EPTCommunity Feedback Update - October 21 - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16197 Posts
| ||
|
AssyrianKing
Australia2110 Posts
| ||
|
Lunareste
United States3596 Posts
Just brainstorming here, but in a world where Adepts rule the early game against Terran and Zerg, could we put Photon Overcharge on the Oracle and finally remove the Mothership Core altogether? When Tanks are buffed to 70 damage, and Cyclones are a decent anti-Mutalisk option, what function does the Widow Mine serve other than worker harassment? Can we remove it? What kind of skill based harassment could be added instead? | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16197 Posts
On October 22 2016 07:59 Spyridon wrote: Blizzard says sales are not the goal. thanks for the laugh. check out any ATVI quarterly. then check out the historical stock price for ATVI since Activision merged with Blizzard. ROFLMAO. Sigaty et al have already said they won't make anything that competes with SC2 for the next 10 years. There is not enough potential revenue to justify a new full release of an RTS game for another 10 years. i'm very happy with how they're supporting SC2 though. | ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On October 22 2016 08:47 JimmyJRaynor wrote: thanks for the laugh. check out any ATVI quarterly. then check out the historical stock price for ATVI since Activision merged with Blizzard. ROFLMAO. I don't deserve the credit. I had very little to do with it. Blizzard were the ones who straight up said it. Here ya go... Our main goal for StarCraft 2 is to create the best game of its type that it can ever be, and not necessarily selling more copies of the game or increasing the playerbase. Why don't you send them over a laugh so they can have your feedback? On October 22 2016 08:36 Charoisaur wrote: players are leaving because they prefer MOBAs/FPSs over RTS games. most casters and pros also say that sc2 is in the best state it's ever been so it's more likely that the general consensus does not agree with YOUR opinion. Pros think it's the best state it's ever been? That's why more of them have quit than ever? That's why more have went back to BW than ever? More pro players have left SC2 for BW, than did for LoL/Dota/Overwatch or any other game. Most casters have already left the game... Come back to reality, man. Look at what is in front of you. Leagues are disappearing!!! Look at the numbers in Korea - then check logs for them over the last 2 years. You will see SC2 with a huge lead on BW, and now SC2 has dropped dozens of places and BW. In Korea, BroodWar is up to number FOUR. Only behind LoL/Overwatch/Fifa. SC2 used to be well ahead of BW, and BW dropped down. WarCraft 3 is more popular than SC2!!! If RTS is dead, how come SC2 is the least popular of all the major RTS games right now? SC2 is the newest of them, had the most investment of all of them, and is doing the worst of all of them... On October 22 2016 08:47 JimmyJRaynor wrote: Sigaty et al have already said they won't make anything that competes with SC2 for the next 10 years. There is not enough potential revenue to justify a new full release of an RTS game for another 10 years. Again bringing that up even though I've addressed it to you a number of times. If they announce a new game this year, with the typical time between announcement > release, they wouldn't be out of beta until the 10 year point. This is besides the fact that SC Remastered is supposed to be revealed by the end of this year, and will directly be competing with SC2. You are really taking the word from Blizzard that they won't compete with their own game? After releasing SC2 and competing with Brood War for the last 6 years...? They debunked that statement themselves. Which is besides the point that they will not compete if they announce something this year anyway. Which is besides the point that you claim Blizzard won't be investing in RTS anymore because of the lack of interest... Yet you have been saying that for years and they are STILL investing money in to RTS. I really wonder how people get so out of touch with reality... Still making the same claims for years when Blizzard is doing specifically what you have been saying they will not do. Still making the same claims about RTS players when their actions are completely contradictory to what you claim... | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16197 Posts
the entire RTS genre continues to decline. this "all the major rtses" comment.. you can just cherry pick the RTS games you want to make ur comment seem correct. Blizzard's #1 priority is sales which is why they are not making another RTS. There is no point in spending good money after bad. The SC franchise has brand value and Blizzard is investing in keeping the brand strong. Look for Blizzard to exploit the SC IP in another genre. | ||
|
TheSayo182
Italy243 Posts
| ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany15827 Posts
On October 22 2016 08:50 Spyridon wrote: I don't deserve the credit. I had very little to do with it. Blizzard were the ones who straight up said it. Here ya go... Why don't you send them over a laugh so they can have your feedback? Pros think it's the best state it's ever been? That's why more of them have quit than ever? That's why more have went back to BW than ever? More pro players have left SC2 for BW, than did for LoL/Dota/Overwatch or any other game. Most casters have already left the game... which pro players left the game because they don't enjoy it anymore? most players either have to quit because of military or in the case of Flash/Effort/Rain and maybe Jaedong switched to bw because they can make more money from it. foreign pros are more motivated than ever and many pros like Nerchio have specifically stated that the game is more enjoyable than ever. casters like Artosis, Tasteless, Incontrol etc say the same. Quote me a single pro player/caster saying that the game isn't fun anymore, I haven't heard a single one. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16197 Posts
| ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On October 22 2016 08:55 JimmyJRaynor wrote: LotV represented less than 2% of ATVI revenue in 2015 and 2016 and they've given up on selling lots of copies of the game which is why another RTS is not on the way. the entire RTS genre continues to decline. this "all the major rtses" comment.. you can just cherry pick the RTS games you want to make ur comment seem correct. Blizzard's #1 priority is sales which is why they are not making another RTS. There is no point in spending good money after bad. The SC franchise has brand value and Blizzard is investing in keeping the brand strong. Blizzard has already said they will work on another RTS after LotV. You have already been debunked on that statement. Your talking about LotV making little money, that doesn't indicate a problem with RTS, that indicates a problem with LotV. The entire RTS genre was held up by BW. All other RTS games declined even before SC2 was released. BW was declining only due to Blizzards involvement, and it has resurged over the last few years. WarCraft 3 has resurged as well. SC2 is the only major RTS that has less numbers than it had 1.5 years ago. The other 2 major ones are GROWING. Blizzard straight up said in this update that their #1 priority is not sales. So your saying Blizzard are liars? Would be about time you admit that. But youd never say that. Again, come back to reality. The double standard is so obvious, and ruins all your credibility. | ||
|
NKexquisite
United States911 Posts
| ||
|
ProMeTheus112
France2027 Posts
On October 22 2016 09:03 Charoisaur wrote: which pro players left the game because they don't enjoy it anymore? most players either have to quit because of military or in the case of Flash/Effort/Rain and maybe Jaedong switched to bw because they can make more money from it. foreign pros are more motivated than ever and many pros like Nerchio have specifically stated that the game is more enjoyable than ever. casters like Artosis, Tasteless, Incontrol etc say the same. Quote me a single pro player/caster saying that the game isn't fun anymore, I haven't heard a single one. it's quite true that when it's your job to cast the game, you're less likely to publicly talk about the game not being that much fun  actually a french caster made a video about this a few days ago, his name is anoss, he explained why he thinks 12 worker start for example is a reason for decline of SC2 fun for casual players ;; he said apparently MLord confirmed the same thoughts for high level play | ||
|
eviltomahawk
United States11133 Posts
http://us.battle.net/forums/en/sc2/topic/20749797803 The following changes are being implemented today to the Testing section of Multiplayer, as well as the Balance Test Extension Mod. Siege Tank -In Siege mode, Crucio Shock Cannon weapon attack period changed from 2 to 2.14. Swarm Host -Locust Acid Spit weapon damage decreased from 12 to 10. Tempest -Anti-ground weapon range increased from 6 to 8. -The Disruption Sphere ability replaced with the Disruption Blast. Disruption Blast: -Tempest charges up for 4 seconds, and then stuns enemy ground units and ground structures in the target area for 7 seconds. -Cast range is 10. -Area of effect radius is 1.95. -43 second own. Bug Fixes Fixed an issue with the Changeling's timed life duration. | ||
|
phodacbiet
United States1738 Posts
On October 22 2016 06:09 WeddingEpisode wrote: They're buffing Cyclone AA? It is so good right now, why in the world? Wait, why is Corruptor lacking? Slow firing? Terran could deal with it now. I think it's because they are very one dimensional. They kill very specific type of units and once those units are dead they are pretty much a waste of supply/gas. I mean I guess you could be cute and have them go pee on buildings, but aside from the gimmick factors they don't really do much. Also, they shoot slow, and have slow movement speed. Their only upside is that they morph into BL and have high starting health/armor. | ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On October 22 2016 09:06 NKexquisite wrote: The one thing I can never really understand is the Korean "the game is too hard complaint"... I mean, aren't these mostly the same people that were playing BROOD WAR? That's actually at the core of my point I've been discussing. BW actually is the harder game in my opinion. But the difference is, BW focused on also being easy to pick up (lower skill floor), and fun factor. Let's look at the differences in design direction. BW was naturally hard doing only decisions of what would be best for the strategy game. Now let's look at sc2. They went in to SC2 with the intent of making a tournament game. Not a "fun" game. Not a game that appeals to casuals but has enough depth and high enough skill cap for hardcore. Even before release, they decided to intentionally TRY to make macro harder, hence macro mechanics. These were 100% intended at the time to make the game "harder". Not because they are fun. Not because it's best for the game. Not because they offer strategic choices. Explicitly to make the game harder. I call this "artificial difficulty". It is harder mechanically, but not strategically or even competitively. You are competing against yourself, and not the other player. But more importantly, without strategic merit, it's just not fun. You can find so many other examples of this. Their economic solution. Their solution to death balls. Their increase in abilities to solve problems. These all follow the design intent of adding artificial difficulty, rather than strategic merit. This differs from BW. RTS, by design, will always be challenging without trying. It's the nature of controlling so many units, buildings, and locations. It is not possible for a human player to play perfect. Without all the steps blizzard took in SC2. Their idea was misguided from the beginning. So now, we have a game focused less on strategy, more on mechanics, loaded with "artificial difficulty". Then factor in the volatility. Scoutings more volatile, counters are more volatile, the economy is more volatile. This all adds up to feeling less fair and more like bullshit if you lose, and cheesy if you win. This is what Koreans mean by too hard. You already couldn't play perfect in BW, but they went out of their way in SC2 to try to inflate the difficulty at the price of strategy and fun. BW is harder, but each second of BW is filled with more strategic decision making, more multitasking, more ways to beat your opponent with micro rather than abilities. And most of all, more of a focus on fun and fairness in their high skull cap, without being overly volatile. | ||
