WC3 Developers Take Over(Terran Balancing Issues)

We all know that for the most part, the Starcraft 2 development team is entirely different than the original development team. Blizzard has had enormous success in their Warcraft world, and have consequently carried a number of developers over from the Warcraft series to fill the ranks of the Starcraft development team. But at what cost?

Recently we've seen a number of changes within the Terran race and a lot of them have been heavily scrutinized by members of this forum because of the effects they will have on Terran gameplay and strategic options. Such changes include the movement of the Viking from the Factory to the Starport and the recent changes made to the Firebat.

However, another issue that has been highlighted in a number of discussions between Ych9 and I, there have been changes in the very basic elements on gameplay in Starcraft 2. Remember in SC1 when you looked back and forth from your puny two Marines to the enemy Zealots in fear? That fear has been drastically reduced in SC2. The Marine is still of its original caliber, but just about every other aspect of Terran infantry has been buffed while the Protoss units have remained at about the same strength as they previously had.

Here's some alarming comparisons that may set off some warning bells in your head:

Terran Seige Tank = 200 HP (200 minerals/150 gas) <---------------> Protoss Immortal 280 HP

Terran Ghost = 100 HP (100 minerals/100 gas) <-------------------> Protoss Zealot (100 minerals) 100 HP

These are only rough estimates of the units, of course, and are based on what we've been told by Blizzard. There are other units that we're still unsure of, but Ych9 and I have noticed an alarming trend in the development of the balancing traits.

The Terran are being buffed by a large margin while the Protoss have stayed at relatively the same statistics.

In SC1 there was a (general) ratio of about 3:1 for the strength of a Protoss unit. In one on one combat, statistics-wise, a Protoss unit was worth about the same as 3 Terran units. This doesn't take into account ranged attacks, etc.

This distance has been severely diminished by the new balancing changes being implemented by Blizzard.

Are Ych9 and I the only ones concerned that the members of the WC3 development team are trying to make the Starcraft races into 3 synonymous races just like in WC3?

 

I wouldn't worry about the development team too much. I'm pretty sure they'll keep the original "flavor" and "style" of the original Starcraft. After all, Starcraft was a much larger success than Warcraft. Anyways, the developing team's not the only people who'll be making the balance changes. They're going to get a lot of advice from those professionals over in Korea and elsewhere and possibly from the original developers, to make sure it's what they intended. Then there's also the beta, where people who've played Starcraft for half their lives can submit their own advice for the game.

 

You have a really good point there Joneagle_X. If these changes are going to continue to happen at this rate, we will soon have races that only have a real difference graphics wise. Starcraft isn't balanced anymore as it used to be, with balanced out units because of their specific abilities, costs and tier levels. I liked this in Starcraft 1, and one of the main reasons people like me prefer Starcraft over Warcraft is the way of balancing things.

I really hope the Protoss will get even more powerful then they were before, and they probably will be anyway with units like the Colossus, (144 damage per shot) but adding a few "super strong" units is bad way of balancing the strength between armies. We don't know a lot about the Zerg yet, but I don't think they will be affected as much as Terran and Protoss, since they rely heavily on massing massive numbers of units and rushing tactics. I don't think that anyone at Blizzard will change the stats of a Zergling in a way so that they will be able to take on a Marine or Zealot one on one.

About the changes in tactics: I don't think we really have to worry to much about that, not yet in any case. Warcraft heavily relies on the complex system of aura abilities, spells etc. and then I have not even mentioned the items some units could carry. Of course I'm referring to heroes, another aspect Starcraft will probably never have in its gameplay. In Starcraft there isn't even a fraction of the amount of abilities used in Warcraft. I doubt Blizzard will let the Warcraft team members to implement so many abilities into Starcraft.

But the building of Vikings at Starports and things like that can still be changed while the game is being developed. I doubt that Blizzard won't listen to the community if most people complain about changes like this.

