It's interesting cuz when I talk to sc2 people randomness kinda broke their brain. Every map needs to have the same layout, same mineral arrangement, same 2- 3 wall-able routes to your base. There is absolutely no RNG allowed, damage always the same, abilities always the same. Everyone just wants the exact build order precisely to seconds. I just feel like it sucks the excitement out of everything
Beasty kind of touched on it. Current players of sc2 want it to be the "unexciting" form that it is now and that's what they have. It's everyone outside that is saying that sc2 is boring
@@martinwinther6013 Randomness is never truly random in these games. For instance in AoE4, the map generation will always produce the necessary resources near your base, and it will mirror the map for the most part so that both players have broadly similar spatial advantages. There can be bad outcomes, like one player having gold that faces towards the other player, while their opponent has gold behind them, but you can tweak the generation to try to fix that. But the variation that exists means players have to scout and think about how to deal with the map as it generates each time. Games are rarely decided based on map generation, almost never in practice, but being good at thinking in the moment and planning out how to deal with the map you're on is part of the skillset. Even, and i am not in favour of this, but even random damage within a range statistically evens out. Like total war, for instance, has dice rolls in combination with unit stats, and it's rarely going to be the case that RNG changes the outcome of a game, because the number of dice rolls is huge, but it can lead to variations that require adaptation.
I remember just before you quitted SC2, you spoke about balance and the way the intern confuses balance and game design. I believed you were so true: patch after patch, they just reduced every possibilities in the game... to the point you can now play only one build order with tiny variations... I also remember your idea, in order to keep the game alive, that they should put a "brawl mode", with some unit's changes every week. I cant state how exciting I would be if this was actually a thing. Having to play with slightly different things every week, some imba, some not imba... it would make the game way more interresting and so fun!
I've seen this problem happen on many games: devs listen too much to pro players, or even just the community, hardcore players, whatever, and the problem isn't listening to them, the problem is pandering to demands and complaints that essentially boil down to "make their life easier" and remove friction. Most of the time, it usually results in devs using sandpaper on everything until it becomes so smooth that nothing stands out anymore. You need to be able to listen to what people like and don't like, and separate what truly makes their life miserable from "things that would make their life easier to achieve their goals".
Devs left the game way back. The tweaks we see now is communitydriven, its done very carefully with only minor adjustments and some of them are rolled back. Most of the changes are done to please the wide community, but its obvious that certain tweaks can be rolled back or altered based on one or two top-tier players performance. If a change cause the entire pro-scene to "collapse" then its obviously not good, regardless the majority likes it..
I believe Starcraft's problem is unsolvable because the issue is baked into the fundaments of the game. StarCraft is heavily leaning towards micromanagement of units at the cost of strategy and macromanagement. It is "naturally selecting" its own playerbase towards "Micromanagement-Savants" (people who are good at this one thing and nothing else). Why would those people want to change the game towards something that does not favour them anymore?
Absolutely, it's structural. Fundamentally "fixing" the issues with sc2 would be equivalent to making a new game, and, there's real promise in the idea of trying to make a starcraft style game with more complex macro, with age game style requirements to go out on the map, but that's a new game, it's not starcraft. And I think one sad thing with stormgate is they missed the opportunity to really try to evolve the genre based on lessons from all the subgenres, and instead they mainly wanted to recapitulate elements of starcraft (mainly) and warcraft.
True, and false at the same time. You could make the game to be more strategy oriented and it won't matter. Strategy once mastered remains mastered, but APM is not capped. APM will allways be an advantage regardless of strategy. If you will, compare this to a TBS game. In TBS you cannot increase the number of your turns over your opponent(usually). In SC2 and RTS in general, you effectively can with APM, because with higher APM, you effectively do more than your opponent opponent for free and doing more for free > strategy every time (especially when the strategy is already mastered by both opponents to the most part). Its just reality.
Rng is already pretty bad in sc2 early game (aka it causes autolose if you throw rock and they threw paper). Why increase it for no good reason by giving you a skill-less chance to fail at scouting? In aoe, you start with a scouting unit. In sc2, you give up econ for to scout. To throw in a random chance to fail at scouting after sacrificing that econ is simply bad design.
@@neonmarblerust It was still a problem with fewer starting workers on 4p maps. Id argue that its even *more* of a problem with fewer starting workers because sacrificing econ by scouting hits even harder. 1/6++ of your workers is way more % to sac than 1/12++.
The big reason 3 and 4 payer maps got removed is that zergs always know where the opponent spawns on these maps. So the gamble was on the opponent finding them, instead of them executing their all-in. Funnily enough way bigger maps with 6-8 spawns would remove that problem, even though Zerg will always have an advantage
Also, totally ironically, MaxPax has become kinda the king of playing predictably but winning anyways. He broke onto the scene with his crazy build which you popularized, but now he's like top 4 in the world, and he is insanely stubborn with his opening. He just holds damn near everything, because he's simply too skilled to beat.