|
B-royal
Belgium1330 Posts
| ||
|
ProMeTheus112
France2027 Posts
| ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On October 22 2016 09:11 ProMeTheus112 wrote: it's quite true that when it's your job to cast the game, you're less likely to publicly talk about the game not being that much fun actually a french caster made a video about this a few days ago, his name is anoss, he explained why he thinks 12 worker start for example is a reason for decline of SC2 fun for casual players ;; he said apparently MLord confirmed the same thoughts for high level playhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5xgjsv71y8 Yup.. A by product of rushing lotv out 5 months early. If you played LotV beta before they pushed up the release date, the 12 worker start wasn't an issue. Becsuse macro mechanics were removed. Macro mechanics accelerate economic scaling. Without them, the economy scaled up way slower. Expanding was around the same time periods of HotS, except until 2-3 bases, you HAD to skirmish with only a handful of units to capture each expansion and hold it to a point where the economy accelerated. The pacing was quite good. Main issue was the mineral costs needed to be rebalanced for units a bit. But that was totally doable with 6 months of dev time before the original release date. They even did a poll at the time, reverting to hots mechanics was the least voted for, and 80% voted for complete removal (rather than the automatic proposal or revert). But release date got pushed up, and they revert the mechanics with contradictory reasoning, even after admitting directly that they believed removal was better design. The pacing was quite fun, and 12 worker start only made early game start faster, but economic acceleration was slower. But once they reverted, we have both faster start AND scaling. But no change in unit or structure costs??? Now it's just out of control. Basically the start of the game ur expanding , the early skirmishes from beta were replaced with crazy harassment forces, T2 battles happen at the time T1 used to happen, early T1 battles not really existent anymore, tiers of units can be mostly skipped in a rush towards T3. It don't make any sense. But what else could they do when they suddenly push up release date from late March to mid November and have a shorter testing phase than planned? We needed the old blizzard at that time. Instead, they screwed SC2 by releasing early, instead of their old motto of "we do not release until it's ready". Absolutely no true software developers will tell you 2 weeks of testing is enough to release a game after making such drastic changes to the core of the game like they did with the economy. Every system in an RTS is built upon economy. The entire game needed testing for all 3 races. 2 weeks was not enough time. And we see how that ended up... | ||
|
ProMeTheus112
France2027 Posts
| ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany15827 Posts
On October 22 2016 09:50 Spyridon wrote: Yup.. A by product of rushing lotv out 5 months early. If you played LotV beta before they pushed up the release date, the 12 worker start wasn't an issue. Becsuse macro mechanics were removed. Macro mechanics accelerate economic scaling. Without them, the economy scaled up way slower. Expanding was around the same time periods of HotS, except until 2-3 bases, you HAD to skirmish with only a handful of units to capture each expansion and hold it to a point where the economy accelerated. The pacing was quite good. Main issue was the mineral costs needed to be rebalanced for units a bit. But that was totally doable with 6 months of dev time before the original release date. They even did a poll at the time, reverting to hots mechanics was the least voted for, and 80% voted for complete removal (rather than the automatic proposal or revert). But release date got pushed up, and they revert the mechanics with contradictory reasoning, even after admitting directly that they believed removal was better design. The pacing was quite fun, and 12 worker start only made early game start faster, but economic acceleration was slower. But once they reverted, we have both faster start AND scaling. But no change in unit or structure costs??? Now it's just out of control. Basically the start of the game ur expanding , the early skirmishes from beta were replaced with crazy harassment forces, T2 battles happen at the time T1 used to happen, early T1 battles not really existent anymore, tiers of units can be mostly skipped in a rush towards T3. It don't make any sense. But what else could they do when they suddenly push up release date from late March to mid November and have a shorter testing phase than planned? We needed the old blizzard at that time. Instead, they screwed SC2 by releasing early, instead of their old motto of "we do not release until it's ready". Absolutely no true software developers will tell you 2 weeks of testing is enough to release a game after making such drastic changes to the core of the game like they did with the economy. Every system in an RTS is built upon economy. The entire game needed testing for all 3 races. 2 weeks was not enough time. And we see how that ended up... they tested removing macro mechanics and it was terrible. most pros/personalities spoke against it. So they re-added it and saw that the game was in a great spot so they released the game. why wait longer when the game is already as good as it can possibly get? | ||
| ||
