StarCraft® II

Make a difficulty harder than brutal?

Anyone feel that WoL was too was easy on brutal? I think Blizzard should increase the difficulty of HoTS or make a mode harder than brutal. What do you guys think?
Reply Quote
yes
Reply Quote
agreed
Reply Quote
"These go to 11", eh?
They could just make Brutal harder.
Reply Quote
some achievements were near impossible on brutal, if not impossible.


As for being easy, i think the ability to save, and repeat missions endlessly puts a cap on how difficult it is, as well as how much harder than the previous difficulty it should be. You make it too difficult, then people would just abuse these mechanics, and im not sure they want people to do that. Especially if they could just breeze through very hard.

But on the other hand, i always enjoy extra challenges =)
Edited by Brathearon on 6/19/2011 8:52 PM PDT
Reply Quote
brutal was easier than expected still a *%%!@ but i don't get %!#!d in first 10 seconds like i thought
Reply Quote
Brutal was certainly brutal at times. I think the difficult level is fine.
Reply Quote
I agree. Especially now that people are familiar with sc2.
Reply Quote
Agreed. Anyone that can get to diamond can make brutal. I need something more hardcore to brag about.
Reply Quote
They have the numbers, and despite the number of people who actually have beaten brutal, it is a surprisingly small amount. Less than 1%, according to Dustin Browder in this interview:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=234187

In the interview they also state that they're planning on MAYBE making only 3 difficulties, but they want the hardest one to definitely be really hard, while the easiest one to be approachable to all people. However, they're making this difficulty based on being an expansion set, so expect it to be harder anyway.


Plus, if you want "hardcore," you'll want to play multiplayer anyway. In fact, a lot of people who play campaign are in the lower leagues.
Edited by KarMAzasz on 6/20/2011 11:02 AM PDT
Reply Quote
A few missions on Brutal were absolutely crazy:

Supernova was nuts. As soon as you got somewhere you have to leave already. I ended up doing the "Speedrun" apporach.

Welcome to the Jungle was literally impossible to do when you first got access to it. You needed all kinds of goodies to overpower the Protoss and prevent them from sealing every well in 20 minutes. Banshees were a godsend.

But for the most part they were managable; managable meaning countless save-loads and the occasional making it by a hair.



I still haven't completed All In or In Utter Darkness >< I made PFs blocking the approaches with loads of tanks behind them and mm to counter kerrigan and I still got my behind handed to me at like 60%, and I decided to take break from campaign to lower my blood pressure.
Reply Quote
I'd say brutal hit just the right difficulty with me. I think if they made it any harder it would hit the whole "AI is a cheating bastard" level of gameplay where they start with all upgrades and your marines are armed with pea shooters and cardboard.

But overall brutal was harder than Starcraft 1's hardest, I'd say Supernova just beat out "To Chain the Beast" as hardest level in the Starcraft series. All In ranged from being the hardest to the easiest depending on your upgrades and if you knew what you were doing or not.

While I think the difficulty is fine, I think they need brutal achivements. Just something that makes the gameplay harder that's not fully self inflicted handicaps by the community (like the only marine runs and whatnot). But as someone said, there was only a VERY small percentage of the community who completed the campaign on brutal.

I think I like the three difficulty thing though. Still, while the researches and upgrades were cool they tend to make everyone's experience vary with the difficulty.
Reply Quote
I found "Brutal" to be disappointing to be called Brutal. Pretty much like how I found Casual to be pretty much an insult to Casual gamers.

I'm not sure whats stopping Blizzard From calling the modes "very easy" and "kind of hard" or something like that. I'm a fairly casual SC2 player, yet that shouldn't mean I automatically suck at the game and have a mode that can be beaten by just building SCVs and AMoving dedicated to casual gaming.

Brutal is kind of the same thing. It's supposed to be brutal. Not "lol, I make marines AMove at enemy." I expected brutal to actually be challenging all the way through. I hadn't played any other RTS for a few years prior to SC2's release, and yet within a couple hours of playing on Brutal, it already felt like a breeze. I found 2 missions to be challenging (stealing the Odin, and All-in), and even then it had a lot to do with bad tech choice.