38:30 Exactly YES. People need to keep in mind that when they're listening just to the current community, there's a survivor bias to their opinions and the kind of game that they want. There were many memorable, dynamic, exciting, action packed games with Mech back then, but ofc over time players who liked that kind of positional methodical style left the game because it wasn't as viable as they wanted. Now mech in TvP for example is more unviable than in HotS, so of course the community currently hates mech and wouldn't support making these other playstyles even just a LITTLE bit viable - it has to nerfed to oblivion. I would love for a 9 worker start, economically it would be closer to 12 worker start but it would hugely increase the margin of time for the early stages of the game where you're scouting, harassing, strategizing. For example, with Terran there used to be all kinds of openers and gas timings that had significant advantages/weaknesses: 11 rax 11 gas, 11 rax 13 gas, 12 rax 12 gas, 12 rax 13 gas, 12 rax 15 gas, 12 rax FE double gas, etc. etc. And then of course there are the wilder rushes where you can build a rax even earlier than that. You also had to decide whether to build 0-3 marines before building 0-3 reapers, or possibly reaper first then reactor into marines in bunker, etc. 9 worker start would bring back so many more opening variations and gas timings. With 12 workers, you reach max efficiency on minerals (16 workers) so quickly that there is so few variation in gas timing. "Gas first" only lets you build your Factory a few seconds earlier than a normal Rax into Gas. sOs got pushed out of the game because of these game shifts towards stable, greedy, economical play and mechanics. Whenever i play ladder now, it just feels like we're rushing to 200/200 supply with every tech + upgrades ASAP. Many games don't feel like putting in effort to gain control of the game, to harass and make plays, etc. is worth it. Just expand faster, tech up faster, get everything faster and then trade with your opponent. Even if one player gets some damage done early, the answer is just to try to greed as fast as possible and faster than your opponent. Pig did some test games with 9 worker start, in one game it looked still pretty close to LotV economically, just a little slower. And a huge difference was that neither player's army reached max 200 supply until literally 15 minutes into the game!! Often times in LotV pro players reach max about 9-10 minutes in if there weren't any huge trades...
Man, I remember watching 2 pros go mass phoenix vs eachother and the game lasted an hour and a half. Or watching someone actually lose to hallucinations, poor idra. When there were no more shake ups with the play style, the game died. I remember InControl coming up with a new cheese every other week.
I hate the take that there should be “Upset potential” this is stupid what great sport has this? Soccer, basketball no no. It elevates the competition one team or player being undefeatable. No one complained when Mike Tyson was winning every match, everyone couldnt wait to see him destroy the competition. If anything with new A.I systems make maps randomised, different minerals per patch, more gas or less gas, start with a random number of workers 5-12, maps larger smaller, different choke points exposed main vs unexposed main. Perhaps this isnt 100% a solve but it is int the right direction. Players can even have 5 mins or a day to study the map before its released. Perhaps they can choose where their main is on a mirrored map. Don’t take skill away from the players, if they can win don’t take it away. Plus that chargelot all in was terribly executed. But the moment you make scouting absolutely necessary, (even where their main is located, how many minerals theyre utilising etc) thats the moment strategy is elevated. Rather than micromanaging savants.
Proplayers want predictability, since their revenue depend on them winning, if matchups are unpredictable, and if there are too much randomness, they may feel like they can no longer make it their jobs and quit. On the other side, if games become stale and repetitive, there will eb no one watching and, therefore, no more revenue for prize pools and so on.
The only thing less workers is going to do is make the same thing happen slower. They keep trying to show off how it's different and it's just the same fucking thing but a few minutes behind
Longtime ago I said on reddit that players shouldn't balance the game. It was devs work. And I got bashed with things like "imagine working for free to keep the game running". I guess sc2 gets exactly what it deserves. Devs don't care, and people took over trying to do something for themselves... it is what it is. Don't get me wrong, sc2 still one of the best RTS out there but all this situation is kinda frustrating.
I mean, lowkey the first bit about lack of volatility is my main issue with aoe4 as well. Going into a match, you can be pretty sure you know the winner before the game starts just by looking at names.
I kinda agree. Seeing PuppyPaw beat Wam in every single Mid Week Muster finals on KillerPigeon's channel has not been the most exciting tournament-wise. That being said, there hasn't been a proper tournament with every S-tier pro in a long time.
I was thinking about you watching that video, and I even commented that you'd been saying this for YEARS. I believe you're right that everyone is too balance-obsessed, and that the focus should be on forcing players to develop strategies.
hot damn, lmao lmao, it was VIBE i was watching the 4th time, now I am watching it the 5th freaking time... from reaction video on this hot damn VOD from Artosis salt mine
The fewer people left in that space, the more they will dig in that they are right and everyone else is wrong. But most of us just want the game to be more interesting and less frustrating, not perfectly balanced for a scene that apparently only has "hard working" pros for 2 of the 3 factions, and no 1st party support
Definitely feel like some more RNG and early game shananigans would help the game.I play a base builder called Against the Storm and the RNG really keeps it fresh.
The SOS, parting and BLy etc... they already gone or almost irrelevant at the higher level, I think they realized that their strategic edge was vanishing fast...
What if we bring the campaign units into the game (balancing them) and before the match starts players can choose some campaign upgrades. Like terran can buy some unit updgrades (campaign exclusive) just like in campaing. Zerg choose the strains and mutations and protoss get the factions and maybe a nerfed spear of adun. And they choose this like a league draft so they can prepare counters and strats against any campaign build.
