|
Heya, this is going to be a quick one.
One of the issues current SC2 has gameplaywise - and this is hugely connected to how few compositions/playstyles are possible - is that we have a severe lack of Power Units.
A quick reminder, what is a Power Unit?
A Power Unit is a unit that is really strong in a direct engagment in small numbers. The classic examples for Power Units would be things like the Siege Tank, the WoL Infestor or the Mothership. Or to use examples from other games, the Lurker from Broodwar or a Hero from WC3.
Why are Power Units so important for strategy games?
The important part is that you can fall back on Power Units when in trouble. For example in WoL as Zerg you could play all forms of midgame styles (and aggressions) and then transition back into infestors, since infestors are not just a unit you build to survive, but also a unit that is a a resource in itself.
Take the TvT siege tank. It grants dynamics in which you are allowed to push an opponent and fail.
At the end of the day, you can fall back into building tanks and hold an enemy push that outnumbers you.
Power Units allow for complex dynamics and transition paths, bud sadly in HotS there are hardly any of them anymore.
Sure, power units can be problematic (Infestor), stupid (Mothership) or easily turn out to make monocompositions the go-to solution to everything (Mech).
But those are problems that should be dealt with individually. Too versatile Infestors were the problem of WoL, and sadly, the solution of blizzard was to make weak, versatile Infestors instead of powerful Infestors.
And their "solution" to Mech seems to be more cheap units...
Let's make them reconsider!
As I said, this is going to be a quick one. Leave a comment 
Nevermind. Should have known that asking for improvements will be used as a "I hate Starcraft 2"-platform...
  
|
Wow... I've rarely disagreed more!
|
What exactly would you see the infestor as? They were intended to be masters of shenaniganry, but were pushed into the role of "kills everything that's hard for zerg to kill" when it became obvious that Zerg had no real tech between roachlinghydra and broodlords.
|
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On October 21 2013 17:52 Passion wrote:
Wow... I've rarely disagreed more!
I agree with you.
|
First of all, the title of this blog is wrong. It should be "come back" (verb, synonym: return), not "comeback" (noun, resurgence), unless you say "They need make *a* comeback".
Second of all, a single lurker in BroodWar is not a "power unit". I think you're thinking of Monkeylords in SupCom, but I digress, and you should know that I hate digressing.
Next, what the hell.
Next, for general game-theory, I don't know how SC2 works these days because they're constantly changing that game, but if you have to enter into a critical engagement in the mid-game (and I'm talking about a big-ass battle) or die, then you're doing an all-in or have incredibly weak play. The solution, therefore, is not to alter the game to give you super-units to keep you from dying when you screw up, but to improve your play so you don't lose your whole army and die. Remember, you're playing a strategy game, so you don't ever need a safety net to protect you from losing. If the game (as a whole, not an individual match) you're playing, however, has such a slippery slope that it necessitates alterations to fundamental elements of the gameplay itself, then it's not worth it to continue playing.
Next, having an overwhelming defender's advantage does not produce a high-risk, high-reward environment. Most of the 'luck' in strategy games comes from the unpredictability of human nature, but can produce very nerve-racking and entertaining scenarios where someone gambles to gain an advantage. The more you take away the randomness of how games play themselves out through defender's advantage, the more you encourage a lot of repetitive "macro games", which on paper, sounds good, but it's not. It's really boring and monotonous. Every match starts to look the same as the last one, and there is minimal variance in possible strategies, which does not make for a game that is fun to play or spectate.
Finally, if super-units do not propagate a defender's advantage, then your whole original point goes out the window. Personally, I would think that the attacker could also employ super-units of their own to break your defense, so the end result would be the same.
|
On October 21 2013 19:22 ninazerg wrote:
First of all, the title of this blog is wrong. It should be "come back" (verb, synonym: return), not "comeback" (noun, resurgence), unless you say "They need make *a* comeback".
Second of all, a single lurker in BroodWar is not a "power unit". I think you're thinking of Monkeylords in SupCom, but I digress, and you should know that I hate digressing.
Amm... Why are you being an ass? English obviously isn't his primary language.
On October 21 2013 19:22 ninazerg wrote:
Everything else.