That's all I have to say for now, I really hope more people will react to this topic, because it's one of the most important issues there is at the moment.
:gossip:

 

I have a sharp gut feeling that the Terran and Protoss are being balanced the way they are because the Zerg have not been worked over enough to be balance tested yet. Thus, the Terran and Protoss are getting a buffing/alarming position that they are in the "Grey" areas for their balance together. I could bet money that units will be changed and converted into balanced races once the Zerg is officially released. I just feel that we have jumped the gun on this one and have tried to establish a link of synonymous gameplay when we actually do not know for sure what is happening.

Also, Something to remember is that the Terran Marines and the Protoss Zealots are not direct opposites, but also remember this. The Terran Marine is the only ranged unit that was 50 Minerals in the original. In SC2 I can imagine that they will cost the same, but be de-buffed a bit. I think they will balance the Marine more with the Zealot and subsequent Zergling as the game gets even further into development. Remember nothing is permanent (this includes the Marine).

Summary: Don't worry Terran will not = Protoss. Zerg-> <-Terran-> <-Protoss Terran get the best of both worlds... only not being the best.

Protoss: High Powered Units, Strategic Value, Hp is relatively high.

Terran: Medium -> High Powered Units, Very Strategic, Hp is relatively Medium -> High.

Zerg: Low -> Medium Power Units, Very Strategic, Swarming, Hp is relatively Medium -> High

 

Well obviously changes can be reversed at any time. That's not the point of this discussion.

What worries me is simply that they have buffed a few units instead of remaining with the same HP system, and there must be a reason.

If you think about it, in order to keep the same HP ratio, the Protoss units would now have to have insane HP values to counter the new Terran increases.

The Seige tank has gained 50 HP in the current build while the Zealot has lost 60. How could that not set off alarm bells in your head? The Ghost is now at 100 HP in addition to its new abilities which basically make it the Terran infantry from hell, despite their relatively costliness.

If you think about it, a Ghost is only marginally more expensive than the Zealot (due to 100 gas) and has the same HP, but also comes with a crapload of abilities, not to mention the fact that it's a ranged unit. In its current state, the Ghost will absolutely rape the Zealot because of its relatively low cost and abilities. And that's without even mentioning the use of EMP, just snipe.

Then you look at the stalker, whose health is now significantly lower than that of the Seige Tank. In SC1 the Dragoon and Seige Tank could be compared as relative equals with the Seige Tank having the edge because of its powerful ranged attack. But now with the Seige Tank's hugely buffed range and HP the Stalker's only hope will be to blink into range.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not ignoring the Immortal's vast potential to completely invalidate the Seige Tank's attack, but that's not the point. Even when outgunned, the Protoss usually have the ability to take an opponent down simply because they can absorb so much of the damage. Every unit they have is a "tank."

The only thing I worry about is that in order to make balancing issues easier it seems to me that the Dev team is taking shortcuts by buffing the Terran instead of giving them more strategic mechanics like they had in SC1. It makes sense, make the races more equal and its easier to balance.

But that is NOT the point of Starcraft!

All of these issues are fixable, but they have just set off warning bells in my head that this could be a sign of bad things. And of course the Zerg have an effect, and this issue probably is a result of balancing just two races, but even when you have only two, you should still be properly balancing them.

EDIT: Also, don't forget that the new bonus damage system is born completely from Warcraft. While it may be cool, it's only one more indicator of a shortcut taken by the Dev team.

 

ghost has 100hp currently, zealot has 160, and it costs only 100 minerals, 100 gas for the ghost makes it a very expensive combat unit that cant really be massed.

The tank used to have 150, now it may have 200, but the immortal has 140 shield and like 240hp, which makes a grand total of 380, thats almost double.

The colossus has nearly 600 hp.

