hansonslee Profile Blog Joined April 2011 United States 2013 Posts Last Edited: 2013-09-07 00:18:25 #1 The History of Blizzard Balancing during the WoL era

+ Show Spoiler +





Yummy!

If anyone has followed the history of balance patches ever since Starcraft II beta, Blizzard never had a consistent method. First approach was to give severe nerfs to OP certain units such as void rays, broodlords, and siege tanks and provide extreme buffs to units such as the infestors and void rays, though void rays were still heavily underutilized during the WoL times. These methods have ultimately been deemed as a failure because of the constant deathball play and how many Zerg simply won with Broodlord/Infestor, seeing how the last WoL GSL has 4 zergs on the top 4.Yummy!



The Definition of Reworking + Current State of Balancing:

+ Show Spoiler + There is also another method called reworking, which consists of removing/adding new abilities or changing the design of the unit with a great mixture of buffs/nerfs. During the Heart of the Swarm Beta, Blizzard was willing to be creative and change the mold of several units such as Widow Mines, Void Rays, and Ultralisks (with its burrowing charge). Ever since the beta has ended, Blizzard has begun to mainly utilize modest buffs or incremental nerfs, which to avoid the consequences of making the game stale and imbalanced.



The good news is that Blizzard does show some care in their product and have learned from their mistakes. As we have seen from the viewership numbers and community responses, the Heart of Swarm was a success and made the game much more exciting with economic harassment opportunities and decreased amount of deathball compositions. In doing so, we can definitely hope that Blizzard will eventually design the product that will even rival its predecessor Brood War.



Problems with the Current State of Balance in terms of design:

+ Show Spoiler +



A less brought, but equally important, is the great number of underutilized units such as carriers, battlecruisers, and thors. These units are either isolated in mirror match-ups or not used at all. Whenever we see unconventional builds by incorporating these units, the observers and casters get excited. However, as excited as they get, such tactics end up being a disappointed as the opponents do end up finding the appropriate counter or the build required perfect execution.





Thor is NEVER here!

However, the community has begun to witness several glaring problems. In certain match ups specifically TvZ and TvP, it seems less diversity in terms of gameplay and composition. Most of the time, Terran is resorted to MMMM composition because it has been the most effective tool they have. Yes, other Terran players such as Bomber, the winner of WCS Season 2, have shown us some exciting builds. However, not every Terran can pull a Bomber because such builds situational (proxy reaper, hellion, and banshee & combat shield, + 1 marine openings) are extremely. As for TvP, with the exception of openings and all-ins, we pretty much see WoL 2.0 with the same composition (Protoss Deathball vs. MMMVG) and tactics (SCV all-in vs. building the “perfect” army).A less brought, but equally important, is the great number of underutilized units such as carriers, battlecruisers, and thors. These units are either isolated in mirror match-ups or not used at all. Whenever we see unconventional builds by incorporating these units, the observers and casters get excited. However, as excited as they get, such tactics end up being a disappointed as the opponents do end up finding the appropriate counter or the build required perfect execution.Thor is NEVER here!



A Possible Solution + How It Can be Used:

+ Show Spoiler + As an attempt to combat these problems, Blizzard should incorporate another method: reworking underutilized units. We have actually seen this method a lot more during the Beta. For example, mutalisks were given regeneration and a movement speed increase. This buff and addition of a passive had given mutalisks much more utility and placed mutalisks back into the metagame. As a result, zerg players have utilized mutalisks in every match-up for a variety of reasons. Though unproven in terms of its causation, the reworking of a variety of units has encouraged players to experiment and be excited about the game once more.



An example of a game that effectively utilizes reworking is DoTA. Unlike LoL, DoTA, which was made by Eul but then pioneered into the game at its present-state by the enigmatic IceFrog, is very conservative with its balance approach and shows a lot more similarities with Blizzard's approach. Instead of adding new heroes at a quarterly basis, DoTA has utilized a great number of modest buffs/nerfs/reworks to the heroes. Like Blizzard, DoTA buffs/nerfs were relatively modest with hero statistics, abilities, and damage. Despite this conservative approach, DoTA looked into how “useful” the heroes and items were in a team fight. Heroes were not just judged by how “strong” they were but how well they could be incorporated into the metagame. The addition of new items has given the players a greater amount of choices and approaches to the game.



