|
Serious discussions are not when you have an OP that says: This serious discussion topic is seriously overpowered. XYZ. Add laser beams to ZYX to balance and change damage/armor to 123.
You guys realize that:
1. Blizz probably isn't gonna add laser beams to ZYX. Adding laser beams to ZYX, changing damage/armor/hp requires a serious amount of balance with most of the rest of the game.
2. Because of this, your best approach instead of complaining about imbalance and how to change the mecanic/unit/spell, make these discussions about how to solve the issue on the PLAYER SIDE. What have you seen that works? What have you been DOING that works/doesn't work?
3. As a result of 1 and 2, these threads are pretty much a complete waste of time and are not constructive at all. The game is still in beta, christ.
I really wish more of the focus would be on what to DO vs XYZ. All these topic starters seem to forget that SC2 != SC1 (notequal) and SC1 tactics we know and take for granted today took YEARS to develop. Hell, terran was considered the weakest race for many years before boxer arrived.
Do we really need to contest the imbalance of every single unit, spell and mechanic of the game in a new thread each time? At least plug all this stuff into some master thread or something.
I mean seriously, Y SO SRS?
If this is in the wrong section, my apologies, please move it to the right place mods. I felt it appropriate to include it where all the other "serious discussions" were.
|
Crunching numbers in the OP should be mandatory in "Serious Discussions".
|
I'm confused, zealots aren't getting lasers? damn...
|
good thread
would read again 
|
On April 10 2010 08:31 Legendary- wrote:
I'm confused, zealots aren't getting lasers? damn...
they have lazer knives
|
Thank god for voices of reason: As day9 always says, the game has set rules, you just need to be able adapt to them.
|
|
|
mrmin123
Korea (South)2971 Posts
On April 10 2010 08:32 Irrelevant wrote:Show nested quote +On April 10 2010 08:31 Legendary- wrote:
I'm confused, zealots aren't getting lasers? damn... they have lazer knives
Clearly OP means that zealots will be balanced when and only if they get lazer gunz.
|
BUT I LOST GAMES TO YOUR SERIOUS DISCUSSIONS. And clearly it wasn't my fault at all.
|
So a game in beta should not have any discussions about balance. Will do.....
|
all strategy threads should be serious discussios
edit: as in, you shouldn't have to title your thread redundantly
|
On April 10 2010 08:44 OHtRUe wrote:
So a game in beta should not have any discussions about balance. Will do.....
A "balance discussion" is not when one person exclaims that a particular aspect of the game is broken and does not heed to anyone else's input. This is true of everyone that starts these damn imba threads. If that's the way you're gonna play the ball, why even bother posting when you clearly won't have your opinion changed?
Does it strike you as such a crazy idea that MAYBE the state of the aspect is not broken?
How long have we been in beta? bottom line is that we don't know shit about this game yet and anyone who insists they do at this point and are screaming imba is seriously misguided.
On April 10 2010 08:34 Two_DoWn wrote:
Thank god for voices of reason: As day9 always says, the game has set rules, you just need to be able adapt to them.
|
About SC1 vs SC2, generally they are different.
But macro concept is the same.
- zerg = crazy macro/mass units
- terran = turtle
- protoss = ??? = profit
|
On April 10 2010 08:50 hellitsaboutme wrote:
About SC1 vs SC2, generally they are different.
But macro concept is the same.
- zerg = crazy macro/mass units
- terran = turtle
- protoss = ??? = profit
I'll try not to be a hypocrite, either, and take note with others opinions. Admittedly they are similar, but still not equal.