Protoss still has a lot more hp than terran

 

Joneagle_X dont get my rong but starcraft1 is starcraft1 and starcraft 2 is 2
The terran was a challenging race because PRO's, but if 2 noob played in sc1 the protoos will allways win
I dont want to offend you but i am glad that terran is buffed
peace

 

omg, it is protosscommander with his peace, quickly arm the cannons


i think the terrans should become the multipurpose per unit race

 

U guys are talking about balance when in this issue we have not right to speak about! We (STILL !!) have not seen the zerg! How the heck and u even speak of balance and u guys have not even seen all that there is too the game. While blizzard shows us what they want to, we only see 2 versions so far, but there still making a 3 sided game. We have not seen how zerg effect the balancing scale so on this behalf this is a overall bad topic. Until we see how the zerg really do play out in SC2 i don't think we should judge the WC3 developers abilities just yet after wall they would not have a job there if they didn't know what they were doing...

 

as they said not every thing is set unto stone if when they release the zerg theres a balancing issue that needs to be changed they will change it

 

If Blizzard is including a feature that they used in WC3, it is because they felt that the feature was effective, and will be effective in SC2. Consider that StarCraft adopted many features from WC2, its predecessor. Consider that WC3 has adopted many features absent in WC2, that came into existence in StarCraft. I am shocked that you would note a WC3-originated feature and then come to conclude that it is being used because the developers are too lazy to think of anything better. The current damage bonus system is much more straightforward than the one used in the original game. Would you have them revert to the old one just for the sake of not being like WC3?

Maybe you're under the impression that mechanics from the previous are all a development studio can think of when they make a new game? Super Mario Galaxy was released recently. Here's an interesting fact: the game that the Nintendo studio shipped before starting Super Mario Galaxy? Donkey Kong Jungle Beat. Yes, a rhythm game. Right before starting on a spotlight, ultra-franchise like Mario. Good game developers simply have no problem forgetting old game mechanics when they have to. In the case of SC2, they don't have to, but don't think that they couldn't. There are piles of very powerful game mechanics for them to work with.

What you're saying is, you are afraid of SC2 becoming WC3 in Space. I can draw an interesting parallel to views expressed in the development of the original StarCraft. I can also point out that, while those views were well-founded, the foreseen problem never happened. In this situation, the game is already so strikingly different from the game it is being compared to, being designed with not being like WC3 kept in mind at all times. I can't even grant that worrying SC2 will be anything like WC3 can be justified. I simply believe that you are strongly mistaken.

Now, you bring up something as frivolous as HP ratios between random units of different races. You note that the Stalker has less HP than the new Siege Tank, and, in direct combat, would die a terrible, painful death. Is it wrong for the unit that requires more of an investment to build and safely deploy to have a better chance in battle? Would you really have the Stalker have the same HP as the Siege tank, just because it is a half-role descendant of the Dragoon? As I recall, Dragoons didn't do too well against Siege Tanks either, and I'd say that the Stalker is much more dangerous to a Siege Tank, even with less relative health, just because of its ability to jump into the tank's minimum firing range after perhaps one hit.

You also note that Terran units are getting more HP, being more able to take damage, while Protoss aren't. This statement is absolutely false. While some Terran units are stronger, while some strong Terran units are being introduced, their relative strength is not rising faster that that of the Protoss. Remember that the Protoss are gaining many abilities that increase their health, albeit in indirect ways that you have not been considering. Consider the faster recovery rate. If the units are managed correctly, a unit's battle lifespan can be doubled or more just by pulling them out to let their shields recharge. Consider the Zealot's Charge. In a battle, a Zealot and all units around it will take much less damage just for the fact that hostile units will die faster. There is more than one way to live longer: being able to take more hits, and being able to prevent the hits from being dealt.

If you look at the new Protoss, you'll see that they are very, very different from the old. These differences are not
the result of the developers looking to WC3 for answers. They are the result of the redefinition of the race. The Protoss are changing, it's actually part of the story. They can't afford to go all Rambo in every battle, so you'll be seeing it reflected in the units. They are trading in possible bonuses in raw stats for bonuses in flexibility. The reason you aren't seeing so much for the Terrans is that they were the ones, in the original game, that already had insane flexibility. Of course, flexibility is being added, they're not even making a tradeoff, like the Protoss, but they're being strengthened to support more "frontal assault" roles to undo their previous need to slowly push into the enemy.