One of the central themes that MOBA games extremely popular is the great amount of freedom players have. First, you have a wide variety of heroes and items to choose from. There are moments when one wants to try a different type of hero, which would have a very different playstyle and item build. Next, LoL, compared to DoTA, has its “casual-friendly” label by giving the player more options and freedom such as adding teleportation in a separate slot, which would allow the player to focus on building their hero instead of using money for the teleportation scrolls and reducing the punishment of doing poorly in the early game.





The Gains of Reworking:

+ Show Spoiler +



Whenever balance is being issued, Blizzard should also include a rework onto underutilized units. A simple buff would actually be counterproductive because that might encourage proxy play and upset the metagame balance. Reworking a unit can include giving the underutilized units new abilities or adding a healthy mixture of nerfs and buffs. One success unit that has been successful from the reworking approach is the void ray. When Void Rays were given prismatic alignment, Protoss players now had much more freedom and ease with the application of the unit. In doing so, void rays have been an occasional integral part of the protoss composition with roles consisting but not limited toa high tech unit killer and a supportive role for the protoss army.



Reworking underutilized units can theoretically compel casual and competitive players alike to explore new and creative approaches to the game. In doing so, HoTS can be exciting for both players and viewers because there will be a greater amount of choices for the player. As seen from MOBA games, the ability to exercise more freedom and utility has been correlated with the popularity of the game. Ever game we play does not have to exhibit just minute differences but also an well manifested variation. When every game feels truly different, we are more likely to be more excited for the next game.





The Mutalisk are here to play!

Now, SC2 definitely cannot be exactly like DoTA2/LoL because of it different genre. However, Blizzard can realize that MOBA games are fun to play AND watch because of the diversity, which is one of the main reasons. Thus, it would be nice, if SC2 focused not just on balance but also on diversity whenever there is a new patch. Implicitly, David Kim has championed ZvT as the epitome of success in terms of how “fun” the HoTS has become. Indeed, ZvT has been a fun match-up for a lot of SC2 observers. However, the game has become stale in terms of how linear the match-up has become. Compared to TvT or PvZ, ZvT, mainly suffers from a lack of diversity. Although the observer cannot predict the outcome of the game, he/she can easily predict what kind of build the Terran or Zerg will go without studying the details of the build.Whenever balance is being issued, Blizzard should also include a rework onto underutilized units. A simple buff would actually be counterproductive because that might encourage proxy play and upset the metagame balance. Reworking a unit can include giving the underutilized units new abilities or adding a healthy mixture of nerfs and buffs. One success unit that has been successful from the reworking approach is the void ray. When Void Rays were given prismatic alignment, Protoss players now had much more freedom and ease with the application of the unit. In doing so, void rays have been an occasional integral part of the protoss composition with roles consisting but not limited toa high tech unit killer and a supportive role for the protoss army.Reworking underutilized units can theoretically compel casual and competitive players alike to explore new and creative approaches to the game. In doing so, HoTS can be exciting for both players and viewers because there will be a greater amount of choices for the player. As seen from MOBA games, the ability to exercise more freedom and utility has been correlated with the popularity of the game. Ever game we play does not have to exhibit just minute differences but also an well manifested variation. When every game feels truly different, we are more likely to be more excited for the next game.The Mutalisk are here to play!



Counterarguments against reworking:

+ Show Spoiler +



The second point relates to a scientist’s approach. He/she wants to apply specific changes to analyze and make a conservative conclusion based on the changes. Blizzard, in some ways, follow this route when they steadily nerfed the hellbat. This method theoretically works because it can produce reasonable changes. However, this process is frustrating slow. Applying very specific variables is a lengthy process because it requires a lot of time to be tested. Next, once that step has been complete, the next step is to test another factor and simply rinse and repeat the process. ESports is becoming more of a commodity, which has little use for patience. Consumers don’t want to wait but instead want to be entertained a rather quickly basis. Although Blizzard should maintain this scientific approach, it should understand that being slow can make the casual viewers and players give up the game and result in the stagnation that SC2 currently exhibits.



