Interview with SC2 Lead Designer Dustin Browder - Page 14
Forum Index > SC2 General |
Tschis
Brazil1511 Posts
| ||
EchelonTee
United States5180 Posts
On May 01 2011 14:48 youngminii wrote: okay that's it my goal in life is now to work in blizzard and work my way up and eventually get in the same team as dustin browder then i'm going to slap him in a design meeting and make him wake the fuck up I admire your initiative and wish you the best. | ||
maybenexttime
Poland5231 Posts
On May 01 2011 10:39 Paradice wrote: And that's the type of comment you get when someone doesn't know the difference between game design and game balance. Browder's job is to think up and/or choose from a whole lot of cool ideas. His job was essentially done when the game hit retail. David Kim's job is to make those cool ideas fair for everyone. His job is ongoing, that's why you have patches with timings, costs, and numbers being continually adjusted. Asking Dustin Browder to comment on balance is like asking the company chef to comment on the art style. You'll get an interesting answer, but if you read too much into it it's more your failure than theirs. Doesn't change the fact that his answer regarding micro, unit counters and the lack of comebacks in comparison to BW is severely lacking. As a game designer he should be extremely knowledgable when it comes to those gameplay aspects if he wants to design a competitive RTS. ;; | ||
Yoshi Kirishima
United States10145 Posts
Doesn't change the fact that his answer regarding micro, unit counters and the lack of comebacks in comparison to BW is severely lacking. As a game designer he should be extremely knowledgable when it comes to those gameplay aspects if he wants to design a competitive RTS. ;; Can you elaborate? It may also just be the translation; small intricacies in detail and tone and etc. may not have been maintained. To me he gave some of the best examples where units can counter another but where micro plays a huge role. Unless that is not what you mean. Btw, thanks for the interviews! really love blizz interviews haha, want to know more no release for all-stars makes me really sad lol | ||
maybenexttime
Poland5231 Posts
I'll just quote some of my posts from WCReplays. As Slugamoo from TL put it (more or less), SC2 has Marines vs. Banelings, while in BW pretty much all counters work like Marines vs. Banelings in SC2. Save for a couple of exceptions, SC2 is all about making the right mix of rock, paper and scissors to counter your opponent's mix of rock, paper and scissors. Not going to get into any pointless discussion. The fact is that Browder was completely wrong when saying that counters are much harder in BW. In BW you can overcome the vast majority of counters with micro and change the outcome of battles by 180 degrees. In SC2 it's the opposite - in case of most counters micro has little to no effect. In other words, Marines vs. Banelings in SC2 is an anomaly (talking about the current situation), whereas in BW the equivalent is the norm, with but a couple of exceptions. It's irrelevant how you want to label those two types of counter systems. As for SC2 hardcounters, I'd say e.g. Immortals vs. Tanks and Marauders (with stim) vs. Stalker (in practice, because in theory, a single Marine with detection could kill an infinite amount of Lurkers, but that'd be reduction ad absurdum) fit that description. I could find much more of them, but that's really besides the point. What I was getting at is that micro in BW counter system/unit design plays a HUGE role compared to SC2 (and if you think otherwise, I advise watching some more BW), where it, in most cases, merely compliments having the right unit composition. Like I said, Marines vs. Banelings or even Mutas vs. Thors (even though I personally find it laughable to call that "micro") sort of interaction is rare in SC2, while in BW it's the norm. Browder in this interview claimed it's the opposite and he's blatantly wrong. I guess we disagree to what degree micro matters in SC2. I'd say having the right composition in SC2 is ~70% of success, while the remaining ~30% is micro - that's in case of most unit counters. In BW it's the other way around - ~30% of success is having the right units and the rest depends on how well you and your opponent control their respective armies. Also a small clarification. The comparison to AoC was a deliberate exaggeration, same for the rock, paper, scissors analogy. My point was that the main theme behind composing SC2 armies is having a counter to each unit in the opponent's army (I make Tanks, you make Immortals, you make Immortals, I make Marines/Ghosts, and so on). Personally, I believe that SC2 would really benefit from having more unit relationships like the one between Marines and Banelings (as far as I'm concerned, all unit "counters" should work that way). Unfortunately, that's not likely gonna happen since Browder actually believes that's already the case, moreso than in BW. I used to have respect for him, but with every interview with him I read, I realize how much of a ignorant fool he actually is. He claimed to have analyzed BW for over a year, so he has to be pretty dumb to make stupid claims like that. ;/ Case in point, SC2 commentators hardly ever discuss micro in batttles, they strongly emphasize the unit composition, though. When the battle starts, it's usually "so much damage!!!" or "what a great concave." | ||
sluggaslamoo
Australia4494 Posts
On May 01 2011 14:49 Hikko wrote: If I make a youtube video of me against my friends in this situation and myself winning with the hero stalker, will you quit? Has to be a GSL game, although if you give me a replay and it looks legit I guess I will take a brief break Its pretty much impossible because Protoss doesn't have shield batteries or goon range. In this situation I can just put down a bunker and your stalker can't kill it, also against 12 marines (like in the vod) I can't corner your stalker as easily if you have shield battery. Not only that but if you even can pop a stalker in time, you could probably get a sentry out instead and use forcefield. Unfortunately you would then not end up with any action that is of the least bit exciting. And if it sounds like I'm going off topic, its exactly these kinds of mechanics which allow for comebacks through skill. The reason I disagree with balance between unit encounters is that the examples involve like someone suggested zealot reaver vs hydra is the same as sentry forcefield vs roach. Unfortunately forcefields mean the balance between micro encounters is completely imbalanced. If I land good forcefields, you cannot do anything except run away until the forcefields disappear and then try again. Where as the reaver vs hydra example shows that it is all going to comedown to the players skill at that exact moment. | ||
kheldorin
Singapore539 Posts
On May 01 2011 17:52 sluggaslamoo wrote: Has to be a GSL game, although if you give me a replay and it looks legit I guess I will take a brief break Its pretty much impossible because Protoss doesn't have shield batteries or goon range. In this situation I can just put down a bunker and your stalker can't kill it, also against 12 marines (like in the vod) I can't corner your stalker as easily if you have shield battery. Not only that but if you even can pop a stalker in time, you could probably get a sentry out instead and use forcefield. Unfortunately you would then not end up with any action that is of the least bit exciting. And if it sounds like I'm going off topic, its exactly these kinds of mechanics which allow for comebacks through skill. The reason I disagree with balance between unit encounters is that the examples involve like someone suggested zealot reaver vs hydra is the same as sentry forcefield vs roach. Unfortunately forcefields mean the balance between micro encounters is completely imbalanced. If I land good forcefields, you cannot do anything except run away until the forcefields disappear and then try again. Where as the reaver vs hydra example shows that it is all going to comedown to the players skill at that exact moment. You can bait the forcefields. You can burrow under forcefields. You can medivac load/unload over forcefields. | ||
Probe1
United States17920 Posts
On April 28 2011 23:21 Yaotzin wrote: SC2 doesn't have hard unit counters. If it did there would lots more swings and comebacks. Hard counters are what creates comeback situations.... People that discuss hard counters are pretty ignorant of actual games in my opinion. If you think a zealot plugging a wall in ZvP will hold off a zergling attack 100% of the time you've never seen me ram 30 zerglings against a wall until the zealot dies and a unending stream of lings are rallied to your door. Sure one on one a zealot can kill a ling, even four. But starcraft is about positioning, tactics, strategy, micro and finally macro/counters. Not just build A to beat B so C can beat A. | ||
| ||