However, even the hardest of missions didn't really feel "brutal", even for someone like me who has no ability to play Terran at all. Pretty much every time I random Terran in a team game, I go battlecruiser rush, nuke rush, or MarineSCV rush since its the only stuff I can even do with the race.
Reply Quote
I still haven't completed All In or In Utter Darkness >< I made PFs blocking the approaches with loads of tanks behind them and mm to counter kerrigan and I still got my behind handed to me at like 60%, and I decided to take break from campaign to lower my blood pressure.


You have to make a complete wall off with them, im assuming you are?

Also, i'd save your artifact explosions only for nydas worms. They hit for pretty much notthing on kerrigan.

06/20/2011 07:04 PMPosted by Retloclive
Like I said, I just didn't like how the difficulty flacuated. I'd be playing a BRUTAL level that I would easily breeze through (Smash and Grab, Outbreak) but then I would play a level that causes me to rage in real-life out of frustration (Welcome to the Jungle, Engine of Destruction)


im not so sure how much they can prevent that from happening.

06/21/2011 04:22 AMPosted by NiteCore
Brutal is kind of the same thing. It's supposed to be brutal. Not "lol, I make marines AMove at enemy."


well, for the beginning missions, there isnt much more you can do.


Also, try to do the achievements on brutal, its a good way to make them more challenging. Some of them are impossible to do on brutal.
Reply Quote

Also, try to do the achievements on brutal, its a good way to make them more challenging. Some of them are impossible to do on brutal.


It's kinda what I did, I even got some of them on my first run through without even knowing the achievement existed. And thats with my Terran playing ability being a horrible terrible disaster.

Reply Quote
06/20/2011 10:58 AMPosted by KarMAzasz
Less than 1%, according to Dustin Browder in this interview


Wow, that's pretty surprising. /flex

Some brutal missions were too easy. Others were unpredictably difficult. I feel like the difficulty was poorly balanced. I don't want a brutal campaign where some missions are stupidly hard and others are a cakewalk. Most of Char was really easy.

06/20/2011 04:10 PMPosted by Stranger
Welcome to the Jungle was literally impossible to do when you first got access to it


06/20/2011 07:04 PMPosted by Retloclive
Welcome to the Jungle is the one mission i absolutely hate on Brutal because theres so much you have to watch out for


...what? Welcome to the Jungle was one of the easiest missions in the campaign. I'm not trying to be a d*ck about it but it took virtually no effort. Just mass marine/marauder/medic and go pwn the protoss. I capped 4 gasses at once and I've heard of some people capping all 7 at once. The only thing in that whole mission that can threaten a bioball is HT and those are only found in bases for the most part, so unless you want to do the feat of strength on brutal, there's no issue.

06/20/2011 07:04 PMPosted by Retloclive
my problem with it was the difficulty seemed to flacuate from being easy to being hard like BRUTAL mode suggests.


I agree with this statement as per above. There were maybe half a dozen missions that qualified as harder than Hard mode, and only a few of those that really took any effort. However I do give credit to the fact that part of the challenge was planning the campaign out to optimize it, undertaking a brutal run is much easier when you know every upgrade, know which missions appear in which order, know which units will help on which missions, etc. You had to put your thinking cap on and decide what to do and when to make it so easy.
Reply Quote
Also, I'd be ok with a mode that is intentionally designed to be nearly impossible, as long as there aren't a bunch of achievements tied to it (a badge and a single achievement is sufficient to prove you did it, if it can be done). Think DOOM Nightmare mode, which was hoped to be impossible but wasn't.

I'd be interested in the campaign designers seeing if they can go totally overboard and finding out if players are actually capable of overcoming it anyway.
Reply Quote
06/21/2011 04:22 AMPosted by NiteCore
I found Casual to be pretty much an insult to Casual gamers


Incidentally:

http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/2674640225

We're working on finishing casual without building any units, even SCVs. Which says a lot about how easy casual really is. On the other hand, funny that a challenge can be made out of casual mode. ;)
Reply Quote

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)
Submit Cancel

Reported!

[Close]