|
SC2 continues to be a great game. thanks for the feedback Mr. Blizzard.
I've never been so fascinated by mirror matchups in any RTS game as i am with the 3 mirrors in Starcraft2. Great job making mirror matchups super interesting. That is not an easy task.
On July 20 2018 04:03 SHODAN wrote:
the usual 2-dimensional response to player feedback. lots of talk about winrates. nothing about unit design, unit roles, unit synergy, micro potential, or anything that might make the game fun to play.
fortunately, the game is an absolute blast.
they provide some feedback that discusses these things. not in this feedback post though. also, "fun" is very subjective so its hard to discuss over a forum post and much better to discuss in person at places like BlizzCon. Every time i've met members of the Blizzard SC2 team they are ALL EARS and listening to me very, very carefully. This is where a non- 2-dimensional interaction can best occur. In particular, Greg Black very carefully listened to every word i uttered. I feel all my face to face interactions with Blizzard employers are anything but "2-dimensional".
The demand for PC RTS games has been on the decline for many many years. I'm thankful Blizzard has devoted so many resources to a declining genre that i love. I'm not so narcissistic or self-absorbed to believe that just because i love the genre that everyone else does. No one is making big time RTS games any longer because their is no demand for it.
THanks again Blizzard.
|
On July 20 2018 04:03 SHODAN wrote:
the usual 2-dimensional response to player feedback. lots of talk about winrates. nothing about unit design, unit roles, unit synergy, micro potential, or anything that might make the game fun to play.
did we read the same community update?
I see no mention of winrates
|
On July 20 2018 04:37 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2018 04:03 SHODAN wrote:
the usual 2-dimensional response to player feedback. lots of talk about winrates. nothing about unit design, unit roles, unit synergy, micro potential, or anything that might make the game fun to play. did we read the same community update? I see no mention of winrates
He's talking about people's reaction to it
|
No immediate changes, but I don't think the game really needs any big changes atm. All the matchups are reasonably well-balanced. Wonder if they are planning another major redesign post-Blizzcon (maybe the Queen?).
|
On July 20 2018 03:55 Fango wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2018 03:48 JackONeill wrote:On July 20 2018 03:45 Fango wrote:
Just because terrans are playing aggressive on 2-3 bases doesn't mean "lategame is unwinnable". It means being aggressive in the midgame is the most effective play. Pro terrans will do whatever strategy gives the best chance of success. "Being overly agressive on 2 bases is the best method to win with terran but that doesn't mean that later stages of the game give less chance of winning" Actually it does. And you've obviously not seen TvP late game with disruptor/colossi and constant zealots/DTs warping vs bio, or tempest/revelation vs anything else. Terran is pigeonholed into 2 bases bio allins because the race lacks the means to deal with numerous late game protoss units/protoss late game economy effectively. You completely missed the point. I never said what you've apparently quoted me to. Being aggressive in the midgame gives terran the best chance at winning. That means lategame is less favourable for terran, not necessarily unwinnable. Pro players will do whatever strategy is best, that doesn't make it the only viable one. If protoss has disruptors+collosi+tempest+revelation with constant zealot/DT harass, and terran just has bio, then they probably made much better in the previous 15 minutes.
glad you said this, If late game is unfavorable, then early-mid game needs a fix. This is all the more reason for a queen nerf.
|
On July 20 2018 04:37 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2018 04:03 SHODAN wrote:
the usual 2-dimensional response to player feedback. lots of talk about winrates. nothing about unit design, unit roles, unit synergy, micro potential, or anything that might make the game fun to play. did we read the same community update? I see no mention of winrates
Someone mentioned winrates earlier in the thread.
Aside from that, I think SHODAN has a very good point.
|
How Blizzard not figured terran later game is trash, because BC is trash.They need to give them some special function to counter something, not like now hit everything and be useless vs everything.
|
Something that people need to take into consideration about marauders is that makes both sides of the MU bad.
Yes protoss is favoured in lategame and terran in the midgame but this and never will be good design.
Besides the obvious struggles from the terran perspective it also makes it bad on the protoss side, as a protoss you know the terran is going to all-in you on 2 bases and thats the same problem PvZ had back before they nerfed the hydra upgrades, you were favoured in the late but it meant that game and game again you were going to face off against terran all ins.
