Finally someone outright says that Protoss early-mid game armies are ridiculously cost and supply inefficient. It's so friggen hard to play an underpowered Protoss army. Late game is finally when it evens out, and by evens out, I mean that it's still on bad footing, especially when counting a disadvantages early-mid game, and a late game that is only marginally better than Terran late game.

archonOOid

1983 Posts

July 10 2012 20:13 GMT

#23

Another interesting and similar stat you could argue is higher in sc2 compared to bw is that the dps intensity (=units are dying too fast) is a lot higher. This is due to the fact of clumping, macro mechanics (units comes out faster) and average dps. HotS will make tvp "mechable" which means that terran units will be more spread out due to tank lines and auxiliary forces dispatched in tactical positions as well. ZvP will have to anti clump units in the viper and the tempest will take out the highest dps dealers. Swarmhosts might work as bouncers for certain passages in all matchups.

Arcane86

United States68 Posts

July 10 2012 20:26 GMT

#24

Comparison to BW are attractive, but perhaps it would be more instructive to compare SC2 matchups to each other. TvX matchups seem to come the closest to being skirmishy, whereas in ZvP it is almost impossible to find a game that isn't either turtle-deathball v turtle-deathball or all-in v. turtle. Perhaps a direct SC2 MU-comparison would be enlightening.

In a recent interview, Dustin Browder made it a point to note that simply porting over Psi-Storm into SC2 was broken as hell because the AI is better at clumping units together. They spent a ton of time tinkering with it to make it balanceable, and still wound up having to remove Khaydarin Amulet. It may be worth considering how these changes that made the game "smarter" plays into not only "skirmish" v. "deathball" but also game design to begin with.

Asday

United Kingdom388 Posts

July 10 2012 20:30 GMT

#25

I don't like you. Everything I've seen you post, (which isn't much), just comes off as you wishing SC2 was BW, when it really really shouldn't me. Last I checked, SC2BW was pretty good. Try that out, instead, if you want an HD remake.

Masayume

Netherlands208 Posts

July 10 2012 20:40 GMT

#26

I am sorry but I do not want SC2 to be BW in High Definition. I used to think that a year back or so, but I gained more and more appreciation for SC2 over the 2 years it's been out.

What I do want is for StarCraft 2 to grow in depth and options. The only reason I reference to BW most of the time is because it is always easier to use an existing example of something to try to explain something.

I think Starcraft 2 is at a good place right now, but as HotS is drawing closer I wanted to take the time to write about things that I personally think held WoL back from being even more enjoyable. The new units are a step in the right direction, but I simply wanted to share my thoughts in order to help figure out what the underlying causes of the sometimes limited gameplay options are in the matchups.

And if you want to reread my posts, you will see that I simply drew comparisons, and didn't actually advocate we go back to the BW mechanics or anything of that nature. That is not the intention and point of discussion for this blog either.

larse

1611 Posts

July 10 2012 20:48 GMT

#27

Two solutions to save SC2:

1, reduce the Faster Game Speed by 10%. This gives players the reaction time you mention, and thus the incentive to micro.

2, add a button to allow modified movement. That is, units will move in their original formation with different speed.
See here for more details: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349968

Because when HOTS comes out, they will have to rebalance the game. So why not just add these two changes--they are going to rebalance the game anyway.

jeeneeus

1168 Posts

July 10 2012 21:15 GMT

#28

If DPS is seriously an inherent issue with the game, it's not something that can be easily fixed. FRB and dynamic movement are fairly easy to do and requires almost no rebalancing of the game (well maybe with dynamic movement, you may have to tweak some numbers for splash units). Altering the DPS, changing production times, or adjusting macro mechanics would basically have to be a complete rehaul of the entire game. So I don't see this happening.

Roe

Canada6002 Posts

July 10 2012 21:41 GMT

#29

On your point about the siege tank from BW, and a player being punished for bad positioning going against the tank line: isn't it true that tanks used to overkill (all target the same unit and fire at it)? so wouldn't spreading out your units in a flank or in an arc would be worse than sending them in a line, because then the tanks would all be firing at different targets, not overkilling?

AzureD

United States320 Posts

July 10 2012 21:42 GMT

#30

Most of your data seems to be wrong. I think all of it actually. Go back and check the SC1 values again.