For the final point, a different game genre absolutely does not mean that one genre can learn something from the other. For example, a stealth game such as Splinter Cell is nothing compared to an Adventure Game such as The Legend of Zelda. However, Splinter Cell has utilized the principle of exploration and exploitation, which is main focus of the Legend of Zelda. In the recent Splinter Cell game, Blacklist, there are multiple ways to approach towards the objective. As for the Legend of Zelda, Link has been placed in stealth and FPS scenarios. Both of them are completely different games, yet they incorporate similar elements, which add a greater amount of dimension.





Thank God that the Warhound is back in the pound!

Now, the concerns for the addition of reworking may consist of how the approach can destabilize the metagame to the point of unpredictability or create a greater amount of uncertainty in analyzing the impact of the balance change. The biggest possible complaint is the genre difference between a RTS and MOBA game. Reworking, at its worst, can result in ruining the finished product. However, seeing how conservative Blizzard is, reworking under careful hands such those of IceFrog or Blizzard can produce different results without major side-effects. And if the rework was too catastrophic, Blizzard can find a new way to address that change. That’s the beauty of reworking, which has been practiced by DoTA (change in hero abilities and new items) and LoL (new champions). We introduce new avenues for the player. After extensive trials, designers can observe the fullest potential of the unit and make the appropriate tweaks to the unit.The second point relates to a scientist’s approach. He/she wants to apply specific changes to analyze and make a conservative conclusion based on the changes. Blizzard, in some ways, follow this route when they steadily nerfed the hellbat. This method theoretically works because it can produce reasonable changes. However, this process is frustrating slow. Applying very specific variables is a lengthy process because it requires a lot of time to be tested. Next, once that step has been complete, the next step is to test another factor and simply rinse and repeat the process. ESports is becoming more of a commodity, which has little use for patience. Consumers don’t want to wait but instead want to be entertained a rather quickly basis. Although Blizzard should maintain this scientific approach, it should understand that being slow can make the casual viewers and players give up the game and result in the stagnation that SC2 currently exhibits.For the final point, a different game genre absolutely does not mean that one genre can learn something from the other. For example, a stealth game such as Splinter Cell is nothing compared to an Adventure Game such as The Legend of Zelda. However, Splinter Cell has utilized the principle of exploration and exploitation, which is main focus of the Legend of Zelda. In the recent Splinter Cell game, Blacklist, there are multiple ways to approach towards the objective. As for the Legend of Zelda, Link has been placed in stealth and FPS scenarios. Both of them are completely different games, yet they incorporate similar elements, which add a greater amount of dimension.Thank God that the Warhound is back in the pound!



The Take-Home Message:

+ Show Spoiler + Overall, SC2 is a beautiful game and continues to survive as the sole representative with the MOBA dominated world for multiple reasons. However, Blizzard should learn to incorporate certain element of MOBA approaches, which primarily focuses on reworking and granting players and observers more options. One option can utilize is reworking a heavily underused unit because this practice has been used in the Beta, which has been met with some success, and excite the SC2 community with new paths to take. Seed's # 1 fan!!! #ForVengeance

Plansix Profile Blog Joined April 2011 United States 15207 Posts #2 League of Legends does patches between seasons called “quality of life” patches, where they buff underused heroes and try to get them back into play. They don’t change or push out the current meta, but try to add in more factors by bring underused champions and items into use. Of course, after they do that, the game settles down to a new meta, but there is always this period of invention and creativity that comes with each of those patches. Dota 2 also has been patching in a similar fashion, trying to avoid nerfing heroes into the ground.



I feel SC2 could use this after the first WCS season. There is not reason to nerf dominant styles. Rather it would be more productive to buff units and buildings that are undersused in the current meta and try to get people to add them into the current match ups:



Thinks like:



Carriers

Tempest

Thors

BC

Tanks,

Hellion transformation

Nydus

Broodlords(I know, but they have fallen off and they were pretty cool when there were like 3 of them)

Banshees

Reapers(yeah, I know, but I think their “jump down” animation could be made a bit snappier)



You don’t break anything that is working, you just push forward stuff that isn’t. It’s a better, more interesting and exciting way to balance.

I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6

Tsubbi Profile Joined September 2010 Germany 7840 Posts #3 great writeup on a very important topic imo, i really think blizzard should be more active about buffing underpowered and underused units



i really think this one reddit thread after release of hots where people asked blizzard to not change anything was bad in the long run. people at that time expected blizzard to mostly nerf units that seem too strong in order to balance which was mostly the case in wol. if blizzard used more reworking instead people would be excited about every upcoming patch whichallows people to explore new stuff, use previously unviable compositions and all in all sc2 would not be as stale as it is with this overly cautios approach blizzard is taking in hots.

