EPT[D] A Serious Discussion about Serious Discussions - Page 2
| Forum Index > Website Feedback |
|
Kantutan
Canada1319 Posts
| ||
|
hellitsaboutme
Singapore118 Posts
Rules are not set yet for SC2. It's in beta stage, so I will try to say whatever I don't like about the game until it's released. If you think that game is perfectly balanced then you should explain why and how to overcome the issue. But all I hear is "noob, learn to play". And I don't really talk for my race, coz I am random. There are some issues that I don't like: - small maps (problem for zergs macro). - Fast ending battles and hard counters - maradeur spamming (terran tier 1 = protoss tier 3) - Fragile defensive buildings (especially bunkers) - EMP - Strong broodlords and weak ultras so on. | ||
|
potatoedoughnut
United States334 Posts
| ||
|
zomgzergrush
United States923 Posts
On April 10 2010 09:02 Kantutan wrote: I know, it feels like the quality of this site has fallen dramatically since sc2 beta had been released. People need to start using proper fucking English as well. I cannot read a goddamn post when the OP insists on throwing in random capitalization to words that are not proper nouns as well as not putting in the effort in typing out 'you' instead of 'u' or 'are' instead of 'r'. We're not fucking 12 years old, guys. Honestly, if you insist on using texting language instead of typing out coherent sentences, you need to invest some time in learning how to type properly. It requires no extra effort whatsoever. Another reason why I'm spearing this. I really want to see TL continue high standards and credibility it has been known for. These bullshit serious discussions that are popping up everywhere is the opposite direction. | ||
|
Floophead_III
United States1832 Posts
| ||
|
ComradeDover
Bulgaria758 Posts
| ||
|
Two_DoWn
United States13684 Posts
On April 10 2010 09:04 hellitsaboutme wrote: Although, Day 9 is very experienced and good commentator I don't agree with him all the time. Rules are not set yet for SC2. It's in beta stage, so I will try to say whatever I don't like about the game until it's released. If you think that game is perfectly balanced then you should explain why and how to overcome the issue. But all I hear is "noob, learn to play". And I don't really talk for my race, coz I am random. There are some issues that I don't like: - small maps (problem for zergs macro). - Fast ending battles and hard counters - maradeur spamming (terran tier 1 = protoss tier 3) - Fragile defensive buildings (especially bunkers) - EMP - Strong broodlords and weak ultras so on. Yes, Blizzard is still making changes. However, once a patch is released, those are the rules. You can't change them. The problem is people creating threads that focus on "omg, I cant seem to beat this one thing, the unit/mechanic/map/whatever else must be imbalanced and changed!" instead of first making threads that ask "these are the rules, how can I win?" | ||
|
WaZuP
Germany487 Posts
just read the "A Serious Discussion about Emp" thread... so much bs in that op... | ||
|
rally_point
Canada458 Posts
| ||
|
Tyraz
New Zealand310 Posts
On April 10 2010 08:35 mrmin123 wrote: Clearly OP means that zealots will be balanced when and only if they get lazer gunz. woah, ease up there cowboy. This only solves the problem when terran is PF rushing! We need real, practical solutions here people. They obviously need to be able to transform like vikings or else they'll have the well documented issue of dying to speedlings when out in the open. | ||
|
BlasiuS
United States2405 Posts
I'm pretty sure Blizzard listens to TL.net, so I'm sure they read our comments about game balance. A good example is the marauder. It looks pretty clear to me that blizz responded to the discussion about the marauder in this thread by nerfing the marauder in patch 8. So something can come of good discussions about units. But I agree that there are too many whine threads disguised as "serious business". Only a GOOD, thought-out post about a perceived imbalance is acceptable. Don't disguise it as an OP or whine thread. Be sure to provide evidence and replays. | ||
|
ComradeDover
Bulgaria758 Posts
On April 10 2010 09:30 BlasiuS wrote: Be sure to provide evidence and replays. That isn't good enough. It's pretty easy to find a replay of some baddie losing to mass zeals or ultraling/corruptor or any unit composition under the sun. What we need is some common sense and objectivity, and I'm not sure the SC2 forum's residents have it in them. | ||
|
NicolBolas
United States1388 Posts