Oh, and here's one that gets me. I'm not trying to justify any argument here, but you say "WC3 Development team" as if they're strangers to the franchise. I ask you, don't you think they had experience developing games before WC3? Don't you think they might have other games other their belt like... I don't know, StarCraft? They are the same people! Well, not the same literal people, across the board, but it is the same culture, with most of the key players still doing this stuff. They're not clueless usurpers as your tone would imply.

At this, I will have to cut this post short (short?!). I apologize for some lack of organization, but I look forward to your responses.

 

When I saw the health for a ghost (100 hp) at its current link in the tech chain (~1.5) and finally its abilities and cost, I almost fell off my chair. I was going to post in the ghost discussion thing, but got lazy.

Let's take a look:

Ghost 100hp 15 dmg range +dmg against light armor (infantry) 35+ damage with snipe Hm.... 100 hp, 45 dmg with snipe, good against light armored units... sounds a tiny bit familiar no?


Then I look at the hp and costs of the protoss opposed to the terran and almost fell off again. Ever notice in the screen shots how the protoss have roughly the SAME number of units as the terrans? What happened to strong protoss units against mediocre terran units against poor zerg units?

I completely agree with this thread and is scared that SC2 will be a protoss unit X=terran unit Y=zerg unit Z, but there are still people from the original starcraft team left and I hope we don't end up with another WC3 but with a starcraft mask. Don't want the SC franchise to turn that direction.

@10 neon
Albeit WC3 had many positive points the archer=grunt=footman=ghoul 'balancing' and the only difference was spells, upgrades, and heroes was a failure in my mind. SC is built on three different races with fundamentally different units and techniques. Having Protoss units with similar health to terran units at the same tech tree with a little difference in ability is not fundamental, that's just putting some make-up on a unit to make it different.

The explanation of the Protoss changing in SC2 so they can not 'go Rambo every fight' is the whole point of this thread I believe, is this change in Protoss necessarily good for SC2? Giving protoss more units, less cost, and distinct abilities rather than giving them more health, more shields, and, getting right down to it, better than a terran unit of around the same caliber. Although that is highly arguable, especially because units of the same caliber are used for different purposes (e.g. DT and Goliath). It's easier to imagine that with the same amount of units disregarding costs and build time, a protoss army would outshine a terran army in raw power. However, with the new screens and info from Blizz is that still true? Four immortals = four siege tanks, whereas 4 reavers > 4 siege tanks but of course reavers and tanks don't cost nearly the same, but immortals and siege tanks do, which is the problem.

@i2new
I see nothing wrong with discussing relative power of two races.

 

You guys serious?

Do you even see what you are comparing?

You're comparing a ghost, tier 1.5-2, that costs 100 gas, with a Tier 1 unit.

A zealot still has 60 more hp than a Ghost.

The siege tank is basically the same.

Things are even more different than they were in SC1, diversity is reaching its limit. Protoss and terran are SO different right now its a joke.

Cant even imagine how different zerg will be from terran and protoss.

 

You're absolutely right!!!!! Blizzard should call the team who worked in SC1 for the development of SC2
SC original was so unique, and DIFERENT from WC, that's why ITS SO GREAT!!!!
Blizzard is turning SC2 into WC, "ARE YOU CRAZY???!!!!"

 

Trust me, I'm not denouncing the SC2 Dev team, but these guys are the WC3 team, and while they've probably worked on other games during their careers, the last 10 have been dominated almost solely by Warcraft III, W3FT, and WoW. These guys are hardcore WCIII men, they don't have the same dedication to the Starcraft project that the original designers had.

What they do have is a sense of its popularity and what the true sense of the game should be. But that won't stop them from putting their own spin on it.

I understand that they've developed a new system of unit attacks and interactions, highlighted by the fact that there are only damage bonuses now, instead of negative damage impacts based on "unit types" like there was in SC1.