Who would've thought listening to players who literally play the game for a living and actively compete for it would give out the blandest and most boring ass balancing for the casual viewers to look upon. Classic. I appreciate the effort and time put out but the Balance Council is a joke.
Two things that made me stop playing SC2. 1.) Speed at which everything dies. Look away for 10 seconds because you are a little slow at doing things and poof gone. 2.) Army management. You set up your units in a formation and then move them to attack, they decide screw I am going triangles into fucking squares. Sincerely, Townhall Guy
And not only that, but the bases being mined out way too fast. Which means that there is too many things to do all the time, you can't enjoy and put precisions into some moves like you used to. There is no atmosphere anymore. While proxies also become harder to spot since maps are bigger, which was a problem for shield battery voidray builds and such. Here was the problem : too much time between the moment you start building your first supply and the beginning of the game is useless. Alright, then let's remove just that part. Let's just give a starting worker amount that require immediatly to build a supply. Let's start at 9 workers. And, sure, let's reduce the minerals of basis, but not that much.
Just a tought, the Queen is indeed a problem, it's too versatible, I would for one, make it only good anti-air. Nerf ground attack by 20-30% and revert the spore changes, keeping the spine reduction... Also good point beasty, the go out on the map and randomly generated stuff makes it very interesting for RTS.
Solution? A mechanical skill ceiling that it's impossible to even get barely close to it for a human which means that the very best player will always still making mistakes and have bad games and in the same time the game balance would be much much easier in this case because the human factor matters a lot more than the played race
I am a SC2 player, so, it does help, when Beasty explains how something in AoE4 works, because, I almost don't follow AoE4. Yep, completely different games, SC2 needs drastic changes, but could be too late now.
The solution could be ... to have structure-wise always the same map. to have maps that are well-known from the beginning of each matchup so you just have to scout your opponent's units and structures and not the map or where your opponent is or will expand. to have only hand-crafted maps. to have an indestructible wall around every base with just a few small entries. to have an ecosystem that allows you to build almost every unit, structure and upgrade with the same resource types, so players just need more resources and the type of resource doesn't matter. to have units with low HP and doing terrible terrible damage. to have a fast movement speed so players can't be too effective with micro. I think more of it can help. I almost have forgotten the most important thing. It is really important that StarCraft 2 will stay as it is. Because things that work well in other RTS don't belong to a Blizzard RTS. Blizzard RTS shouldn't evolve, because it makes Blizzard RTS worse. Blizzard RTS has to be Blizzard RTS, it doesn't matter if it is a bad or good thing from a Blizzard RTS. And we all know there are no bad things in Blizzard RTS. They are perfect. They are the biggest E-Sport games.
For me the worts thing in SC2 is that, nearly every unit moves the same way, they have different move speed but thats not a big deal, what i mean is, they all micro the same way. Also, the way they handled the gas made so the avaiablity of a lot of unit became kinda... whatever, they give way too much for only 2 bases, so now having 6 siege tanks early is not a big deal while in BW having ONE was massive. Stealth units and detection ? whatever
unbelievable? you are using a battlecruiser supposedly half a kilometer in size or so which performs no better than some gunship and can be destroyed by grunt soldiers on drugs ... sc1 units were already unbelievable in that regard
I had the feeling that SC2 is not a strategy but a Korean Simulator back in HotS. back there we had mech but we had SH so i dropped out. In LoV its even worse in terms of mechanics and i felt like all build orders are same (like reaper-cc-3 rax - 3rd cc + 2 rax vs reaper-cc into 5 rax and then 3rd base, wow)
Being able to win every match is pointless if you aren't playing any matches, because there aren't any matches, because the sponsors dried up, because the viewers left, because the game became boring. Pros need to realize that their profession is entertainment.
Many things wrong with SC2 and Artosis gets most of them right. Game has been super bland for years and even more lately. i only check in every once in a while but it's not fun to watch.
2-3 years ago I stopped watching SC2 I basically watch the homestorry cup and thats it (because of vibes and fun). And I got back to SC1 pro scene, so much more thrilling and fun...same with playing it when I play sc1 my nerves are all up, with sc2 its like simulator, I dont care what outcome is.
Want to add strategy and volatility back into the game. Remove how much damage thors do to air, muta will make a return adding options for Zerg, Voidray will also be useful Vs Terran again. Thats just one way to do it. Zerg recently got nerfed, our builds are limited to around 2-3 in Masters and above.
optimization and RNG are opposite ends of the spectrum. SC2 is an optimization game, and SCBW is RNG based. pathing is one issue. works too efficiently in sc2. in scbw, some units go backwards.
I have to disagree with the "older game" part. I think its because bw has 4 player maps with random maps spawns and 3 player maps as well. As well as different terrain (like a map where your main is low ground and your expansion is high ground). The different random spawn points created completely different type of games. SC2 being only two player maps its far too predictable. Also going past the early game in 3 minutes doesn't help.