This makes the MU be back again to HotS, except you went survive to colossus balls its now survive to charge/storm. You can see that in current pro TvPs.
Terran all ins, did it attack before storm/charge/enough templars with energy? Terran win
Terran all ins, did it attack after storm/charge/enough templars with energy? Protoss win
Of course thats not 100% of the time but it makes the MU bad for both sides as it becomes too 1 dimentional, the removal of the MsC and the buff to stalkers/zealot made TvP much better because they didn't depended on defending on 3 bases until double/forge storm.
Also saying that theres many strategies its very misleading, yes opener wise its quite good but games end up being the same all the time, how many games have been, either all game or big part, the same thing over and over?
PvZ eventually ends up being always about immortals and archons versus banes and hydras, zerg has some choices, yes, but protoss is always ICA into storm/sky.
Same thing about TvP marine/tank/medivac into MMMM with eventual ghosts libs, mech has never been viable at all, only time it was in beta when cyclone and warhounds were OP as shit.
I know they are scared of disrupting balance, because everybody and their mother cares about that, but they need to start making the games more varied instead of the same strategies and methods pidgeon holed time and again because eventually people burn out on that.
|
I like the interference matrix and the anti armour missile. But the latter needs another type of animation, all that orange is awfull, sometimes both units of the player are orange at the same time.
|
TvZ is at 46% atm. Pre nerf raven was cancer in TvT and TvZ, but now lategame is Zerg favored. Blizzard needs to compensate by nerfing things like corruptor or viper. Also 8 range queens are unfair and annoying.
|
On July 20 2018 08:53 Lexender wrote:
Something that people need to take into consideration about marauders is that makes both sides of the MU bad.
Yes protoss is favoured in lategame and terran in the midgame but this and never will be good design.
Besides the obvious struggles from the terran perspective it also makes it bad on the protoss side, as a protoss you know the terran is going to all-in you on 2 bases and thats the same problem PvZ had back before they nerfed the hydra upgrades, you were favoured in the late but it meant that game and game again you were going to face off against terran all ins.
This makes the MU be back again to HotS, except you went survive to colossus balls its now survive to charge/storm. You can see that in current pro TvPs.
Terran all ins, did it attack before storm/charge/enough templars with energy? Terran win
Terran all ins, did it attack after storm/charge/enough templars with energy? Protoss win
Of course thats not 100% of the time but it makes the MU bad for both sides as it becomes too 1 dimentional, the removal of the MsC and the buff to stalkers/zealot made TvP much better because they didn't depended on defending on 3 bases until double/forge storm.
Also saying that theres many strategies its very misleading, yes opener wise its quite good but games end up being the same all the time, how many games have been, either all game or big part, the same thing over and over?
PvZ eventually ends up being always about immortals and archons versus banes and hydras, zerg has some choices, yes, but protoss is always ICA into storm/sky.
Same thing about TvP marine/tank/medivac into MMMM with eventual ghosts libs, mech has never been viable at all, only time it was in beta when cyclone and warhounds were OP as shit.
I know they are scared of disrupting balance, because everybody and their mother cares about that, but they need to start making the games more varied instead of the same strategies and methods pidgeon holed time and again because eventually people burn out on that.
I mean before the marauder buff Protoss was favored both in the mid game and the late game
|
Yah so imo what we are seeing presently is 100% a result of the raven nerf with compensatory mara and viking buff. Its a little unsettling that it wasnt an obvious or intended consequence when you think about it. What else could possibly have happened? You literally dont see terran players (even maru) intending whatsoever to play late game scenarios in any non mirror..it makes no sense. Terran has the worst macro mechanic for this stage in the game..rate of build for remax etc. The raven was stupid to watch but its also really stupid to watch broodlord infestor spore crawler slow push the map.. its also stupid to watch mass templar tempest colo rupter deathballs steamroll a move a late game terran army...so im not saying to revert the raven..but follow thru on fixing the other races caveman bullshit that anyone can execute by literally staying alive for 25 min...im including mech in that equation too.