Before I go any further, I think I should remind you guys that I have been a huge opponent to the arguments about the way that Blizzard is balancing the game. This is the first time that I have ever expressed any concern about the direction I saw the game going in. The only other time I've been so alarmed was when I heard that the Protoss Mothership was no longer a superunit, and I'm still ticked about that.

What's strange is that I'm being nailed for drawing comparisons to Warcraft III's development and balancing when I was on the polar opposite of the debate when the MS issue arose. I was harshly critical of arguments that compared the Mothership to a WCIII hero. But that's not what this debate is about.

Firstly, let me straighten out a few facts about the current SC2 build:

1. I was incorrect, the Zealot has 160 health, not the 100 that I had stated in my earlier post.

2. The Seige Tank has an HP of 200.

3. The Protoss Immortal has an HP of 280 as of BlizzCon.

These are the current build's attributes. Anyway, as you can see, the Immortal is comparatively weak for a Protoss unit, but it's still a "tank" for all practical purposes. But if you look at the ratios, although that has been declared as taboo in this thread, apparently, they're way off.

For instance, let's break down the Ghost's role. Let's assume that you pay 100 minerals for the unit and then you're paying that additional 100 gas for the abilities. For the 100 minerals, you're getting 100 HP plus a ranged attack that is effective against lightly armored units (the Zealot). So effectively, without abilities, its an effective counter to the Zealot which is a given even without its huge range due to its comparatively high HP. After all, he's not in a bio suit like the Marine, but he's still much stronger. Then you add in that 100 gas, and you suddenly have all of these amazing abilities. Snipe, for one, which does 150 damage that basically means that each Ghost will take down at least one Zealot from range before they can even close the gap. Then you have EMP, which adds another dynamic element in that it can remove 1/3 of any Protoss unit's HP. And finally you have cloaking/nuking/drop pods which just make this unit insane. So the question I'm asking here is... Why in hell does the Ghost need 100 HP? IT DOESN'T

The same can be said for the Tank. 200 HP? WHY?. It doesn't really need it, they just need to nerf the Protoss mechanics a bit, or come up with some more original ways to counter those mechanics, like... I don't know... new mechanics for the Protoss?

Traditionally the Terran race has relied on keeping their enemies at a distance and blasting them. Their units usually pack the most firepower per food, but they also are very weak once the enemy has closed the distance. This is true of the Seige Tank, the Vulture, Marine, etc... So basically, Terran players are dependent on range and not unit strength.

The Protoss, on the other hand, don't usually pack too much of an individual unit punch. But their units survive forever, which is basically the premise of the Immortal. The Zealot is a very durable unit, as is the Dragoon, even in the face of withering tank fire.

So with the fact that the Stalker is a relatively weak unit by Protoss standards, and the fact that the Firebat as well as the Tank and Ghost are being buffed quite heavily, alarm bells are going off for me.

Whether the Zerg have been released or not is irrelevant. Two races should balance just as well and equally as three. After all, we do play 1v1s where not all three races are present, don't we? So technically it's more important that two races be balanced with each other than all three at once.

This is where I think the Dev team may be taking a wrong turn. They've decided to go one step further with the additive damage system and are buffing Terran units to be able to withstand direct one-on-one contact with Protoss units. That's a mistake in its purest form. I think it is incredibly important that the race identities and gameplay styles be preserved at all costs.

The best way to do this is to maintain the Protoss' classic buffered HP and the Terran's weakness at close range.

As a summation of my argument, I view the removal of the Viking to a higher tier (produced at the Starport, which puts it up a bit on the tech tree) and its replacement in the Factory by what can only be called a Mechanical Firebat, is a quick fix offered by the Dev team to the buffing of the Terran faction.

Don't get me wrong, I know why this has occurred. It's because the Protoss are overall very overpowered with their new mechanics and the Terran aren't doing so hot in response. They're still overall a very immobile race compared to the other two and may have needed that HP boost to handle the Protoss Warp-Ins and enhanced expansion abilities. Basically the Viking was meant to almost nullify anything the new Protoss mechanics would be able to do because of their support role and their high mobility. The Reapers were also meant to fill part of this niche. But Blizzard obviously couldn't find a balanced spot on the tech tree for the Viking that would both allow the Terran player to balance the Protoss mechanics without giving them a base raiding weapon too early. Quite a conundrum. But they've come up with an incorrect solution.

