EPTRegarding LoTV's Economy and Critiques - Page 3
| Blogs > qxc |
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20344 Posts
| ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20344 Posts
I think DH8 1hyg is much more elegant than BW solution of "ai is bad so income sucks". You're deliberately telling the AI to act in a certain way, rather than it being reduced in an inconsistent and unpredictable way. I think we should also be calling for mineral positions to be CONSISTENT. On some maps through mineral stacking and such, you can currently get as much as over 10% more income than other maps. There are not only close and far patches, but there are close close patches, far close patches, far far patches etc. | ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
vesicular
United States1310 Posts
On April 22 2015 02:19 Big J wrote: Don't really agree. Mainly because I'm disagreeing with because I think is a problem of unit design. In other words, I like turtling. I dislike strategies that allow you to heavily bypass supply caps through overly supply efficient units, worker replacement through mules and gardens of often-not-so-static defenses. This could all be changed directly, while still allowing for defense and reactive play. I agree with this. When I say I like defensive styles of play, I think Tank/Turret lines from BW that promote map control. I don't think of Swarm Hosts. Thankfully LotV will give us Lurkers again, but much like Tank/Turret it means little when SH, BL or deathballs exist. I also think offensive vs defensive misses the point. If a game does not reward expanding, then expanding ceases to be a strategic decision. Making the game so 200 vs 200 deathballs are rare is a very good thing. But the econ discussion to me is more about adding in another element of decision making for the player. In short, expanding should give you an edge, at the risk of spreading yourself too thin. That's a strategic, pro/con, risk/reward choice. What we have in LotV may help speed the game up and get it to the "fun" stage faster as well as help with max supply problems, but it doesn't really improve econ depth at all. It would be fun to have more depth so that macro strategies could be as interesting to see unfold as micro ones. | ||
|
Kingsky
Singapore298 Posts
I think the best decision for SC2 LOTV would be for blizzard to hire Lalush | ||
| ||