On April 10 2010 09:15 Two_DoWn wrote: Yes, Blizzard is still making changes. However, once a patch is released, those are the rules. You can't change them. The problem is people creating threads that focus on "omg, I cant seem to beat this one thing, the unit/mechanic/map/whatever else must be imbalanced and changed!" instead of first making threads that ask "these are the rules, how can I win?" But the question "these are the rules, how can I win?" is not the question beta is intended to answer. The more pertinent question is "these are the rules, are they any good?" And that requires having substantive discussion about those rules, where they are deficient, and how they could be improved. Asking how to win is an important part of that discussion. But discussing the quality of the rules is just as important. I'm not saying that there isn't a lack of serious discussion; most of these threads either devolve into idiotic bitch-fests or start that way from the beginning. But you can't throw the baby out with the bathwater, and you shouldn't promote how to win over how good the rules are until after the game comes out. There needs to be more moderation over balance discussion threads, with thread-locks and bannings handed out for mindless stupidity. But we still need to have those discussions. | ||
riptide
5673 Posts
Tbh though I think this whole thread creating process is imba. I mean like one guy gets to make the OP and we all have to answer it? It should be nerfed so at least everyone can make OPs so all our posts get the same amount of views. | ||
|
hellitsaboutme
Singapore118 Posts
On April 10 2010 09:15 Two_DoWn wrote: Yes, Blizzard is still making changes. However, once a patch is released, those are the rules. You can't change them. The problem is people creating threads that focus on "omg, I cant seem to beat this one thing, the unit/mechanic/map/whatever else must be imbalanced and changed!" instead of first making threads that ask "these are the rules, how can I win?" So far I've seen four serious discussions: maradeurs, roaches, HSM and EMP. Maradeurs and roaches have been changed and EMP came out only today. HSM wasn't changed but I think we haven't used it enough to make decisions. Overall, those discussions are not pointless even if blizzard doesn't read them. It's just sharing ideas. Of course there are trolls or idiots but still, they are everywhere. The fact that units were changed makes you wrong. People didn't need to play well or counter somehow, it was imbalanced and then nerfed by blizzard. | ||
|
BlasiuS
United States2405 Posts
On April 10 2010 09:38 ComradeDover wrote: That isn't good enough. It's pretty easy to find a replay of some baddie losing to mass zeals or ultraling/corruptor or any unit composition under the sun. What we need is some common sense and objectivity, and I'm not sure the SC2 forum's residents have it in them. I don't consider a low-level replay as evidence, I'm sure you don't either. | ||
|
ComradeDover
Bulgaria758 Posts
On April 10 2010 09:40 NicolBolas wrote: But the question "these are the rules, how can I win?" is not the question beta is intended to answer. The more pertinent question is "these are the rules, are they any good?" And that requires having substantive discussion about those rules, where they are deficient, and how they could be improved. With all due respect, you're not the one being asked that question, that's something Blizzard's balance dudes are asking each other. They work in a major video game company and you don't. The thought that anyone here thinks they can tell anything about the game from this short time we've had our hands on it is fucking nuts. Inb4 "But I'm a beta tester!". So are half the WoW players filling up the Copper/Bronze leagues. In any case, asking the question of "How do I win" indirectly addresses the quality of the rules, without having to have some retarded debate about it. If, for example, it becomes apperant that the only way to win a PvP is to proxy warp-in, then Blizzard will see that and make the appropriate changes. If it turns out that Unit X automatically wins the game for a player when it is used, it will probably be nerfed without any need for making threads. The only way to find what (If anything) really needs to be changed is to advance the level of play higher and higher. You won't do that by pondering what aspects of the game should be changed, but you will by asking yourself how to perform at the peak of your abilities. On April 10 2010 09:40 NicolBolas wrote: There needs to be more moderation over balance discussion threads, with thread-locks and bannings handed out for mindless stupidity. But we still need to have those discussions. Those discussions come into this world retarded. What good could possibly come of them? A thread entitiled "A Serious Discussion About Mech" that's really a thinly veiled way of saying "I believe mech is completely useless under all circumstances, here is a list of ridiculous changes". And this bad thread continues being bad even after the initial claim is proven wrong, gathering such intelectual gems as "ya i agree 1 teim i play mech and i loss 2 DTs nerf plz". A forum-wide ban on "Serious Discussions" except when initiated by moderators or something would be the best course of action. Come to think of it, wasn't there some idea floating around about an "experts forum" or something? Make it happen please. On April 10 2010 09:46 hellitsaboutme wrote: So far I've seen four serious discussions: maradeurs, roaches, HSM and EMP. Maradeurs and roaches have been changed and EMP came out only today. HSM wasn't changed but I think we haven't used it enough to make decisions. Please tell me you're kidding. I can discuss my ideas about the sun rising tomorrow, and just because it happens doesn't mean I made it happen. How huge is your ego to think that your opinion holds any sway at all. The only correct thing you said was that you haven't used it enough to make decisions, except that instead of just HSM, that applies to every aspect of SC2. | ||
