point because of the race he plays? The balancing of this game is beyond most people, including yourself, which is why we have a balance team. Everybody has a viewpoint that should be considered, even those in the lower divisions, as it is the breadth of playerbase that will make SC2 survive.
He has no point because he had no point. There was nothing to the post at all.
|
|
|
Well you can call it as you want, but obviously a terran player would never in any case come to the conclusion that bio might be a problem for the game.
You know what I call phatetic?
I explained in detail what effects bio has on the game. How players adapt and how unwanted effects are conditioned, how solutions are built around bio instead of adressing bio directly. The guy puts a one liner that he don't want to believe. That is phatetic.
What I call phatetic is how terran's consequently deny the problem with bio but then tend to be the biggest whiners in the community how up terran is and how strong counters to bio are.
Of course the basic bio mechanics are fun for terrans. Bio controls games and metagames and even balance/design development in a major fashion.
You know why p/z have less of a problem with each other? Cause it is a mutual thing there. Both can do stuff that forces the other one into doing things and all or almost all units have a place in that matchup, not only one-sided. With terran it is mostly single-sided and no matter what e.g. a zerg builds, it is countered by different compositions consisting of 80% bio.
People who sit on that playing terran and whine about balance and defend bio are phatetic while the whole SC2 could be helped with fixing some of the bio issues for the greater good.
|
On January 28 2017 02:32 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2017 02:22 DeadByDawn wrote:On January 28 2017 01:02 LSN wrote:On January 28 2017 00:36 Gullis wrote:
I cannot comprehend how anyone can look at the current state of the game and through out starcraft 2 history and say "yeah, the core problem is bio".
It really makes me understand why it is hard for blizzard to take any feedback..
You do not because your main concern probably is to have a perfectly balanced pro-level SC2, not an SC2 with fun and strategical mechanics and interactions. Also when you play terran yourself of course your problem is not bio but what is built around and against it. You fail to see the connection and lack the vision. http://www.rankedftw.com/player/519255/Terran player. Nuff said. Pathetic. He has no valid point because of the race he plays? The balancing of this game is beyond most people, including yourself, which is why we have a balance team. Everybody has a viewpoint that should be considered, even those in the lower divisions, as it is the breadth of playerbase that will make SC2 survive. He has no point because he had no point. There was nothing to the post at all.
Not true.
First, LSN 'Terran player. Nuff said.'. This is totally unacceptable, we don't discriminate on race.
Second, Gullis was (tersely) questioning that some people have looked at the problems with SC2 and decided it is bio's strength that is the core problem. Some people believe that, not all, and he does not agree. If it was so easy to identify the problems with the game, then the balance team would have done it, and there would not be so many dissenting voices.
To really understand if bio is the problem we need to look at the internal development builds of SC2 before it was released. Was the strength of bio a reaction to the strength of the gimmicky warp in mechanic that allows Protoss to skip the build cycle, or the insta-remax of Zerg, which is absurdly powerful when combined with a tech switch. And ever since we have been in an arms race as Blizz attempts to provide each race the tools to counter the other races OP'ness.
|
Terrans are discriminating both other races here on TL for ages. Protoss especially but zerg as well to a certain extend.
I am sick of arguing against made up stuff.
No you need to just apply common sense. Macro mechanics are things that were implemented to serve the game not the other way round. Claiming that bio was a result of larva inject is nothing but naive.
|
On January 28 2017 02:45 LSN wrote:
Well you can call it as you want, but obviously a terran player would never in any case come to the conclusion that bio might be a problem for the game.
You know what I call phatetic?
I explained in detail what effects bio has on the game. How players adapt and how unwanted effects are conditioned, how solutions are built around bio instead of adressing bio directly. The guy puts a one liner that he don't want to believe. That is phatetic.
What I call phatetic is how terran's consequently deny the problem with bio but then tend to be the biggest whiners in the community how up terran is and how strong counters to bio are.
Of course the basic bio mechanics are fun for terrans. Bio controls games and metagames and even balance/design development in a major fashion.
You know why p/z have less of a problem with each other? Cause it is a mutual thing there. Both can do stuff that forces the other one into doing things and all or almost all units have a place in that matchup, not only one-sided. With terran it is mostly single-sided and no matter what e.g. a zerg builds, it is countered by different compositions consisting of 80% bio.