While you may have a good point, altering SC2 in a way so that defenders advantage is more favorable would probably increase player consistancy, which is actually a pretty major problem in the SC2 scene.
While I've seen or played next to no games of HOTS the fundamentals probably remain the same. Lets take PvP for example because of it being void of all defenders advantage it's as volatile as ZvZ in BW except that it has a lower skill ceiling than SC2 and that really doesn't make for a good combination; it makes for a extremely bad putrid coin-flippy matchup with a lightweight coin.
|
What sc2 really needs to truly define itself and attract new customers is unicorns. Or pandas. In the true Blizzard spirit, they might want to take it a step further.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On October 21 2013 20:40 Stratos wrote:What sc2 really needs to truly define itself and attract new customers is unicorns. Or pandas. In the true Blizzard spirit, they might want to take it a step further. + Show Spoiler +
What a try-hard xD. Where did you get that?
|
I like power units, however both fungal and vortex weren't ok in WoL.
Fungal was 0 skill super power cc ability and vortex was do - win, or fail to do - die.
Mothership to be honest needs immunity to emp, feedback, neural parasite in order to become a useful caster with whatever powerful spells you give it.
Ghost snipe used to be fun, but they nerfed it quite badly and imo wrongly.
There could be an upgrade for halucination which would reduce spell cost of it -> another playstyle not force fields but mass halucinations.
Mothership could have a air shield spell for e.g. 75 mana, which would block air to ground damage in a large area for 20 seconds = like dark swarm but only against air units and works on buildings too, allies or enemies alike.
Works also against colossus - since it's a semi air unit.
Useful against colossus, mutalisks, voidrays...
...
|
First of all, the title of this blog is wrong. It should be "come back" (verb, synonym: return), not "comeback" (noun, resurgence), unless you say "They need make *a* comeback".
Second of all, a single lurker in BroodWar is not a "power unit". I think you're thinking of Monkeylords in SupCom, but I digress, and you should know that I hate digressing.
That's what I wrote:
is really strong in a direct engagment in small numbers
On October 21 2013 19:22 ninazerg wrote:
Next, for general game-theory, I don't know how SC2 works these days because they're constantly changing that game, but if you have to enter into a critical engagement in the mid-game (and I'm talking about a big-ass battle) or die, then you're doing an all-in or have incredibly weak play.
That's not true, SC2 has had 4 tiny changes since HotS, it's basically not changing at all.
And it's also not true that you have to have weak play or do an allin. That's exactly why you shouldn't be posting when you don't know how the game works these days.
Example 1, Terran vs Zerg: Terran MUST go for attacks off 3-4 bases, pretty constantly. It's not an allin decision, it's how bio/mine works because there is no good unit that you build up - aka power unit.
Example 2, Terran vs Protoss: Terran MUST attack of 3-4 bases, because the Protoss can build up certain power units and the Terran cannot and at the end of the day you fight with MMMVG against a Protoss who has nothing but Colossi and Templar and Tempest. Guess who wins.
Example 3, Zerg vs Zerg: You build more roaches, you win in a ground war. You build more mutalisks, you win in an airwar. That's it. There is no "don't go through this choke, because there are infestors up the ramp" anymore. If you have 10more roaches you don't have to care about the choke.
About the "Comeback". It was intentional because I wanted to imply that without Power Units there can be no back and forth games. Since the player with higher army value simply wins, since there are not units that are extraordinarily efficient in big combats.
And yes, you are right that the attacker can bring his power units too. But then again, that's a question of the actual design of those units to prevent that from happening.
Examples:
- 5tanks still have a hard time to push 3tanks, due to the siege dynamic (similar for lurkers)
- An Fungal Growth works best in a choke, which you are not standing in when you defend, but the attacker does.
- A MSC cannot use Photon Overcharge offensively
- A Thor used to be a Power Unit against mutalisks in WoL, since it would severly damage mutalisks (not anymore through the regeneration). But it's very hard to "just attack" with Thors, due to their speed and due to how they rely on repair against mutalisks defensively. (and banelings knock those SCVs out nearly instantly)
What exactly would you see the infestor as? They were intended to be masters of shenaniganry, but were pushed into the role of "kills everything that's hard for zerg to kill" when it became obvious that Zerg had no real tech between roachlinghydra and broodlords.