NeThZOR Profile Blog Joined November 2010 South Africa 5205 Posts Last Edited: 2013-09-06 13:43:43 #4 Don't make expansions, just add buffs to underused or underpowered units and buildings (yes, think spore crawler buff) and add the content on a streamlined basis. Valve never catches us offguard by adding a ton of heroes (equate this to an expansion) and buffs/nerfs simultaneously. Instead, they add them over time and see how the changes affect the meta. SuperNova - 2015 | SKT1 fan for years | Dear, FlaSh, PartinG, Soulkey, Naniwa

tombigbimbom Profile Blog Joined January 2011 12 Posts Last Edited: 2013-09-06 13:46:29 #5 I applaud the effort you put into writing this, but in my opinion it's a completely pointless thread and discussion.



"Now, SC2 definitely cannot be exactly like DoTA2/LoL because of it different genre."



I'll even say that SC2 is a _completely_ different game that cannot be in any way compared to LoL/Dota/All-Stars.



We could very well be discussing what the SCII team can learn from WoW and Diablo teams, but that seems like a vicious circle, doesn't it?



PS. Some old units got reworked in HotS already and new options were added as well. Really not sure what the lesson here is supposed to be after all.



__

To the posts above: both games you brought up are f2p games, so they don't have any expansions. Also, I wonder how happy the pros would be to see the rules of a super tight game that SC2 is largely reworked every other patch. Even the smallest changes already bring a ton of complaints and riot (pun not intended).

Cite Profile Joined August 2010 Australia 251 Posts Last Edited: 2013-09-06 13:49:36 #6 I think your entire post overanalyzes a game that isn't even considered fully finished. Majority of these posts are thinking within what they believe is a long term goal of "oh a couple months down the line it should be stablized then its cool". You guys are failing to realize that LoTV is still to be released and with it multiple new things.



Now you need to then consider the following: Any changes done now will also have to possibly take into consideration what the devs have in store for LoTV (As it would be utterly stupid to not consider this then buff units up then when LOTV comes you realize you have a mess of overbuffed units with the inability to add anything cool). For those of you that believe blizzard does not think that far ahead, you should take into consideration that a lot of stuff was present in betas but then taken out for later use (Also evident in SC and SCBW with lurkers and such in the earlier betas of the first SC even (correct me If I am wrong)).



What I have to say is, the people over analyzing the wrong areas and posting beatufiul posts like this, maybe should be less shortsighted and spend more time analyzing.

vthree Profile Joined November 2011 Hong Kong 7879 Posts #7 Although I agree with some of the points made. I think it is some what unfair to compare SC2 to DoTA. The way the 2 games work is so different that the difficulty to balance to totally different. Look at how a +2 range on a defensive unit changed the whole metagame (BL-infestor) in TvZ. RTS is all about resources and the choice between eco/army/tech. Even giving a slight buff to one of these in the early game (Queen's let zergs build less army in the early game), and the whole things snowballs and timing windows are shutdown.



I know that MOBA snowballs and well but no where as drastic.



Plus you can always ban out OP champs. And more importantly, teams can pick the 'OP' heroes themselves. So the bigger champion pool you have, the better you will be to gain advantages from buff/nerfs. But in SC, especially at the highest levels, players stick to one race. So if you have an 'OP' race, you run into a lot more issues.

hansonslee Profile Blog Joined April 2011 United States 2013 Posts Last Edited: 2013-09-06 13:56:46 #8 On September 06 2013 22:43 tombigbimbom wrote:

I applaud the effort you put into writing this, but in my opinion it's a completely pointless thread and discussion.



"Now, SC2 definitely cannot be exactly like DoTA2/LoL because of it different genre."



I'll even say that SC2 is a _completely_ different game that cannot be in any way compared to LoL/Dota/All-Stars.



We could very well be discussing what the SCII team can learn from WoW and Diablo teams, but that seems like a vicious circle, doesn't it?



PS. Some old units got reworked in HotS already and new options were added as well. Really not sure what the lesson here is supposed to be after all.