People who sit on that playing terran and whine about balance and defend bio are phatetic while the whole SC2 could be helped with fixing some of the bio issues for the greater good.
Well you can call it as you want, but obviously a terran player would never in any case come to the conclusion that bio might be a problem for the game.
Ah cmon man, that's just wrong and gets us nowhere. That's a non argument used as excuse to not engage other arguments (well he didn't have one to begin with, but you get the point)
|
On January 28 2017 02:45 LSN wrote:
Well you can call it as you want, but obviously a terran player would never in any case come to the conclusion that bio might be a problem for the game.
You know what I call phatetic?
I explained in detail what effects bio has on the game. How players adapt and how unwanted effects are conditioned, how solutions are built around bio instead of adressing bio directly. The guy puts a one liner that he don't want to believe. That is phatetic.
What I call phatetic is how terran's consequently deny the problem with bio but then tend to be the biggest winers in the community how up terran is and how strong counters to bio are.
Of course the basic bio mechanics are fun for terrans. Bio controls games and metagames and even balance/design development in a major fashion.
You know why p/z have less of a problem with each other? Cause it is a mutual thing there. Both can do stuff that forces the other one into doing things not only one sided. With terran it is mostly single-sided and no matter what e.g. a zerg builds, it is countered by different compositions consisting of 80% bio.
People who sit on that playing terran and whine about balance and defend bio are phatetic while the whole SC2 could be helped with fixing some of the bio issues.
Well I am mainly a Terran player, probably 90% of the time.
When I started playing SC2 in the WoL days, coming from the other SC (Supreme Commander) and the C&C series, I picked Terran as I like the idea of fighting to save humanity from alien races.
I tried to play transitional play, going for bio early to survive and drop, transitioning into mech with air support. Things I had done in other games. But it did not work, the different units types did not synergize well, and the split upgrades meant that it was difficult to win. The better strat was just to power bio, which was fun but limited.
If Blizz could balance the game and make it so that I could do that, or sometimes end the game early with my early units if I catch my opponent out (and he can do the same) then I would be really happy. I like diversity, I do not like to win all the time, I want to see my Terran heroes (Inno, Gumiho) lose and win so that wins are meaningful. I want to be able to be active at all stages of the game, and I want a siege tank that kicks ass, but can get its ass kicked.
|
Plus I want to have fun, but that should be implied, it is a game - why else would I play it.
Perhaps Blizz should have that above the door of the offices: Rule #1 Players must have fun.
|
My post was more of an outlet of frustration in the context of a post I made yesterday.
On January 27 2017 06:59 Gullis wrote:
It is pretty dumb to talk about bio being to strong without even mentioning the production mechanics of the other races,
Bio had to be "to strong" because of warp gates( which is cancerous as fuck) and to a lesser degree injects.
Even with bio being so strong we still have had times when terran got straight up owned by gateway units because of warp gate.
In the end I think it is pretty redundant to discuss if it is "op bio" that forces "op splash" or "op warp gate/inject" that forces "op bio", because it is all part of "terrible terrible damage", the economy and the hard counter system which I think is the real causes of the frustration with this game.
|
After almost 7 years of SC2 and no solutions have been found for the basic problems that obviously exist in game design, after many discussions have been held and many things have been tried one thing is still there to stand strong and be defended by every terran player:
In no way bio could potentially be the reason!
Lets rather find more other excuses. Larva inject is the problem, which everyone and their mother could adapt to any different game design within a few minutes to serve it as well as it serves the current game design. lol
|
LSN I aprreciate work u put into your analysis and i must admit that I agree with its conclusions.
But have no delusions- most of ppl here will neve lr read this or even try to think about it.
