EPTGSL Daybreak In Ladder: A Plea to Blizzard - Page 3
| Blogs > prodiG |
|
nonsequitur
384 Posts
| ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25547 Posts
On March 01 2012 08:18 nonsequitur wrote: Why does Blizzard always try to cater maps to "lower league" players? Even if it somehow confuses them, someone in Bronze isn't going to give a flying fuck about how an expansion has different amount of minerals/gas. I think your average bronze player won't be terribly confused by a 6m1g setup. He'll look at it, say "oh there's less stuff there" and proceed to play as normal. It's not like being in the bottom 20% of players somehow prevents you from making basic observations. Does blizzard think that the bronze league players will be like "hey man where are my extra 2 mineral patches and vespene geyser? This has ruined my entire game!" no I think people just don't give the lower league players enough credit. Having weaker mechanics / game sense won't prevent you from dealing with a nonstandard resource layout, especially if you've played the campaign, which had several nonstandard resource layouts. On March 01 2012 06:03 Sumadin wrote: Blizzard also have the ladder data, and while you may disagree with it's validity, it still provides a fairly good idea of stuff that needs fixing. They also have people paid only to do research on what the statestics says aswell as gather opion from the pros. Not to mention the amought of work they put into testing which claims of inbalance is true and what is just community bias. The ladder data may be useful, but I don't know why anyone would use it in lieu of an analysis of top-tier professional play. An obvious example here is Ghosts in TvZ-- they aren't really a problem at the lower level and on most of the ladder because most people don't have the mechanics to use it. It's pretty clear Blizz took a look at professional play and instituted a change. On March 01 2012 06:03 Sumadin wrote: After the ghost change i couldn't aggre with you more. But i will still label Blizzard as the Judge, Jury and Executioner, when it comes to controlling balance in SC2. And i wouldn't want it any other way. Even if that's true, that doesn't mean they should meddle with something that works. Blizzard doesn't have more info about how people react to 6m1g than the mapmaking community does because Blizzard has never put such a map on the ladder. Daybreak as it stands is a balanced and baller map, and I don't think it needs to be changed. | ||
|
-orb-
United States5770 Posts
| ||
|
Issi
Norway45 Posts
| ||
|
Hossinaut
United States453 Posts
/rant | ||
|
The_Unseen
France1923 Posts
On March 01 2012 15:42 Hossinaut wrote: While I do hate Blizzard for many reasons, most of which have to do with fucking around with SC2, I do have to give them props, for the people that are talking about rocks. Korhal Compound and Cloud Kingdom only have rocks to narrow chokes, not to actually block paths. This is a HUGE deal, and Daybreak already has those rocks in place. In my opinion, that is about the only thing they can be given props for, apart from adding actually decent maps, concerning maps. I think they also go about balancing incorrectly, don't listen concerning LAN, and can't figure out how to make a good UI to save their lives. Oh and they are trying to whore for money. Yay. /rant I think you could MAYBE also give them props for like... making the game we all love so much? | ||
|
MrMatt
Canada225 Posts
I notice they also got rid of all neutal supply depots again and also changed the creep tumor to rocks on metropolis. None of these changes are reflected in the so called LE pictures or loading screens. | ||
|
Traumwolle
Germany25 Posts
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/4/42/Daybreak.jpg - original http://i.imgur.com/GCoSb.jpg - LE the entrance to the second is a bit smaller and to the third a bit larger! also lightning and graphic changes ... | ||
| ||