Yeah, I am aware that Blizzard is not going to listen, but it's an attempt to steer the community from balance whining more towards how the game can be fun for everyone. Hopefully, the community would change its approach and influence Blizzard to do same. The lesson here is that Blizzard should on balancing AND reworking the game design. Bringing up the Beta was to provide an example of how Blizzard can easily rework the design, if it wanted to.



We could definitely bring up how SC2 can learn from other games, but games such as WoW and Diablo have actually been losing popularity. So, such games, although they still have their share of popular support, are not as relevant as the MOBA games, which have been on the rise.



Yeah, I am aware that Blizzard is not going to listen, but it's an attempt to steer the community from balance whining more towards how the game can be fun for everyone. Hopefully, the community would change its approach and influence Blizzard to do same. The lesson here is that Blizzard should on balancing AND reworking the game design. Bringing up the Beta was to provide an example of how Blizzard can easily rework the design, if it wanted to.We could definitely bring up how SC2 can learn from other games, but games such as WoW and Diablo have actually been losing popularity. So, such games, although they still have their share of popular support, are not as relevant as the MOBA games, which have been on the rise. I think your entire post overanalyzes a game that isn't even considered fully finished. Majority of these posts are thinking within what they believe is a long term goal of "oh a couple months down the line it should be stablized then its cool". You guys are failing to realize that LoTV is still to be released and with it multiple new things.



Now you need to then consider the following: Any changes done now will also have to possibly take into consideration what the devs have in store for LoTV (As it would be utterly stupid to not consider this then buff units up then when LOTV comes you realize you have a mess of overbuffed units with the inability to add anything cool). For those of you that believe blizzard does not think that far ahead, you should take into consideration that a lot of stuff was present in betas but then taken out for later use (Also evident in SC and SCBW with lurkers and such in the earlier betas of the first SC even (correct me If I am wrong)).



What I have to say is, the people over analyzing the wrong areas and posting beatufiul posts like this, maybe should be less shortsighted and spend more time analyzing.



That part makes sense from a business standpoint. However, that point has its share of assumption, believing that reworking will push Blizzard to the corner where it cannot introduce anything new to LoTV. Based on what I have seen, that belief is somewhat untrue because, if you look at LoL or DoTA2, the designers always find new problems and solutions. This dynamic helps the scene grow and evolve, making the game and just as organic as the player and eSport scene. That part makes sense from a business standpoint. However, that point has its share of assumption, believing that reworking will push Blizzard to the corner where it cannot introduce anything new to LoTV. Based on what I have seen, that belief is somewhat untrue because, if you look at LoL or DoTA2, the designers always find new problems and solutions. This dynamic helps the scene grow and evolve, making the game and just as organic as the player and eSport scene. Seed's # 1 fan!!! #ForVengeance

Plansix Profile Blog Joined April 2011 United States 15207 Posts #9 While I don’t think you will ever get Blizzard to latch onto a specific balance change, they have been willing to listen to the community in the past if there is a clear message. Larger maps and removing close spawns took a while, but they did remove them and they have added features we have been asking for. If the majority community and professionals supported the idea of buffing under used units, upgrades and buildings between WCS seasons, I think Blizzard would be willing to consider that and put it into place. The key is to make sure that what is being requested in clear and concise, rather than a laundry list of different changes. I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6

Zanzabarr Profile Joined October 2010 Canada 217 Posts #10 There is nothing to learn from MOBA balance like DOTA2 or LOL. Both games are horrendously imbalanced, understandably so especially in the case of LOL where there are over 100 champions (gotta keep the new champ + skins coming for that cash flow, despite game balance). The result is people discovering the FOTM OP champs and compositions, abusing them, patches rolling out to buff / nerf underused / overused champions.... repeat ad infinitum. It's an easy and lazy way to go about balancing a game, but probably also the only way to balance a game like League of Legends. You can never have a truly balanced MOBA if you insist on regurgitating out new champions every couple weeks.



Blizzard's balance decisions over the course of WOL and HOTS so far have not been great. They've been extremely slow in addressing issues (BL infestor anyone) in the past, and have made strange buffs / nerfs in the games history. That being said, I'd much rather have a game that aims for true balance between races, than a game of lets see who can win at the character select screen with OP hero selections / bans.

zezamer Profile Joined March 2011 Finland 3797 Posts #11 Don't mention Dota if u don't know anything about it...

