EPTOn August 17 2013 01:44 Falling wrote:
Which is kind of an odd characteristic for something that is supposed to be a 'board control' unit. It can do so, but basically requires a map where you can keep on repositioning between attack lanes in the middle of the map. Kinda like closing the gap as a soccer/football goalie, you are able to defend more territory. But you can't leave a couple SH behind and hope they are going to do anything but die. It's the entire group of SH that are moving and back and forth. And so SH really can't do much against split attack.
@LaLusH
Yeah, I think there is really something to that. Maybe a half a year ago, I was wondering why DT's are allowed to be so much better (one shot workers without a sound) in BW, than in SC2 (although they are relatively powerful and can do damage.) But it's actually a huge cost in money and time to get out even 2 dark templar. If they don't do anything that's actually a big deal. But BW DT would snowball so fast because of the higher economy and speed in which you can pump out DT (balanced out by having a separate tech building, admittedly.)
But I definitely buy the idea that if the game is intended to rocket to a 200/200 max army, then certain compositions are most cost effective when you it is impossible for you to have a distinct numbers advantage. A game where one player is hovering between 120-150, the other player can gain a numbers advantage by exceeding 150. If the game necessarily hits 200/200 super fast, that situation doesn't occur except to bank minerals and gas and build more macro structures to max and remax again.
edit
Just thinking here and correct meif I'm wrong. But in a game balanced around expected 200/200 maxed armies, that creates situations where both armies roaming around, completely maxed, but maybe not attacking or else overwhelming undefended bases. Does the army composition require mobility to be the majority unit? Maybe I'm thinking too much of the Protoss death ball that roams the map and eats what it can in it's path. But it seems to me the more the armies are tied at 200, the more it becomes imperative that the entire army is available to win the Big Battle. Having units stationary wouldn't help in the repositioning game and pulls supply out. (Of course there is also the multiple drop harass, but SH hardly work doing that compared to M&M.) And lurkers if not with their big army, would simply get over-run by the other big army.
Which is kind of an odd characteristic for something that is supposed to be a 'board control' unit. It can do so, but basically requires a map where you can keep on repositioning between attack lanes in the middle of the map. Kinda like closing the gap as a soccer/football goalie, you are able to defend more territory. But you can't leave a couple SH behind and hope they are going to do anything but die. It's the entire group of SH that are moving and back and forth. And so SH really can't do much against split attack.
@LaLusH
Yeah, I think there is really something to that. Maybe a half a year ago, I was wondering why DT's are allowed to be so much better (one shot workers without a sound) in BW, than in SC2 (although they are relatively powerful and can do damage.) But it's actually a huge cost in money and time to get out even 2 dark templar. If they don't do anything that's actually a big deal. But BW DT would snowball so fast because of the higher economy and speed in which you can pump out DT (balanced out by having a separate tech building, admittedly.)
But I definitely buy the idea that if the game is intended to rocket to a 200/200 max army, then certain compositions are most cost effective when you it is impossible for you to have a distinct numbers advantage. A game where one player is hovering between 120-150, the other player can gain a numbers advantage by exceeding 150. If the game necessarily hits 200/200 super fast, that situation doesn't occur except to bank minerals and gas and build more macro structures to max and remax again.
edit
Just thinking here and correct meif I'm wrong. But in a game balanced around expected 200/200 maxed armies, that creates situations where both armies roaming around, completely maxed, but maybe not attacking or else overwhelming undefended bases. Does the army composition require mobility to be the majority unit? Maybe I'm thinking too much of the Protoss death ball that roams the map and eats what it can in it's path. But it seems to me the more the armies are tied at 200, the more it becomes imperative that the entire army is available to win the Big Battle. Having units stationary wouldn't help in the repositioning game and pulls supply out. (Of course there is also the multiple drop harass, but SH hardly work doing that compared to M&M.) And lurkers if not with their big army, would simply get over-run by the other big army.
I think so. What's important in a prolonged 200/200 situation is to make sure you take that one good engagement.
You don't split up or harass unless you are reasonably sure that a battle will not break out.
You do often get a scenario where people's first 3 bases start mining out, and where they have had a 4th for a while, but are trying to expand to a 5th (in order to keep 2-3 simultaneous bases mining). In that scenario players often take turns in running to one end of the map and back to continuously deny eachothers' 5th attempts.
That's the scenario in which you sometimes see some splitting (because they feel certain enough they can't be forced into a big fight, as well as certain enough that their opponent is not actually actively seeking out an engagement). When they have denied their 5ths enough times and when their 2nd and 3rds start drying up is the point where one player usually really feels he has to get something done.
Actually strike that. Come to think of it people don't really frequently split in these situations either. Only sometimes.
When a player is somewhat actively seeking out the engagement though, you do not split in any circumstances!