But for the sake of not taking up two pages, I just wanted to draw attention to what I think is a fundamental balancing flaw that has arisen because of the addition of the experience from WC3 rather than sticking to the true form of SC1. If the price we pay for having a more simple unit interaction system is weakened race identities, then I vote we go back to the original SC damage types and stick with the original HP ratios rather than inflating them.

 

Jon you make a really good point but the number are a really bad representation of how these units are going to interact. Shit, just take a look at SC1 the reaver only had 140 total hp compared to the tanks 150 and the carrier only had 450 compared to the battlecruisers 500. And the same is true for alot of later game units in the Protoss/Terran tech trees. The only big difference in hp lied in the very early game units and I am going to wager alot that those number havnt changed much. Now while I know its an older source I went and looked back the Protoss gameplay video and I watched 11 zealots rip 20 marines with only 2 zealots dieing and about 4-6 that actually took any real damage. Those lots would have chopped 24-28 marines and still had a half dozen to spare. And im sure no one can forget the huge ling swarm that had to have been over 50 lings and it looked like the 16 lots would have taken em without colossus suppport. (even though more lots would have died) So far the only real Terran unit that seems to break the mold is the ghost and we have to remember that the ghost is suppose to be more physchicly (or howerever you spell it) powerful than zealots and all of that physchic energy is being focussed into physical attributes and the cloak. If anything I would suggest lowering the ghosts hp to 80 to make it more in line but in comparrison to SC1 it doesnt seem like much stat wise has changed.

It is my honest belief that we need to watch/play the game some and see if the Terrans can really go man to man with the Protoss or whether the numbers are lying. Im going to guess the latter until im showed definitive proof of the former.

 

Excellent post Jon.

I would like to make some points clear.

Yes, we all know that SC2 is still in internal alpha stage. That means, those #'s that we are seeing would be changing constantly. Second, Blizzard hasn't been releasing much new info/units that we can talk about lately. It is why Jon and I have been discussing about the issues that arises that we think might pose a problem for SC2. For those that want to read on, bear in mind that everything that I'm about to discuss is subjected to change. I am well aware that SC2 is still in the internal alpha stage and therefore, my discussion and argument would probably prove to be useless. But nevertheless, it is an interesting topic that I would like to talk about and voice my opinion to Blizzard during their balancing stage.

What I liked about SC is that each race were so distinctive. Playing a different race feels like playing a totally new game. It is why that I can't settle for 1 race forever :-\. I'm always switching races back and forth. One of the main characteristic for the Protoss was that all their units were tough but comes at a price. You simply couldn't fight a Protoss toe to toe. Protoss's HP advantage was their, "IDENTITY" and, "THEME" during gameplay in the world of starcraft. But in SC2, they are slowly losing that. Terrans are getting overall HP buffs to their units.

Like Jon mentioned, Ghosts and Siege Tanks comes to mind. Put in the new and improved Firebat (dont' know their exact stat but from the words of Karune, they are looking very beefy if they are coming from the Facts), and the Protoss identity and theme of gameplay has been lost. I'm not saying I dont' like the new Ghosts ability. I'm just saying that at 100 HP, it is too similiar to a Protoss unit bearing the fact that ghosts are tier 1.5 units. Add in the fact that it costs 100minerals/100gas, and we can clearly see similarities compared to the Protoss identity and theme. Not to mention, the Siege tanks have been dramatically boosted in their HP and overall damage but comes with increased cost (Also the exact same Protoss identity and theme).

As for your concern DKutrovsky, yes we are comparing a Tier 1.5-2 Terran's unit HP to a Tier 1 protoss infantry. It doesn't matter if they are in different tier because In Sc1, a Zealot has more HP than all the factory units (which is Tier 2-2.5). Yet Blizzard still managed to balance SC. I would like to see Blizzard balance SC2 without giving the Terrans an overall HP boost. HP advantage is something that the Protoss should have as a race as long as it comes at a price.