Artosis/Beasty 2v2 when? As a huge SC2 fan and current player, I really miss all the fun crazy stuff. The nerfs to splash and warps-ins and things have made the game into "who has the best A-move" and micro. Strategy matters much less. Zealots and stalkers always lose to Marine/Marauder or Ling/Bane, Protoss needs shenanigans. Not only did it used to be more fun to watch, but the only way we ever get a Protoss champ again is if they get some of their crazy tools back.
IMHO - Theres like 3 actual A move units in the game(Ultras, BC and Carriers), rest needs killar micro to truly come to light. Ok. Zealots n banelings are also A move. But you need to be on top with stuttersteps, storms, snipes and what have we. I feel like the game is the least "a-move-ee" as it has ever been
A game should never be balanced around the pros, they are 0.00001% of the player base. The game should be balanced around the other 99.99999% of gamers who just want to have fun playing and watch some interesting games. If there is a strong player base then the pro scene will be strong by default. For example, id say Clem is the best player in the world right now. He does the same build every game (hellion, banshee into bio tank/mine) and has done for the past 10 years or something. We know exactly what he is going to do but its almost impossible to punish. Dark can sometimes catch him offguard with runbys or weird roach timings but toss has literally nothing that can surprise him. PvT used to be my favourite matchup to watch, now I cant stand it. If the pax cant win with 4gate blink its GG. So boring. The issue with using maps to make things more interesting in sc2 is that weird maps invariably favour terran. With flying buildings, reapers, tanks, medivacs and libs they have the best tools to exploit map features and odities. Remember island bases.😂 Can anyone tell me the features of a Protoss favoured map?? Currently a toss favoured map is one that doesnt favour the other 2 races😂. Toss race has no defining characteristics to take advantage of map design in a way the other races cant. We need to scrap the balance council and replace it with a fun council, with players like beasty, thermy and pig making decisions to breathe life back into the game. The quest for finer and finer balance is sucking the soul out of SC2.
They should also add, that pro players can only be random in money tournaments. Or they need to choose a race for each game, and mirror races, only last deciding map, you can choose your favorite race. Why should a player be good only with one race, he is good only with 1/3 of the game...
They patched the game to death.. made it hella boring... then put boring ass mirrored maps..... THEN the 12 workers... I loved sc2.. but they butchered it. Its become a 1000% mechanic game with next to no strategy... pretty SAD for a rts.
And that is why SC3 is necessary. Simply take the strengths of SC1 and SC2 and discard the weaknesses of both games and you get a better RTS for both casual and hardcore players. SC1 is a cult classic, but the gameplay has gotten stale and certain aspects like the AI and pathfinding didn't age very well. SC2 may have major improvements, but the balance is out of whack. This is why SC3 is necessary to shake things up. Unfortunately, with the current trends in video games leaning more on convenience, RTS games are left out in the dark, just like Detroit.
Dude honestly SC2 sucks ballz now. It was good when there was 6 workers and 4 player maps but now it's just so lame. Totally unbalanced at high level and reverse unbalanced at low level. Everything is figured out. That's why the best are going back to Broodwar like Rain and Soulkey Jaedong etc. Broodwar will live forever as the main RTS but SC2 is now dead. It's not fun to watch of play.
i try to 1v1 as a newer player and its honestly pretty bad. almost no reason to continue playing. maps feel like they're built for 10 players. when EVERY SINGLE PLAYER is just protoss with the same build, maybe its time to balance a bit?
![NISAMANEE - TADA (ท้าดา) [ OFFICIAL MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/hcQHEPMmJpU/mqdefault.jpg)
New Beasty Starcraft video woooohoooo!
It's interesting cuz when I talk to sc2 people randomness kinda broke their brain. Every map needs to have the same layout, same mineral arrangement, same 2- 3 wall-able routes to your base. There is absolutely no RNG allowed, damage always the same, abilities always the same. Everyone just wants the exact build order precisely to seconds. I just feel like it sucks the excitement out of everything
RNG can spiral into RNG on RNG on top of some RNG..
Thats not a good thing for what shoulda been a skillbased game.
@ why not? Your skill will still matter 99% of the time, and part of your skill should be adapted to situations
Beasty kind of touched on it. Current players of sc2 want it to be the "unexciting" form that it is now and that's what they have. It's everyone outside that is saying that sc2 is boring
@@martinwinther6013 Randomness is never truly random in these games. For instance in AoE4, the map generation will always produce the necessary resources near your base, and it will mirror the map for the most part so that both players have broadly similar spatial advantages. There can be bad outcomes, like one player having gold that faces towards the other player, while their opponent has gold behind them, but you can tweak the generation to try to fix that.
But the variation that exists means players have to scout and think about how to deal with the map as it generates each time. Games are rarely decided based on map generation, almost never in practice, but being good at thinking in the moment and planning out how to deal with the map you're on is part of the skillset.
Even, and i am not in favour of this, but even random damage within a range statistically evens out. Like total war, for instance, has dice rolls in combination with unit stats, and it's rarely going to be the case that RNG changes the outcome of a game, because the number of dice rolls is huge, but it can lead to variations that require adaptation.
@@martinwinther6013 wrong, even real life sports has RNG. RNG makes games fun to watch. If you think Poker has no skill you are brain dead
I only watched this because I saw you were doing something about SC2. :D
I remember just before you quitted SC2, you spoke about balance and the way the intern confuses balance and game design. I believed you were so true: patch after patch, they just reduced every possibilities in the game... to the point you can now play only one build order with tiny variations...