I would add that macro mechanics in current state of the game in ZvT favors Terran a lot too. More workers at the beginning means faster orbital and faster mule, that provides even faster second orbital and mule. Tjat means even more minerals. And concidering that BIO costs mainly minerals it scales out of hand. In the same time Zerg has nerfed larva. That means less drones in early game and in the end slower 4th saturation. That's why Terran pressure and harras hurts even more as u cannot spend larva into drones and units efficiently enough to stop pressure. U must produce units with that limited larva so that slows your economy even more. Effect is that Terran push comes ehen u are starting to build your 4th or trying to saturate it (if you rush to 4th) . In HOTS when Terran pushed, u had your 4th already mining. This LOTV ecnomy model means snowball effect for both races. But for Terran it is positive, for Zerg negative. Sad but true. In the end Terran on 3 bases with mules outproduces Zerg with the most cost efficient composition which MMM is. That's pretty much imbalance to me.
|
Yeah and that is being countered by dumb mechanics like mass armour ultralisks, mass range hydras (reversed), even stronger op banelings (reverted) which mess up and are almost BIS in ZvP now, to create a feeling of balance.
|
Understand, that whatever the reason for the state of SC2, that what you are asking for is SC2 2.0. Changing fundamental units such as the marine, and especially its interaction with the medivac, will lead to a cascade of nerfs and buffs to ALL races.
The only thing that we can expect is balance tweaks. SC2 seems doomed to swing between periods of Protoss dominance, Zerg dominance and Terran dominance as balance patches alter the meta.
Blizzard will never (again) make fundamental changes to SC2 - see how quickly they backed off removing the macro boosters as Terran collapsed as bio was no longer viable, and mech was never an option.
|
Sure, why not? Who can do 8 armor ultras, 7 range queens and hydras (or was it 8?), who puts in dumb stuff like MSC pylon cannon can as well do some tweaks to bio.
Just of how you base your arguments you can see already what is wrong. Any change to bio would be so fundamental that you call it SC2.0 and everything else is minor compared to that.
|
On January 28 2017 03:44 DeadByDawn wrote:
Understand, that whatever the reason for the state of SC2, that what you are asking for is SC2 2.0. Changing fundamental units such as the marine, and especially its interaction with the medivac, will lead to a cascade of nerfs and buffs to ALL races.
The only thing that we can expect is balance tweaks. SC2 seems doomed to swing between periods of Protoss dominance, Zerg dominance and Terran dominance as balance patches alter the meta.
Blizzard will never (again) make fundamental changes to SC2 - see how quickly they backed off removing the macro boosters as Terran collapsed as bio was no longer viable, and mech was never an option.
Oh come on, lets be honest here. They never gave removing macro boosters a TRUE try. There was more work to be done before a true attempt was completed. It was clear as day that mineral costs needed to be readjusted for Terran, same as larvae would need to be rebalanced for Zerg and build/research times for Protoss.
All 3 macro boosters affect the economies differently. They share one thing in common - accelerating the economy in a specific way. So if you remove those, you need to repair the races appropriately.
All signs from LotV beta indicate that this was the plan at the time. They said they were going to move forward and make adjustments appropriately. They spoke to Korean pros and said the response was positive so they were going to keep the changes.
Then... something happened at Blizzard. All of a sudden, they "announced a release date announcement" saying "it might be earlier than you think" - which was very strange because a couple months earlier they just said it was going to be "by far the longest Beta a RTS ever had at Blizzard".
Then they say in the community update "we're not sure about this direction moving forward, we're not sure if we should be chasing the best design, or if we should be removing a skill players have practiced for years". After clearly stating they were confident in their decision and moving forward, suddenly they are not sure?
Next community update - "We have decided to revert back to HotS power macro boosters because of the negative perception of some members in the community". No, they didn't say they did it because they think its"best for the game". They even ADMITTED in the past update that they knew no MM was better design. But they chose against it, with the supposed reason of PERCEPTION??? Not even something real, but... perception of "some people"??? It did not make sense.
Then the release date announcement - weekend of Blizzcon. Which again - very strange, Blizzard Store page at the time said March 2016 release date! And if you go by their comments of "this will be the longest RTS beta" - it ended in the exact amount of months of HotS beta - basically turning themselves in to liars.
All of this indicates that, the original plan was to have a longer development cycle. They knew MM removal needed more time to be rebalanced. But something happened at Blizzard (likely something was pushed from Blizzcon). LotV got pushed up, and they didn't have time to remove MM. For the first time, a Blizzard game was RUSHED before it was ready. And the game has been suffering ever since.