That's partly true and partly not. The Infestor was always intended as a unit that can counter stuff like marines or zerglings. It got patched to do more dps (and hold down for shorter time), but the intention was originally there already.
If you ask me, the main problem of the Infestor in WoL were 3 things:
1) it countered way more than it should by completely wrecking Vikings and Voidrays, which made it too strong when combined with the Broodlord
2) it was to versatile, through ITs allowing to build way more Infestors than you needed and thus removing the energydensity-downside and being too good against harassment once people got really strong at (defensive) multitasking
Don't get me wrong. I like the new Infestor and how it works. But I think it has been overnerfed and the way to go would have been to actually buff the other races against it.
|
You don't want power units in this game. Due to the nature of the pathing system if you make a power unit too strong it dominates the game and will (in the case of the siege tank, swarm host, brood lord, mech and infestor - pretty much everything Protoss) make the game stale, slow and boring.
The right balance of power unit is the mine, which takes long enough to build that it compliments bio in sparse numbers yet is strong enough with the single shot dynamic that it holds its own. Of course it has also replaced the siege tank completely - which is one of those power units that if buffed too much can easily snowball and become rediculous.
TvT is very unforgiving. Very much so. And in the case of siege tanks, it is not as mechanical a matchup as, say, ZvT/TvZ. The tank immediately slows the pace of the game the moment it comes into play. And in SC2 that is not always a good thing (although top tier players make TvT look incredible it is quite boring below that level of skill). The game is already slow/safe in play enough. ZvT, as hard as it is, has the best pace of any MU outside of TvP.
I dread the day that Terran players start using mine based mech as a strong alternative to bio/mine. Zergs in HOTS have to fight it with swarmhosts. It might be interesting for awhile, but in the end it's just infestor-broodlord for both sides. And that's just stupid.
I don't think players need forgiving units. And what ninazerg said is largely accurate, though she reads as though she is chomping at the bit. Very refreshing.
|
You don't want power units in this game. Due to the nature of the pathing system if you make a power unit too strong it dominates the game and will (in the case of the siege tank, swarm host, brood lord, mech and infestor - pretty much everything Protoss) make the game stale, slow and boring.
I disagree. TvT is a good matchup due to power units. ZvZ was better with available power units. PvP is better with an early game power unit.
Neither the Broodlord nor the Swarm Host is a power unit. You need a lot of either of them. They are the complete opposite of a power unit - a unit that is terribly inefficient in low amounts. It's those units that we want to have as few as possible in the game, units that scale up but don't work in lower numbers. Because those units force you to turtle, when you try to go for them.
The Broodlord/Infestor scenario is simply a very bad example for "power unit" play, since it was broken. Sure, if my winrate if I attack in the midgame is 50%, but when I turtle to the lategame it is 60%, I'm gonna go for the lategame option. But if my composition is not broken, since my opponent has his own power units or some other way to combat me (outexpand me, specific counters, counterattacking, harassment), so the lategame winrate is 50% as well, then I have no benefit from forcing stale play.
I agree, the mine is an interesting type of power unit and fits very well in the game. But it's only a power unit for one specific scenario - Terran vs MLB Zerg - and sucks in all other cases.
|
Bcs and thors could need a buff, they look like powerunits but have wery small nieches in the game and still fail a lot. Maybe it is the fact that fully upgraded bio is the only thing that can be produced fast enoug to compete with z/p lategame. I would much prefer thors or bcs to ravens or ghosts as the ultimate lategame composition.
|
United States10402 Posts
o god. brood war TvT... never again... those tank lines. one wrong move and your line was gone in a matter of seconds... *shudders*
|
On October 21 2013 22:50 Big J wrote:First of all, the title of this blog is wrong. It should be "come back" (verb, synonym: return), not "comeback" (noun, resurgence), unless you say "They need make *a* comeback". Show nested quote +
Second of all, a single lurker in BroodWar is not a "power unit". I think you're thinking of Monkeylords in SupCom, but I digress, and you should know that I hate digressing.