My suggestion is that Ghosts and Siege tanks in SC2 should have their HP and cost reduced a bit to keep the race identity more distinctive.

I understand that this is SC2 and not SC1. That means, everything will be different. Race theme and identity could change dramatically. As long as Blizzard makes each race as distinctive as SC1, what's there to complain right? Well, I want SC2 to exceed SC1. The HP/unit cost issue is something that I believe is a very important aspect of the game. It is something that I believe the Protoss should keep as their race theme and identity. Think about it, the Protoss are the most advanced race. Their theme should be that they have the strongest units but comes with a price. With the current buff of the overall HP/cost of Terran units, Protoss are losing that identity. Yes, Sc2 is a new game and Protoss has new mechanics that makes up for it (warp-in). But if Blizzard could differentiate the race even more (which is what Blizzard is intending to do if you read their official site) without sacrificing any of their old theme and identity, SC2 would truly be a better game.

*Edit* A little correction LordKerwyn, Reavers have a total of 180 HP, not 140. But you do bring up a point. The HP advantage for the Protoss in SC exist only for early game. The problem now is that in SC2, that early HP advantage for the Protoss is evaporating.

 

Your right on the numbers (I was thining of the shuttle, speaking of which it has less hp than its terran or zerg counter parts), but my point is still valid. And just because I was curios I averaged the total hp of all the Terran units vs.. all of the Protoss units. and those numbers came out 137 (Terran) vs. 166 (Protoss) thats an averge difference of about 30. That isnt much but the the theme and feel was/is still there. And I think the same can also be said about SC2 the numbers dont show it but I am willing to bet the Protoss still feel really powerful while the Terrans feel adaptable. Also everyone has to remember that numbers are fine tuned last because they are what put the fine tuning on the balance.

I really think until we know more everyone just needs to sit back and give blizzard the benefit of the doupbt because they have built alot of good games (WC3 and WoW included), how many people actually believe blizzard is going to drop the ball on the one people have been waitng a long time for? Im not saying SC2 looks perfect as of now but it looks damn good (while I still have my gripe with the Mothership ) and it would take alot to change that.

 

Right on LordKerwyn :good:

Like I said, everything will be subjected to change since SC2 is still in their internal alpha stage. I think we should all relax and trust Blizzard. One of the reason that both Jon and I posted about this was because simply there really isn't anything to talk about lately. Blizzard needs to start releasing some Zerg info. The forum activity will jump back up immediately.

 

Relax and trust Blizzard? You kidding there right Ych9? Having been through WC3 and WoW since beta days, and all of their crazy balance patches of those games and Diablo 2, I can't say that I am able to share that faith even if I tried. StarCraft is gold, a lot of other stuff out of Blizzard is good, but don't even try to tell me Blizzard gets automatic credit for being the gods of balance just because of one 10 year old game, because they are not.

In my own personal experience, Blizzard is the company that likes to include design flaws in their games, likes to go overboard with item creation, and likes to introduce patches or new mechanics of complete crap just to introduce more patches/mechanics immediately after to balance or counter previously introduced crap. I am loyal to SC and SC only, screw Blizzard, especially anything related to Warcraft, WoW included. Well, maybe not WC1, that was a kickass game.

I understand game companies carrying over gameplay mechanics from one game to the next even though they are not the same franchise or series, that's not completely uncommon or unreasonable especially when it's still the same genre. But you will excuse me for a moment when I quietly step right over here completely behind Jon where we overreact and say that anything WC3 is evil.