|
zomgzergrush
United States923 Posts
On April 10 2010 09:42 riptide wrote: This is a serious discussion. Please stay on topic. Tbh though I think this whole thread creating process is imba. I mean like one guy gets to make the OP and we all have to answer it? It should be nerfed so at least everyone can make OPs so all our posts get the same amount of views. rofl its like multiple layers of irony here my head's about to explode. Good stuff. There is a place for all the other "serious discussions" and balance issues you would like blizzard to evaluate. It's called Blizz forums. "Add Laserbeams attached to Headz" balance ideas should just all go there. I say that with both sarcasm and seriousness. It is probably much more likely that your comments are even read if they just go there. | ||
|
DefMatrixUltra
Canada1992 Posts
On April 10 2010 09:40 NicolBolas wrote: But the question "these are the rules, how can I win?" is not the question beta is intended to answer. The more pertinent question is "these are the rules, are they any good?" And that requires having substantive discussion about those rules, where they are deficient, and how they could be improved. Asking how to win is an important part of that discussion. But discussing the quality of the rules is just as important. I'm not saying that there isn't a lack of serious discussion; most of these threads either devolve into idiotic bitch-fests or start that way from the beginning. But you can't throw the baby out with the bathwater, and you shouldn't promote how to win over how good the rules are until after the game comes out. There needs to be more moderation over balance discussion threads, with thread-locks and bannings handed out for mindless stupidity. But we still need to have those discussions. From a devil's advocate viewpoint, I'd argue that you are wrong. The best way to fix beta is to break beta. Take the current rule set as a given and find things that are abusable and abuse them. If all the high-level games become boring one-unit spam-fests, then the problem will be plain to see for anyone. So from this point of view, Day[9] hits the nail right on the head. If players concern themselves only with playing the current game, then there is no bias towards previous patches or later patches or previous games. There is only the current state of the game. Most of the "discussions" about balance ideas end up being "prove it with replays" or some such thing. If everyone just practiced as hard as they could and demonstrated that "X is boring because it plays 1-dimensionally in order to win" or "Y is too weak, so all that anyone ever does is Z, which still often loses to Q" there would be less argument over it and slightly more certainty. | ||
|
Kyo Yuy
United States1286 Posts
1) Your race is always the weakest race that needs a buff, and the other two races are overpowered. 2) Any time someone else whines about your race, it's because they don't know how to play the game and suck. 3) If you lost a game, it's not because your build order is bad, it's because something about the other race is imbalanced. There are no bad players, only imbalances. 4) Imbalances can only come from units. There's nothing wrong with the maps, the macro mechanics, or tech timing, it's always a fault of whatever unit your opponent made the most of. 5) Every time you lose a bunch of games, the first thing you should do is to create a thread on the Internet to express how imbalanced the other races are. Remember, you can't possibly be doing anything wrong, it is most definitely a balance issue. 6) Always back up your claim with random statistics. For example, most Platinum players whose screen names begin with the letter L play Terran, thus we can conclude that Terran is imbalanced. DIMAGA won a bunch of Zotac Cups, thus Zerg is imbalanced. I once saw a Youtube video of really good Protoss micro, thus we can conclude that Protoss is definitively overpowered. 7) Theorycrafting ALWAYS makes your claim true. For instance, SCVs have 5 more HP than Probes and Drones, thus SCVs are overpowered. Warp Gate causes units to appear in 0 seconds versus Thor's 60, thus Warp Gates are imbalanced. And of course, Roaches cost 75 minerals and 25 gas for 125 hp/16 damage whereas a reaper costs 50 minerals and 50 gas for 45 hp/12 damage. THE POWER OF MATH has shown that Roaches are clearly imbalanced. The bottom line: If you don't like it, it is imbalanced. I personally don't like the Mengsk statues on Metalopolis, I think they are OP and need a nerf. | ||
| ||