I also remember your idea, in order to keep the game alive, that they should put a "brawl mode", with some unit's changes every week. I cant state how exciting I would be if this was actually a thing. Having to play with slightly different things every week, some imba, some not imba... it would make the game way more interresting and so fun!
I've seen this problem happen on many games: devs listen too much to pro players, or even just the community, hardcore players, whatever, and the problem isn't listening to them, the problem is pandering to demands and complaints that essentially boil down to "make their life easier" and remove friction. Most of the time, it usually results in devs using sandpaper on everything until it becomes so smooth that nothing stands out anymore. You need to be able to listen to what people like and don't like, and separate what truly makes their life miserable from "things that would make their life easier to achieve their goals".
Devs left the game way back. The tweaks we see now is communitydriven, its done very carefully with only minor adjustments and some of them are rolled back.
Most of the changes are done to please the wide community, but its obvious that certain tweaks can be rolled back or altered based on one or two top-tier players performance.
If a change cause the entire pro-scene to "collapse" then its obviously not good, regardless the majority likes it..
I believe Starcraft's problem is unsolvable because the issue is baked into the fundaments of the game. StarCraft is heavily leaning towards micromanagement of units at the cost of strategy and macromanagement.
It is "naturally selecting" its own playerbase towards "Micromanagement-Savants" (people who are good at this one thing and nothing else). Why would those people want to change the game towards something that does not favour them anymore?
Absolutely, it's structural. Fundamentally "fixing" the issues with sc2 would be equivalent to making a new game, and, there's real promise in the idea of trying to make a starcraft style game with more complex macro, with age game style requirements to go out on the map, but that's a new game, it's not starcraft.
And I think one sad thing with stormgate is they missed the opportunity to really try to evolve the genre based on lessons from all the subgenres, and instead they mainly wanted to recapitulate elements of starcraft (mainly) and warcraft.
True, and false at the same time. You could make the game to be more strategy oriented and it won't matter. Strategy once mastered remains mastered, but APM is not capped. APM will allways be an advantage regardless of strategy.
If you will, compare this to a TBS game. In TBS you cannot increase the number of your turns over your opponent(usually). In SC2 and RTS in general, you effectively can with APM, because with higher APM, you effectively do more than your opponent opponent for free and doing more for free > strategy every time (especially when the strategy is already mastered by both opponents to the most part). Its just reality.
the 12 worker thing is like the stupid AOE4 mode that you already start with a base, it kills the game
Only having two player maps is so stupid
Rng is already pretty bad in sc2 early game (aka it causes autolose if you throw rock and they threw paper). Why increase it for no good reason by giving you a skill-less chance to fail at scouting? In aoe, you start with a scouting unit. In sc2, you give up econ for to scout. To throw in a random chance to fail at scouting after sacrificing that econ is simply bad design.
@@Kowzorz Kinda need fewer starting workers for more spawn locations.
@@neonmarblerust It was still a problem with fewer starting workers on 4p maps. Id argue that its even *more* of a problem with fewer starting workers because sacrificing econ by scouting hits even harder. 1/6++ of your workers is way more % to sac than 1/12++.
@@Kowzorzmore variables lead to less rock paper scissors situation
The big reason 3 and 4 payer maps got removed is that zergs always know where the opponent spawns on these maps. So the gamble was on the opponent finding them, instead of them executing their all-in.
Funnily enough way bigger maps with 6-8 spawns would remove that problem, even though Zerg will always have an advantage
Also, totally ironically, MaxPax has become kinda the king of playing predictably but winning anyways. He broke onto the scene with his crazy build which you popularized, but now he's like top 4 in the world, and he is insanely stubborn with his opening. He just holds damn near everything, because he's simply too skilled to beat.
Reduce starting worker numbers to a random number, same for both, between 8 to 10 workers.
THat would be insane, in a good way.
That's actually really cool and brings out the best of all worlds!
Sounds like a good idea at first but would result in unfair match ups in the long run.
yeah you are right beasty. the people who want sc2 to change largely quit already. feelsbadman
it is more wild that Brood war doesn't have balance patches pretty much!!! LOL
38:30 Exactly YES. People need to keep in mind that when they're listening just to the current community, there's a survivor bias to their opinions and the kind of game that they want.
There were many memorable, dynamic, exciting, action packed games with Mech back then, but ofc over time players who liked that kind of positional methodical style left the game because it wasn't as viable as they wanted. Now mech in TvP for example is more unviable than in HotS, so of course the community currently hates mech and wouldn't support making these other playstyles even just a LITTLE bit viable - it has to nerfed to oblivion.
I would love for a 9 worker start, economically it would be closer to 12 worker start but it would hugely increase the margin of time for the early stages of the game where you're scouting, harassing, strategizing.
For example, with Terran there used to be all kinds of openers and gas timings that had significant advantages/weaknesses:
11 rax 11 gas, 11 rax 13 gas, 12 rax 12 gas, 12 rax 13 gas, 12 rax 15 gas, 12 rax FE double gas, etc. etc.