The main WC franchise is for the most part, pretty great, but it's one where its games all share a pattern. WC 1 and 2 can be said to be the roots of SC, so one might argue that all Blizzard RTS's are on the same path of evolution. Well, let's see, WC1 started it all and there was a lot of fresh magic, it had 2 races that were the same. WC2 introduced some new things like flying units, has slightly better graphics, but still 2 races that were the same. Then came SC, not just 2, but 3 completely different yet balanced races, oh my, 'nuff said. After a huge success, Blizzard pulled out WC3, more new things like 3D and hero, 4 races, but wait, they're all the same again. WC3 was a huge disappointment for people who really cared about competitive multiplayer aspect of the game.

WC2, two races, same ---> SC, three races, completely different ---> WC3, four races, same. Stay the hell away from WC3, lesson learned. For the first two games of the WC RTS series, it was understandable for the races to be the same because it was early on in the series and there was ground work to be laid. For WC3, there was no excuse, especially after SC right before it already did 3 distinct races. WC3's attack/armor type system was also complete crap IMO. It was needlessly complicated, and only got worse going onto the expansion. I fail to see how memorizing different sets of percentage mod numbers for each damage type that all apply to the various armor types differently is more straightforward than a universal system. If you start a thread on the SC system and one for the WC3 system, and compare the two, you'll see my point.

While I see some people obviously put off by Jon's way of selling his point, from what I can see, Jon is one of the few people on various internet forums who display a good understanding of SC's racial identities. Everwhere you see people saying Protoss has the strongest units but few in number, Terran is in between with medium strength units and moderate in number, and Zerg is the massing race on the other end of the spectrum with the weakest units but greatest in number. People want to believe that SC races are set up like small, medium, large with Terran in the middle on everything. Well, that's crap, utter crap. And that crap about Terran being the most flexible/mobile/adaptive race, that's false too, that's actually Zerg.

Protoss was the weakest race as far as damage output goes. Their high damage numbers per attack cycle are deceiving because there are always other factors such as long cooldown. All Protoss units generally have crap for damage output when you consider damage per cooldown per food. Protoss's only area where it really stands out above the other races is pretty much the durability/resilience of its units, basically high HP/armor. So like Jon and Ych9 says, that needs to be a big and obvious design focus for the race.

Terran on the other hand, was the true glass cannon race. Terran had the best firepower, great damage at range, but Terran units were very fragile. Terran is all about hitting hard and killing them before they can come hurt me, because if they do it's gonna hurt me bad. When everyone gets in everyone else's faces, Terran units are the most fragile and flimsy. That glass cannon mentality is also something that the devs should be consciously trying to emphasize throughout Terran design.

Yes, people can say that things are subject to change, it's still only alpha. They can also say stuff like this ain't SC1. But starting with races that have smaller gaps between them than before and tweak later isn't how you get three extremely different races. It might be easier to balance quickly, but it's not the way to make them more different. At least that makes no sense to me. Starting with very different focuses for each of the three returning races then balancing them is the way to keep them different, especially more different than they were before. Going about designing SC2 randomly on whatever ideas that seem cool without a clear focus and design emphasis, and somehow still expecting the end product to retain the feel and key substances of the original, IMO is a bag full of ass.

Even forgetting about all that stuff for a minute, what the hell is the Terran ghost doing with 100 HP? I don't know about all the crazy unit comparisons Jon or anyone else has been doing, but I for one would prefer to compare it to the Protoss DT. Anyone feel free to step in with the SC2 stats of the current build as I have no clue, but the SC1 DT was 125 mineral 100 gas, 2 food, 1 armor, small(light armor) biological, and it had 80 HP 40 shield for a combined total of 120. The DT and the ghost can both cloak, but for the DT, that's about it. The ghost as I understand, is 100 mineral 100 gas and 100 HP. It could also cloak, attack both ground and air from great range, snipe your ass, EMP, call down the thunder or drop pods. I sure am glad there is that extra 20 HP on the DT's side to balance all that out. Especially when it doesn't have any of those other fancy pants abilities, can't attack air, has an attack range of 1, is higher tech, and carries an extra 25 mineral cost.

And here we have crazy Jon thinking something might be wrong with the picture, silly boy. I see some people basically having a WTF response here, despite various different tones. WTF is right, but it sure ain't aimed at Jon from where I'm sitting.