DinosaurPoop Profile Blog Joined April 2013 687 Posts Last Edited: 2013-09-06 14:30:44 #12 ya but if blizzard tries to change too much its like putting everyone back in the beta

in sc2 if you rework say the banshee or thor people will still find a best general strategy that will fall into a few possible compositions people make up.

people use MMMM because it is currently what people figured out to be the best way to play in TvZ

some moba games may have a shitton of heroes/champions but there will always be a small group of heroes that are viable in a certain position doesn't it?

the game is not imbalanced, it is flawed, but they would have never have seen it given the ingenuity of koreans and their tendency to figure out optimum strats and openers really fast. they try to fix whatever problems appeared by 'reworking' units in expansions but it snowballs into some more problems that they didn't have the foresight for.



tl;dr blizzard is not iNcontroL of the meta, the players are. When cats speak, mice listen.

Cubu Profile Blog Joined February 2011 871 Posts #13 On September 06 2013 23:03 Zanzabarr wrote:

There is nothing to learn from MOBA balance like DOTA2 or LOL. Both games are horrendously imbalanced, understandably so especially in the case of LOL where there are over 100 champions (gotta keep the new champ + skins coming for that cash flow, despite game balance). The result is people discovering the FOTM OP champs and compositions, abusing them, patches rolling out to buff / nerf underused / overused champions.... repeat ad infinitum. It's an easy and lazy way to go about balancing a game, but probably also the only way to balance a game like League of Legends. You can never have a truly balanced MOBA if you insist on regurgitating out new champions every couple weeks.



Blizzard's balance decisions over the course of WOL and HOTS so far have not been great. They've been extremely slow in addressing issues (BL infestor anyone) in the past, and have made strange buffs / nerfs in the games history. That being said, I'd much rather have a game that aims for true balance between races, than a game of lets see who can win at the character select screen with OP hero selections / bans.

There are over 100 heroes in dota as well. Infact, for the majority of its existence, lol had less champions than dota. There are over 100 heroes in dota as well. Infact, for the majority of its existence, lol had less champions than dota.

MattD Profile Joined March 2013 United Kingdom 83 Posts #14 if you change one small thing in sc2 the win rates can swing wildly in the favor of one race, this doesn't happen in moba, there is much less risk involved in changing skills on an underused champion in LoL than changing a unit in sc2.

TeeTS Profile Joined June 2011 Germany 2642 Posts #15 The big problem of the design of SC2 is indeed the large number of underused units. Currently the following units are only used in mirror matchups or barely at all:

Terran:

Siege Tank

Hellbat

Thor

Banshee

Raven

Battle Cruiser



Protoss:

Carrier

(This is the only unit, where I don´t see that as a problem, since the carrier shut´ve been cut and only remained in the game for the fluff)



Zerg:

Ultralisks - they are on their way onto that list.



Right now terran has the bigger end of that problem, but in the past we had f.e. hydralisks also sharing their seats in here.

Balancewise terran does not suffer from the problem, that half of their units are pretty much useless in non mirrors, because of the strength of bio. But designwise in is a complete disaster, to have so many useless units in a game and on top of that in one fraction.

czaku Profile Joined June 2011 Poland 424 Posts #16 On September 06 2013 22:50 vthree wrote:

Although I agree with some of the points made. I think it is some what unfair to compare SC2 to DoTA. The way the 2 games work is so different that the difficulty to balance to totally different. Look at how a +2 range on a defensive unit changed the whole metagame (BL-infestor) in TvZ. RTS is all about resources and the choice between eco/army/tech. Even giving a slight buff to one of these in the early game (Queen's let zergs build less army in the early game), and the whole things snowballs and timing windows are shutdown.



I know that MOBA snowballs and well but no where as drastic.



Plus you can always ban out OP champs. And more importantly, teams can pick the 'OP' heroes themselves. So the bigger champion pool you have, the better you will be to gain advantages from buff/nerfs. But in SC, especially at the highest levels, players stick to one race. So if you have an 'OP' race, you run into a lot more issues.



Pretty much this, please stop comparing two different genres.

Changing things in MOBA's affect both teams, either one can pick champion or ban it out. Focusing on shutting down chosen champion while giving up the help to other lanes can help in MOBA's. You cannot do that in RTS. No rush 15 before the game huh? Too big change might bring bad things to balance.