Real reason splash is more effective in SC2 is due to clumping not any dps difference which is tiny.

Qwyn

United States2779 Posts

July 10 2012 21:52 GMT

#31

On July 11 2012 05:30 Asday wrote:
I don't like you. Everything I've seen you post, (which isn't much), just comes off as you wishing SC2 was BW, when it really really shouldn't me. Last I checked, SC2BW was pretty good. Try that out, instead, if you want an HD remake.

I don't like you either.

Last time I checked SC2 was a mediocre game that could be SO much better. Game quality is objective.

BW is better than SCII as both a spectator sport and competition wise. SCII just has more funding b/c it is rendered on a modern engine and has Blizzard's backing. But as a game it's inferior.

SCII should take things from its predecessor, if it's so busy killing it off.

WolfintheSheep

Canada14127 Posts

July 10 2012 21:53 GMT

#32

Anyone saying SC2 DPS is too high and then saying BW was better loses all credibility immediately.

Masayume

Netherlands208 Posts

July 10 2012 21:56 GMT

#33

Roe, that's a great point. You are completely right, the old BW tank did not have smart fire. Players would often send a few units ahead to tank volleys and take spider mine damage. For the rest you still really wanted to spread your units out properly over the side that wouldn't be hit by stasis.

AzureD, the DPS as a pure value expressed in game time is close to the same yes, but the DPS in Real-time is delivered faster in SC2. This is what makes deathballs more favourable in SC2 combined with the high density of DPS (read clumped and more DPS uptime).

AzureD

United States320 Posts

July 10 2012 23:32 GMT

#34

Masayume, then what is the difference in time between SC1 fastest and SC2 fastest?

Narcind

Sweden2489 Posts

July 10 2012 23:42 GMT

#35

On July 11 2012 06:56 Masayume wrote:
Roe, that's a great point. You are completely right, the old BW tank did not have smart fire. Players would often send a few units ahead to tank volleys and take spider mine damage. For the rest you still really wanted to spread your units out properly over the side that wouldn't be hit by stasis.

AzureD, the DPS as a pure value expressed in game time is close to the same yes, but the DPS in Real-time is delivered faster in SC2. This is what makes deathballs more favourable in SC2 combined with the high density of DPS (read clumped and more DPS uptime).

People do this in sc2 too, throwing out a couple of well spaced out infested terran eggs to draw fire from tanks while lings run in, for example?
And people simply have deep tank lines so they get completely raped by every tank firing at 1 ling.

L3gendary

Canada1470 Posts

July 10 2012 23:55 GMT

#36

Individual units in BW had higher dps. You use the mutalisk as an example when it is actually an outlier. The dps was increased because they couldn't stack anymore. Mutalisks in low numbers (~11) were deadly in bw even against marines whereas in sc2 its mostly hit and run and no micro, where you ignore the AA unless u have superior numbers. The reason overall dps is higher in ground units is cause of the way the AI bunches units together allowing for many units to fire at once.

sluggaslamoo

Australia4494 Posts

July 11 2012 00:03 GMT

#37

Siege Tank fire is much faster in SC2 than BW.

However the cooldown on BW siege tank is faster than 7.5 seconds.

Blazinghand

United States25557 Posts

July 11 2012 00:10 GMT

#38

On July 11 2012 09:03 sluggaslamoo wrote:
Siege Tank fire is much faster in SC2 than BW.

However the cooldown on BW siege tank is faster than 7.5 seconds.

Yeah after some research I can confirm both of these. Also, the kinds of damage units deal works a bit differently in BW in terms of bonus damage-- tanks deal less damage against small units, but always deal full damage to shields, making them modestly more effective against zealots and intensely more effective against archons than their Sc2 counterparts.

Psychobabas

2531 Posts

July 11 2012 00:17 GMT

#39

Guys guys...

Yes dps is higher in sc2 BUT hitpoints are also quite a bit higher.

Marauders, thors, ultralisks, roaches, immortals, colossus, queens, broodlords, even the Archon is a lot tankier due to being a purely massive/psionic unit. So it kind of balances out in generally.

But looking into specific matchups you see questionable stuff like the tank being appalling versus protoss units, hence the battle hellion and warhound.

MNdakota

United States512 Posts

July 11 2012 00:30 GMT

#40

Great read.