And then of course there are the wilder rushes where you can build a rax even earlier than that.
You also had to decide whether to build 0-3 marines before building 0-3 reapers, or possibly reaper first then reactor into marines in bunker, etc.
9 worker start would bring back so many more opening variations and gas timings. With 12 workers, you reach max efficiency on minerals (16 workers) so quickly that there is so few variation in gas timing. "Gas first" only lets you build your Factory a few seconds earlier than a normal Rax into Gas.
sOs got pushed out of the game because of these game shifts towards stable, greedy, economical play and mechanics.
Whenever i play ladder now, it just feels like we're rushing to 200/200 supply with every tech + upgrades ASAP. Many games don't feel like putting in effort to gain control of the game, to harass and make plays, etc. is worth it. Just expand faster, tech up faster, get everything faster and then trade with your opponent. Even if one player gets some damage done early, the answer is just to try to greed as fast as possible and faster than your opponent.
Pig did some test games with 9 worker start, in one game it looked still pretty close to LotV economically, just a little slower. And a huge difference was that neither player's army reached max 200 supply until literally 15 minutes into the game!! Often times in LotV pro players reach max about 9-10 minutes in if there weren't any huge trades...
Man, I remember watching 2 pros go mass phoenix vs eachother and the game lasted an hour and a half. Or watching someone actually lose to hallucinations, poor idra. When there were no more shake ups with the play style, the game died. I remember InControl coming up with a new cheese every other week.
"That army..
Was halluc..."
"FUCK U!!!" 😂
I like uthermal sc2 but i prefer beasty sc2 thou.
I hate the take that there should be “Upset potential” this is stupid what great sport has this? Soccer, basketball no no. It elevates the competition one team or player being undefeatable.
No one complained when Mike Tyson was winning every match, everyone couldnt wait to see him destroy the competition.
If anything with new A.I systems make maps randomised, different minerals per patch, more gas or less gas, start with a random number of workers 5-12, maps larger smaller, different choke points exposed main vs unexposed main. Perhaps this isnt 100% a solve but it is int the right direction.
Players can even have 5 mins or a day to study the map before its released. Perhaps they can choose where their main is on a mirrored map.
Don’t take skill away from the players, if they can win don’t take it away.
Plus that chargelot all in was terribly executed.
But the moment you make scouting absolutely necessary, (even where their main is located, how many minerals theyre utilising etc) thats the moment strategy is elevated. Rather than micromanaging savants.
Proplayers want predictability, since their revenue depend on them winning, if matchups are unpredictable, and if there are too much randomness, they may feel like they can no longer make it their jobs and quit. On the other side, if games become stale and repetitive, there will eb no one watching and, therefore, no more revenue for prize pools and so on.
The only thing less workers is going to do is make the same thing happen slower. They keep trying to show off how it's different and it's just the same fucking thing but a few minutes behind
Back then I mentioned it could use a little bit of RNG, not a lot just a little bit. I got sht on so hard.
Longtime ago I said on reddit that players shouldn't balance the game. It was devs work. And I got bashed with things like "imagine working for free to keep the game running". I guess sc2 gets exactly what it deserves. Devs don't care, and people took over trying to do something for themselves... it is what it is.
Don't get me wrong, sc2 still one of the best RTS out there but all this situation is kinda frustrating.
I still remember when they added tankivac, it was imba but it was so fun to watch and felt like a really fresh breeze.
The idea with seasons sounds amazing. Definitely a lot of work for the dev side, but it would keep it fresh and everyone watching engaged, for sure.
I wish i had a time machine to send this video to Artosis in 2012.
I mean, lowkey the first bit about lack of volatility is my main issue with aoe4 as well. Going into a match, you can be pretty sure you know the winner before the game starts just by looking at names.
I kinda agree. Seeing PuppyPaw beat Wam in every single Mid Week Muster finals on KillerPigeon's channel has not been the most exciting tournament-wise. That being said, there hasn't been a proper tournament with every S-tier pro in a long time.
I was thinking about you watching that video, and I even commented that you'd been saying this for YEARS. I believe you're right that everyone is too balance-obsessed, and that the focus should be on forcing players to develop strategies.
Add Sub Factions problem solve. :p
hot damn, lmao lmao, it was VIBE i was watching the 4th time, now I am watching it the 5th freaking time... from reaction video on this hot damn VOD from Artosis salt mine
The fewer people left in that space, the more they will dig in that they are right and everyone else is wrong. But most of us just want the game to be more interesting and less frustrating, not perfectly balanced for a scene that apparently only has "hard working" pros for 2 of the 3 factions, and no 1st party support
I have been blessed with the algorithm gods
IMO Starcraft 2's only hope is to be separated from Blizzard, which obviously will not happen.
Blizzard wont do such things.
Definitely feel like some more RNG and early game shananigans would help the game.I play a base builder called Against the Storm and the RNG really keeps it fresh.
The SOS, parting and BLy etc... they already gone or almost irrelevant at the higher level, I think they realized that their strategic edge was vanishing fast...