12 worker start was designed around NOT having accelerated economy from macro boosters - 12 worker start was not a problem in beta without MM. But once they put the macro boosters back, the economies were out of control. Each economy snowballs in completely different ways - they might get numbers looking good statistically, but they will never be able to make it "feel" fair when economies are not controlled and snowball in different ways between the races. Economies are the backbone that affects every aspect of an RTS game. They need to have some form of control and limitation, asymmetric economies will never feel good without a solid way to keep them under control - and that was always a bit of a problem with SC2 - but in LotV with the MM combined with 12 worker start, it became a huge problem.
So no, they did not back off of removing macro boosters because of Terran "collapsing". They backed off removing macro boosters because they simply did not give the game appropriate time to develop. They had to make a decision of which game is going to have to take the hit and be rushed, and they decided LotV would do the least amount of damage.
And they have been doing PR to try to repair the damage ever since. Hence, all these bullshit community updates with little substance and asking for "community guidance" and never going thru with the changes promised.
|
On January 28 2017 03:17 LSN wrote:
After almost 7 years of SC2 and no solutions have been found for the basic problems that obviously exist in game design, after many discussions have been held and many things have been tried one thing is still there to stand strong and be defended by every terran player:
In no way bio could potentially be the reason!
Lets rather find more other excuses. Larva inject is the problem, which everyone and their mother could adapt to any different game design within a few minutes to serve it as well as it serves the current game design. lol
I don't defend bio, I would be all for the removal of the marauder and split the medivac into medic and dropship.
However I dont like the narrative of "bio is the problem" because I think in tvt and in tvz marine tank have been fantastic gameplay. Meanwhile in tvp for the most part, any deviation from bio+viking have been completely shut down by somewhat binary abilities in the protoss arsenal, like feedback killing bc, thors and ravens, immortals absolutely owning tanks.
Additionally I think whatever issues marauder and medivacs brings I think they pale in comparison to what warp gates brings.
I didnt write this but this guy sums it up very well http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/407434-that-protoss-elephant
|
Whilst we will never know for surre what happened with the attempt to remove MM, it does seem that the release date was brought forward, so they cut the beta period.
The whole removal of MM was mishandled. Blizzard should have enough people with numerical analysis skills to model the new economy model and see how it affected each of the races differently in the early game, from this they could have made an initial stab at correcting the economy to see how it worked. They didn't, the game was totally unbalanced and they did not see a way to correct the balance in time and so reverted the changes.
And so, with all these shining examples of Blizzards ability, we are asking for a ground up rebalance/redesign? I think a lot of people believe that Blizzard are basically doing damage limitation now, on a game that is no longer on their A list. Tweaks is what we will get, tweaks are what we should focus on asking for.
|
On January 28 2017 04:41 Gullis wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2017 03:17 LSN wrote:
After almost 7 years of SC2 and no solutions have been found for the basic problems that obviously exist in game design, after many discussions have been held and many things have been tried one thing is still there to stand strong and be defended by every terran player:
In no way bio could potentially be the reason!
Lets rather find more other excuses. Larva inject is the problem, which everyone and their mother could adapt to any different game design within a few minutes to serve it as well as it serves the current game design. lol
I don't defend bio, I would be all for the removal of the marauder and split the medivac into medic and dropship. However I dont like the narrative of "bio is the problem" because I think in tvt and in tvz marine tank have been fantastic gameplay. Meanwhile in tvp for the most part, any deviation from bio+viking have been completely shut down by somewhat binary abilities in the protoss arsenal, like feedback killing bc, thors and ravens, immortals absolutely owning tanks. Additionally I think whatever issues marauder and medivacs brings I think they pale in comparison to what warp gates brings. I didnt write this but this guy sums it up very well http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/407434-that-protoss-elephant
It's not the fact that bio is viable that's the problem, it's the strength and lack of weaknesses for bio. Imagine if adepts were healed by warp prisms or roaches were healed by overlords and they had the boost ability, you'd have to nerf other protoss and zerg units to compensate for that insane strength and utility. Make 1 army composition a reliable comp for the entire length of the game and you have to weaken the other aspects of that race.
|
On January 28 2017 05:52 TheZergishOne wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2017 04:41 Gullis wrote:On January 28 2017 03:17 LSN wrote:
After almost 7 years of SC2 and no solutions have been found for the basic problems that obviously exist in game design, after many discussions have been held and many things have been tried one thing is still there to stand strong and be defended by every terran player:
In no way bio could potentially be the reason!