That's what I wrote: Show nested quote +On October 21 2013 19:22 ninazerg wrote:
Next, for general game-theory, I don't know how SC2 works these days because they're constantly changing that game, but if you have to enter into a critical engagement in the mid-game (and I'm talking about a big-ass battle) or die, then you're doing an all-in or have incredibly weak play. That's not true, SC2 has had 4 tiny changes since HotS, it's basically not changing at all. And it's also not true that you have to have weak play or do an allin. That's exactly why you shouldn't be posting when you don't know how the game works these days. Example 1, Terran vs Zerg: Terran MUST go for attacks off 3-4 bases, pretty constantly. It's not an allin decision, it's how bio/mine works because there is no good unit that you build up - aka power unit. Example 2, Terran vs Protoss: Terran MUST attack of 3-4 bases, because the Protoss can build up certain power units and the Terran cannot and at the end of the day you fight with MMMVG against a Protoss who has nothing but Colossi and Templar and Tempest. Guess who wins. Example 3, Zerg vs Zerg: You build more roaches, you win in a ground war. You build more mutalisks, you win in an airwar. That's it. There is no "don't go through this choke, because there are infestors up the ramp" anymore. If you have 10more roaches you don't have to care about the choke.
If you consider Hellbats being the centerpiece of Terran play and then becoming virtually unused a "tiny change", then I guess you're right. I'm just curious as to which other RTS games you've played in the past, and to what extent, to come to these conclusions.
About the "Comeback". It was intentional because I wanted to imply that without Power Units there can be no back and forth games. Since the player with higher army value simply wins, since there are not units that are extraordinarily efficient in big combats.
That's the way SC2 works. You have more powerful army, then you win. If you don't care for that type of game, then there are lots of other games you can play.
|
On October 21 2013 20:31 thezanursic wrote:Show nested quote +On October 21 2013 19:22 ninazerg wrote:
First of all, the title of this blog is wrong. It should be "come back" (verb, synonym: return), not "comeback" (noun, resurgence), unless you say "They need make *a* comeback".
Second of all, a single lurker in BroodWar is not a "power unit". I think you're thinking of Monkeylords in SupCom, but I digress, and you should know that I hate digressing.
Amm... Why are you being an ass? English obviously isn't his primary language.
Since you have a long history of disagreeing with everything I say, I don't think this needs addressing.
While you may have a good point, altering SC2 in a way so that defenders advantage is more favorable would probably increase player consistancy, which is actually a pretty major problem in the SC2 scene. While I've seen or played next to no games of HOTS the fundamentals probably remain the same. Lets take PvP for example because of it being void of all defenders advantage it's as volatile as ZvZ in BW except that it has a lower skill ceiling than SC2 and that really doesn't make for a good combination; it makes for a extremely bad putrid coin-flippy matchup with a lightweight coin.
No, the problem with player consistency is that fundamental elements of gameplay are changed every few months, and it's impossible to have the kind of exhaustive preparation that professional players use to win matches if their whole strategy and way of playing goes out the window.
|
Do you think there's any chance in hell that Blizzard will change anything significant in LotV?
|
One of the current issues with SC2 is that you can't just say "one of the current with SC2 is...".
You can't expect to fix that issue and suddenly the game will become better.
The current issue with SC2 is that it is so fundamentally broken that fixing it the way people want is actually impossible. We can't have strong splash damage units like we did in BW, and this cascades down, now with weaker splash damage, we cannot have positional play like we used to, now we need maps with easier to access bases, now we get 1-a deathballs because the bases aren't far enough to support guerilla play.
In order to actually fix SC2, we need to go back to before Wings of Liberty and completely change the design philosophy of the game as a whole. Believe that "worse pathing" is actually better, that siege lines aren't actually boring, and that we shouldn't make the strongest units in the game equally as easy to use.
|
seige tanks are most certainly not units that are good in small engagements, they are the classic example of units that are bad at small engagements.
|
66% of all sc2 players and 100% of all sc2 viewers still suffer from the trauma that the infestor caused in WoL.
You shouldnt use him as example
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/s3a3Rld.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/aFXnEyJ.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/xLYlfvg.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/2Jkn9mB.jpg)