What if we bring the campaign units into the game (balancing them) and before the match starts players can choose some campaign upgrades. Like terran can buy some unit updgrades (campaign exclusive) just like in campaing. Zerg choose the strains and mutations and protoss get the factions and maybe a nerfed spear of adun. And they choose this like a league draft so they can prepare counters and strats against any campaign build.
Who would've thought listening to players who literally play the game for a living and actively compete for it would give out the blandest and most boring ass balancing for the casual viewers to look upon.
Classic. I appreciate the effort and time put out but the Balance Council is a joke.
Edgy comment considering most of the talking points here was all blizzards doing.
@@mkadventures2313 Ok nerd
29:28 That would be so much fun. Best idea ever!!!!
Two things that made me stop playing SC2.
1.) Speed at which everything dies. Look away for 10 seconds because you are a little slow at doing things and poof gone.
2.) Army management. You set up your units in a formation and then move them to attack, they decide screw I am going triangles into fucking squares.
Sincerely,
Townhall Guy
And not only that, but the bases being mined out way too fast. Which means that there is too many things to do all the time, you can't enjoy and put precisions into some moves like you used to. There is no atmosphere anymore. While proxies also become harder to spot since maps are bigger, which was a problem for shield battery voidray builds and such.
Here was the problem : too much time between the moment you start building your first supply and the beginning of the game is useless. Alright, then let's remove just that part. Let's just give a starting worker amount that require immediatly to build a supply. Let's start at 9 workers. And, sure, let's reduce the minerals of basis, but not that much.
Just a tought, the Queen is indeed a problem, it's too versatible, I would for one, make it only good anti-air. Nerf ground attack by 20-30% and revert the spore changes, keeping the spine reduction... Also good point beasty, the go out on the map and randomly generated stuff makes it very interesting for RTS.
Solution? A mechanical skill ceiling that it's impossible to even get barely close to it for a human which means that the very best player will always still making mistakes and have bad games and in the same time the game balance would be much much easier in this case because the human factor matters a lot more than the played race
bring back 4 players map.
6/8 workers.
vortex and seeker missile.
remove oracles, disruptors, cyclones, widow mines, swarmhosts, nerf queens
I am a SC2 player, so, it does help, when Beasty explains how something in AoE4 works, because, I almost don't follow AoE4. Yep, completely different games, SC2 needs drastic changes, but could be too late now.
The solution could be ...
to have structure-wise always the same map.
to have maps that are well-known from the beginning of each matchup so you just have to scout your opponent's units and structures and not the map or where your opponent is or will expand.
to have only hand-crafted maps.
to have an indestructible wall around every base with just a few small entries.
to have an ecosystem that allows you to build almost every unit, structure and upgrade with the same resource types, so players just need more resources and the type of resource doesn't matter.
to have units with low HP and doing terrible terrible damage.
to have a fast movement speed so players can't be too effective with micro.
I think more of it can help.
I almost have forgotten the most important thing. It is really important that StarCraft 2 will stay as it is. Because things that work well in other RTS don't belong to a Blizzard RTS. Blizzard RTS shouldn't evolve, because it makes Blizzard RTS worse. Blizzard RTS has to be Blizzard RTS, it doesn't matter if it is a bad or good thing from a Blizzard RTS. And we all know there are no bad things in Blizzard RTS. They are perfect. They are the biggest E-Sport games.
For me the worts thing in SC2 is that, nearly every unit moves the same way, they have different move speed but thats not a big deal, what i mean is, they all micro the same way.
Also, the way they handled the gas made so the avaiablity of a lot of unit became kinda... whatever, they give way too much for only 2 bases, so now having 6 siege tanks early is not a big deal while in BW having ONE was massive. Stealth units and detection ? whatever
In other words, Red Bull WOLOLO were GOATED for making all the pros mad?
Beasty OMG bro. couch that guys a litle :D
zerg being completely insanely broken OP for over 10 year is also not helping
what if they randomize the number of workers
Sc2 needs to be remade because it’s full of dumb overspecialized units that make it look like amateur hour compared to brood war
wood luv 2 c some beasty and Serral 2v2
I still play SC1 on my own occasionally, but never got into SC2 as the units just got too silly and unbelievable. AoE4 all the way
unbelievable? you are using a battlecruiser supposedly half a kilometer in size or so which performs no better than some gunship and can be destroyed by grunt soldiers on drugs ... sc1 units were already unbelievable in that regard
I had the feeling that SC2 is not a strategy but a Korean Simulator back in HotS. back there we had mech but we had SH so i dropped out. In LoV its even worse in terms of mechanics and i felt like all build orders are same (like reaper-cc-3 rax - 3rd cc + 2 rax vs reaper-cc into 5 rax and then 3rd base, wow)
Being able to win every match is pointless if you aren't playing any matches, because there aren't any matches, because the sponsors dried up, because the viewers left, because the game became boring.
Pros need to realize that their profession is entertainment.
Many things wrong with SC2 and Artosis gets most of them right. Game has been super bland for years and even more lately. i only check in every once in a while but it's not fun to watch.
Two people who haven't played SC2 in 10 years discuss a dead game
2-3 years ago I stopped watching SC2 I basically watch the homestorry cup and thats it (because of vibes and fun). And I got back to SC1 pro scene, so much more thrilling and fun...same with playing it when I play sc1 my nerves are all up, with sc2 its like simulator, I dont care what outcome is.