Edit: Just to be clear.. im not saying all races need equal strength at all times in the game..but i am saying that the ultimate composition of any race should not be so easy to micro and multi with that you cant tell the difference whether stats is playing or some random masters player in a late game fight. Mechanics should be important all the way thru the game so that t > 25 isnt a predetermined conclusion and someone who can micro / macro and multitask 2 x his opponent will still win the game regardless of what race they play.
|
Balance group:There is nothing happen,so we are still lazy.
|
I've never liked blizzard's philosophy of "different advantages at different points of the game." The problem being: you're basically putting one race (in most cases the terran) on a timer, and forcing them to play a few specific, aggressive ways. That's just not a good way to design a real time strategy game.
|
The game is fairly balanced but that is just because everyone has adapted their gameplay to the balance situation. No point in trying to play late game if you are Terran now.
Pre patch I remember TvZ and TvP going to the late game quite often. Now every single game is killing Zerg as they transition to Hive and killing Protoss before Carrier/HT.
My win rates are same but the game has become more repetitive.
|
On July 20 2018 02:52 McNuggets wrote:
Nothing about shield batteries and immortals vs zerg. feelsbadman.
Great to hear that it is not only my issue.
Played a game recently, as mid-M Z vs dia P, and barely, even luckily won vs shield battery-immortal-disruptor. Usually it's a straight up loss in case P will follow simple steps of checking for a hidden base.
Once again, was thinking how to get rid of this cancer, and realized that starting batteries with 0 energy can be an answer. That will allow use them as expected - in defense, but will take some wind out of aggression sails.
|
Help me out, what s the update here?
Basically they tapped themselves on the shoulders saying, Yeah, there are complaints, and there are situational imbalances, but we re pretty awesome and satisfied with ourselves
|
On July 20 2018 16:52 Geo.Rion wrote:
Help me out, what s the update here?
Basically they tapped themselves on the shoulders saying, Yeah, there are complaints, and there are situational imbalances, but we re pretty awesome and satisfied with ourselves
Yes. It's fine.
|
On July 20 2018 16:52 Geo.Rion wrote:
Help me out, what s the update here?
Basically they tapped themselves on the shoulders saying, Yeah, there are complaints, and there are situational imbalances, but we re pretty awesome and satisfied with ourselves
"eh chief, been a while since we wrote one of them typy uppy things about sc2." the lead designer pauses his overwatch session, puts his feet up and drolls: "ehh give it to that new intern on bottom floor. yeah yeah, samantha, the cute one from HR. hell, she probably knows more about balance design than we do!" they all laugh and go back to playing overwatch.
|
Poland425 Posts
You all need to stop with this "queen nerf" ballshit.
Protoss and Terrans has so many options of early game harras and pushes that nerfing queen in any way means deleting Zerg from the game. Balance is pretty much good in TvZ i would say, especially with that map pool. Ravens after nerf are still good unit and it really makes me laugh that just because Terrans can't mass it into victory, they stopped making even 2 of them to hit some AAM, which in my opinion is very, very good spell still. I mean -3 armour to all hit units?
Korean Terrans still wreck korean Zergs. Queen just like she is now, is a must as a defending tool, especially that Blizzard stripped Zerg from early game agression tool like overlord drops.
I don't like that Zerg matchups are mostly defending till midgame, but hey. It is what it is. It's Protoss and Terran problem to hit my economy and pressure me enough to win.
Again. TvZ is fine in my opinion. I say that with heavy heart because still I get frustrated from diversity of T options in early game, and imba mules and shit.
PvZ though needs some tweeking. Carriers/Storm is imba, also very frustrating is that P can reach tier 3 units in early game without consequences- Archon Drop...My god...Immortals also are too strong, and i think Terrans will agree with me too. I don't say PvZ is totally Protoss favored, but definitely needs some tweaking in those departments.
To be honest I get sick from ppl that want Zerg nerfs, as Zerg was the most nerfed race since major changes. Lurkers- nerfed, Hydras- nerfed, Ravsgers- nerfed, Vipers- nerfed in both Parasitic Bomb and Blinding Cloud, Droperlords- nerfed, Ultralisks- nerfed. Funny how u don't remember that. Sick.
Overall, I agree that the game is in pretty good shape balance wise, maybe needs sone tweaking but it's pretty much fine. Ofc it's fulk of frustrating things, but it's not because of balance, but because of things we can't do on our current level of play.
I think Blizzard is saying that overall u have options as a player- u want to play ultra agressive and active? Change race from Zerg to Terran. The game itself gives u an option to play whatever u want, not necessarily your race.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