Yeah, but if even one aspect is different, that means they're not equal. The consequences of that single aspect that is different in respect to the rest of the game can't be known for sure yet. One single change means a largely different game. We have an extremely biased mindset right now due to BW.
|
Im being super serious guys...
|
On April 10 2010 08:49 zomgzergrush wrote:Show nested quote +On April 10 2010 08:44 OHtRUe wrote:
So a game in beta should not have any discussions about balance. Will do..... A "balance discussion" is not when one person exclaims that a particular aspect of the game is broken and does not heed to anyone else's input. This is true of everyone that starts these damn imba threads. If that's the way you're gonna play the ball, why even bother posting when you clearly won't have your opinion changed? Does it strike you as such a crazy idea that MAYBE the state of the aspect is not broken? How long have we been in beta? bottom line is that we don't know shit about this game yet and anyone who insists they do at this point and are screaming imba is seriously misguided.
If that's true, then how has Blizzard been making changes? Presumably, their changes are designed to improve balance and remove imbalanced things. If all arguments about imbalance are "seriously misguided," then what arguments does Blizzard use to decide what to change?
I agree that there is a great deal of needless grousing about things that clearly aren't a balance issue. But that's simply what's going to happen when you have a game in a malleable state: people are going to put forth their opinions. Not everyone's opinions are well-informed or well-considered; that's just as true for SC1 as for SC2.
So what exactly is it that you want? No threads about whether any particular aspect of the game is unbalanced or imbalanced? That people in a beta be unable to even ask the question? It seems counterproductive to the purpose of a beta.
The mindset of a beta tester is, and must be, different from the mindset of a player.
|
lol i was just starting to notice there is a "serious discussion" thread for just about every unit in the game.
|
The threads labeled Serious Discussion should be ban-happy territory. If the OP + responders do not put effort or thought into their posts, they should just get banned. Labeling a thread as such (or coming into a thread labeled as such) and then just shitting all over the keyboard just clutters the SC2 forums with even more useless crap than it already has.
|
throwing around things to be added because of balance vs other races is bad posting
Instead make your discussions built around the compared effectiveness of different units within the race at doing what you want.
X unit needs help because it is not cost effective in XYZ situations vs Y unit of the same race etc.
if you come in complaining about balance saying whatever race you play needs whateverthefuck for buffs you come off as a clammoring race-fanboi.
|
On April 10 2010 08:57 NicolBolas wrote:Show nested quote +On April 10 2010 08:49 zomgzergrush wrote:On April 10 2010 08:44 OHtRUe wrote:
So a game in beta should not have any discussions about balance. Will do..... A "balance discussion" is not when one person exclaims that a particular aspect of the game is broken and does not heed to anyone else's input. This is true of everyone that starts these damn imba threads. If that's the way you're gonna play the ball, why even bother posting when you clearly won't have your opinion changed? Does it strike you as such a crazy idea that MAYBE the state of the aspect is not broken? How long have we been in beta? bottom line is that we don't know shit about this game yet and anyone who insists they do at this point and are screaming imba is seriously misguided. If that's true, then how has Blizzard been making changes? Presumably, their changes are designed to improve balance and remove imbalanced things. If all arguments about imbalance are "seriously misguided," then what arguments does Blizzard use to decide what to change? I agree that there is a great deal of needless grousing about things that clearly aren't a balance issue. But that's simply what's going to happen when you have a game in a malleable state: people are going to put forth their opinions. Not everyone's opinions are well-informed or well-considered; that's just as true for SC1 as for SC2. So what exactly is it that you want? No threads about whether any particular aspect of the game is unbalanced or imbalanced? That people in a beta be unable to even ask the question? It seems counterproductive to the purpose of a beta. The mindset of a beta tester is, and must be, different from the mindset of a player.
Go to battle net forums. There's plenty of comments about imbalance everywhere on every aspect there. Battle.net forum and in-house testing is where the majority of blizz' changes are done.
Did anyone SAY that infestors needed a friggen neural parasite range change? Did anyone here say that that was EXACTLY what was needed so that we'll use it more?
The fact of the matter is, like 95% of these posts are absolute garbage to begin with and have no basis. Most of them will continue to exclaim that they are of some arbitrary rank that cannot be proven.
On April 10 2010 08:58 Foreplay wrote:
lol i was just starting to notice there is a "serious discussion" thread for just about every unit in the game.
The exact reason why I started this thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