The truth is, RTS is shading out. Look at the other RTS games. All went dead. It's great game but i think it wouldn't be developed so much if it wasn't named Starcraft. Pretty much this, please stop comparing two different genres.Changing things in MOBA's affect both teams, either one can pick champion or ban it out. Focusing on shutting down chosen champion while giving up the help to other lanes can help in MOBA's. You cannot do that in RTS. No rush 15 before the game huh? Too big change might bring bad things to balance.The truth is, RTS is shading out. Look at the other RTS games. All went dead. It's great game but i think it wouldn't be developed so much if it wasn't named Starcraft.

HeeroFX Profile Blog Joined November 2010 United States 2619 Posts #17 I really don't think they need to look at Moba games at all. And they won't care. Blizzard really doesn't care what the community says when they make games. They have this sense that they are above every other developer.

Plansix Profile Blog Joined April 2011 United States 15207 Posts #18 On September 06 2013 23:21 MattD wrote:

if you change one small thing in sc2 the win rates can swing wildly in the favor of one race, this doesn't happen in moba, there is much less risk involved in changing skills on an underused champion in LoL than changing a unit in sc2.



When a big patch comes out for Dota 2, it throws the entire meta out the window and its kinda awesome. Which is also why Blizzard is reluctant to do it. However, if the community were totally in support of doing that and said “We don’t mind if its unstable for a little while if the game is made more interesting” then they might be more willing to do it. Right now, they are reluctant to throw anything out of balance they believed(and we have informed them) the community values a stable game over all other things. When a big patch comes out for Dota 2, it throws the entire meta out the window and its kinda awesome. Which is also why Blizzard is reluctant to do it. However, if the community were totally in support of doing that and said “We don’t mind if its unstable for a little while if the game is made more interesting” then they might be more willing to do it. Right now, they are reluctant to throw anything out of balance they believed(and we have informed them) the community values a stable game over all other things. I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6

DinosaurPoop Profile Blog Joined April 2013 687 Posts #19 On September 06 2013 23:26 czaku wrote:

The truth is, RTS is shading out. Look at the other RTS games. All went dead. It's great game but i think it wouldn't be developed so much if it wasn't named Starcraft.

fucking truth right here fucking truth right here When cats speak, mice listen.

Stratos_speAr Profile Joined May 2009 United States 6408 Posts #20 On September 06 2013 22:49 Cite wrote:

I think your entire post overanalyzes a game that isn't even considered fully finished. Majority of these posts are thinking within what they believe is a long term goal of "oh a couple months down the line it should be stablized then its cool". You guys are failing to realize that LoTV is still to be released and with it multiple new things.



Now you need to then consider the following: Any changes done now will also have to possibly take into consideration what the devs have in store for LoTV (As it would be utterly stupid to not consider this then buff units up then when LOTV comes you realize you have a mess of overbuffed units with the inability to add anything cool). For those of you that believe blizzard does not think that far ahead, you should take into consideration that a lot of stuff was present in betas but then taken out for later use (Also evident in SC and SCBW with lurkers and such in the earlier betas of the first SC even (correct me If I am wrong)).



What I have to say is, the people over analyzing the wrong areas and posting beatufiul posts like this, maybe should be less shortsighted and spend more time analyzing.



When the game is released to the public and is being played in sanctioned tournaments for money, then "the game isn't finished because we still have LotV" isn't an excuse.



The general idea of "buffing more than nerfing" is a good one that Blizzard never understood, partially because it's also a hard thing to do. That style lends itself to power creep very easily, but if pulled off successfully, is the method of balancing that pretty much anyone would prefer, as it opens up more options and excitement than what Blizzard does.



That said, don't ever expect Blizzard to learn anything. Ever. When the game is released to the public and is being played in sanctioned tournaments for money, then "the game isn't finished because we still have LotV" isn't an excuse.The general idea of "buffing more than nerfing" is a good one that Blizzard never understood, partially because it's also a hard thing to do. That style lends itself to power creep very easily, but if pulled off successfully, is the method of balancing that pretty much anyone would prefer, as it opens up more options and excitement than what Blizzard does.That said, don't ever expect Blizzard to learn anything. Ever. A sound mind in a sound body, is a short, but full description of a happy state in this World: he that has these two, has little more to wish for; and he that wants either of them, will be little the better for anything else.

1 2 3 4 5 23 24 25 Next All