8:50 and then there was abbassid
Want to add strategy and volatility back into the game.
Remove how much damage thors do to air, muta will make a return adding options for Zerg, Voidray will also be useful Vs Terran again.
Thats just one way to do it.
Zerg recently got nerfed, our builds are limited to around 2-3 in Masters and above.
Zergs don't have builds lets be real, they just do what they want when they want.
@@JohnMelon-qg9tj I wish - do that and you'll get destroyed.
optimization and RNG are opposite ends of the spectrum.
SC2 is an optimization game, and SCBW is RNG based.
pathing is one issue. works too efficiently in sc2. in scbw, some units go backwards.
Balance Clowncil
Gottem
I have to disagree with the "older game" part. I think its because bw has 4 player maps with random maps spawns and 3 player maps as well. As well as different terrain (like a map where your main is low ground and your expansion is high ground). The different random spawn points created completely different type of games. SC2 being only two player maps its far too predictable. Also going past the early game in 3 minutes doesn't help.
Artosis/Beasty 2v2 when? As a huge SC2 fan and current player, I really miss all the fun crazy stuff. The nerfs to splash and warps-ins and things have made the game into "who has the best A-move" and micro. Strategy matters much less. Zealots and stalkers always lose to Marine/Marauder or Ling/Bane, Protoss needs shenanigans. Not only did it used to be more fun to watch, but the only way we ever get a Protoss champ again is if they get some of their crazy tools back.
IMHO - Theres like 3 actual A move units in the game(Ultras, BC and Carriers), rest needs killar micro to truly come to light. Ok. Zealots n banelings are also A move. But you need to be on top with stuttersteps, storms, snipes and what have we.
I feel like the game is the least "a-move-ee" as it has ever been
A beasty/uThermal 2v2 team up would be my pick. The old beasty/maxpax 2v2s were so great.
A game should never be balanced around the pros, they are 0.00001% of the player base. The game should be balanced around the other 99.99999% of gamers who just want to have fun playing and watch some interesting games. If there is a strong player base then the pro scene will be strong by default.
For example, id say Clem is the best player in the world right now. He does the same build every game (hellion, banshee into bio tank/mine) and has done for the past 10 years or something. We know exactly what he is going to do but its almost impossible to punish. Dark can sometimes catch him offguard with runbys or weird roach timings but toss has literally nothing that can surprise him. PvT used to be my favourite matchup to watch, now I cant stand it. If the pax cant win with 4gate blink its GG. So boring.
The issue with using maps to make things more interesting in sc2 is that weird maps invariably favour terran. With flying buildings, reapers, tanks, medivacs and libs they have the best tools to exploit map features and odities. Remember island bases.😂
Can anyone tell me the features of a Protoss favoured map?? Currently a toss favoured map is one that doesnt favour the other 2 races😂. Toss race has no defining characteristics to take advantage of map design in a way the other races cant.
We need to scrap the balance council and replace it with a fun council, with players like beasty, thermy and pig making decisions to breathe life back into the game. The quest for finer and finer balance is sucking the soul out of SC2.
Give aoe4 5-7 years and you'd be complaining why aoe4 is about mechanics and not strategy anymore
Who's the guest?
NoRegret zerg pro
They should also add, that pro players can only be random in money tournaments. Or they need to choose a race for each game, and mirror races, only last deciding map, you can choose your favorite race. Why should a player be good only with one race, he is good only with 1/3 of the game...
They patched the game to death.. made it hella boring... then put boring ass mirrored maps..... THEN the 12 workers... I loved sc2.. but they butchered it. Its become a 1000% mechanic game with next to no strategy... pretty SAD for a rts.
Spells are not as "OP" and game changer as sc1
StarCraft 2 has been cooked for years.
Nobody understands cooked.
@ huh?
SC2 has become a pile of pure survivorship bias and no willingness for creativity or drastic changes that would actually be fun.
And that is why SC3 is necessary. Simply take the strengths of SC1 and SC2 and discard the weaknesses of both games and you get a better RTS for both casual and hardcore players.
SC1 is a cult classic, but the gameplay has gotten stale and certain aspects like the AI and pathfinding didn't age very well. SC2 may have major improvements, but the balance is out of whack.
This is why SC3 is necessary to shake things up. Unfortunately, with the current trends in video games leaning more on convenience, RTS games are left out in the dark, just like Detroit.
SC2 has an even bigger problem. The balance of the game is terrible. Zerg is too strong. Its boring.
Dude honestly SC2 sucks ballz now. It was good when there was 6 workers and 4 player maps but now it's just so lame. Totally unbalanced at high level and reverse unbalanced at low level. Everything is figured out. That's why the best are going back to Broodwar like Rain and Soulkey Jaedong etc. Broodwar will live forever as the main RTS but SC2 is now dead. It's not fun to watch of play.
i try to 1v1 as a newer player and its honestly pretty bad. almost no reason to continue playing. maps feel like they're built for 10 players. when EVERY SINGLE PLAYER is just protoss with the same build, maybe its time to balance a bit?
first
firstwo
@@martinprince8253 I was firster