Lets rather find more other excuses. Larva inject is the problem, which everyone and their mother could adapt to any different game design within a few minutes to serve it as well as it serves the current game design. lol
I don't defend bio, I would be all for the removal of the marauder and split the medivac into medic and dropship. However I dont like the narrative of "bio is the problem" because I think in tvt and in tvz marine tank have been fantastic gameplay. Meanwhile in tvp for the most part, any deviation from bio+viking have been completely shut down by somewhat binary abilities in the protoss arsenal, like feedback killing bc, thors and ravens, immortals absolutely owning tanks. Additionally I think whatever issues marauder and medivacs brings I think they pale in comparison to what warp gates brings. I didnt write this but this guy sums it up very well http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/407434-that-protoss-elephant It's not the fact that bio is viable that's the problem, it's the strength and lack of weaknesses for bio. Imagine if adepts were healed by warp prisms or roaches were healed by overlords and they had the boost ability, you'd have to nerf other protoss and zerg units to compensate for that insane strength and utility. Make 1 army composition a reliable comp for the entire length of the game and you have to weaken the other aspects of that race.
That is not an equivalent comparison. The marine is 45 health, and loses 10 health each time it stims, Adepts are 130, have 1 armor and auto regenerate shields, Roaches are 145, have 1 armor and auto heal, very fast when burrowed. Without access to healing marines die in the blink of an eye.
Now splitting health and transport into medic and vac, if done with cost reductions, could work.
|
On January 28 2017 04:48 DeadByDawn wrote:
Whilst we will never know for surre what happened with the attempt to remove MM, it does seem that the release date was brought forward, so they cut the beta period.
The whole removal of MM was mishandled. Blizzard should have enough people with numerical analysis skills to model the new economy model and see how it affected each of the races differently in the early game, from this they could have made an initial stab at correcting the economy to see how it worked. They didn't, the game was totally unbalanced and they did not see a way to correct the balance in time and so reverted the changes.
And so, with all these shining examples of Blizzards ability, we are asking for a ground up rebalance/redesign? I think a lot of people believe that Blizzard are basically doing damage limitation now, on a game that is no longer on their A list. Tweaks is what we will get, tweaks are what we should focus on asking for.
Just pointing out, we know more than JUST that.
We also know the release date was the reason for MM changes - they were satisfied with their decision to remove MM, and went as far as to make an announcement that they were moving forward with it, before they pushed up the release date.
We know (from admitting it) that even Blizzard's lead designers were aware that no MM was better design for the game, but they intentionally decided against it.
We know 12 worker start was balanced around no MM.
We know that they had only a couple weeks of testing before going live with the final changes - so it was rushed to a point that the game was not even sufficiently tested (as those changes weren't even available with time in the beta).
We know this was one of the ways they planned to market & grow SC2's competitive future, by trying to bring in more players alongside the Archon mode (which we were also told was going to have been better supported, but never happened).
With that said, all these things do point to your last paragraph being true.
The only problem is, during Blizzcon they stated that in the future they WOULD be looking at the game again , and be willing to do ground up rebalance/design changes. Yet when the time came, it was a half assed balance update, where the majority of changes got dropped anyway.
Then they have the nerve to tell us "they removed the changes as the community wanted" (when polls at the time were 80% in favor of full MM removal) and when the time for a "design update" comes, again they have the nerve to say they "see it was the right decision as players are very happy with the update" - even though the #1 complaint about LotV since release has been the ridiculous economy growth/speed.
So players are rightfully upset. Bait & switched by the SC2 team yet again. So yeah, we "might get tweaks so we should ask for tweaks" is true to a point... but we were told we would get more. So we have every right to ask, and if they don't deliver, we can all give a collective "screw you" with our wallets (which is what I've been doing since LotV beta, when I purchased beta because they said they were happy with their direction and moving forward with the plan for release, then reverted the changes).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
