|
(N.B. This entry was started here, but I decided to break it out into two postings. The original just as a personal introduction, and this one to get down and dirty with the subject matter.)
So let's just jump into it. Supply depot before barracks -- if it isn't blindingly clear from the above and maybe a quick search for my posts, I really dislike and disagree with this change. I dislike it for a variety of reasons ranging from emotional attachment to game play concepts. On the emotional attachment side, you have issues like "that's the way it's always been since SC1" to "it makes sense from the lore" to "what about all of those (in)famous Pro bunker rushes of yore?" On the game play side, well, the bunker rush issue overlaps a bit between the emotional and the critical, but there are other fast tech and rush timings that are now not available. Now, I know the bunker before rax change is intimately tied into the reaper issues, but as for this discussion I *really* want to try to focus on other reasons why depot before rax is a bad idea (I plan to make reapers my second topic of discussion).
Now, the primary reason why I think removing the option to go supply depot after barracks is that it removes certain timing windows for very aggressive, perhaps cheesy play. I like the option to cheese in general because it completes the triangle of aggression vs. economy vs. technology openings that have become a staple of high quality RTS play. Of course, I realize that early aggression is still possible with supply depot first, but some classic maneuvers like the bunker rush and the dual proxy 8 rax receive a significant hit if not become unviable. I'm sure TLO, Jinro, Nada, Boxer, or someone of like caliber is going to figure out the new cheese timing just fine, but I don't think the window of surprise is going to have nearly the impact it used to (especially since the "new cheese timing" is essentially just the cheese timing you are forced into with the new requirements and not actually new). And I'm not talking about reapers. Again, I want to focus as much on non-reaper here as possible. I'm talking about the good old marine/bunker type cheese and pressure... heck even marauder/bunker pressure.
Another set of timings that are lost are those of the quick tech route. Now the economy takes a hit to be sure, but having the barracks down in base at 8, with a depot and gas to follow can lead to a very early factory (perhaps even proxied!) that could lead to some very interesting shenanigans. I must admit that much of this is theorycraft, but to rush a supply depot first to get a barracks to begin to fast tech is quite a bit more risky. So not only is cheese hurt, but very fast tech is hurt too.
And what about the in-base gateway proxy? It is going to be that much more devastating. You are essentially forced to scout your entire base with your 8th worker or keep your 7th on the ramp (2 player maps). So now you also have a hit to your economy built in.
I'm sure there are other game play issues I'm not thinking of. Thoughts on any of these? (For those who do not agree with my sentiments, I would strongly urge you to think out your reasons for disagreeing with any of my points before you post, I want this to turn into a productive game design discussion; a "if this were my game I would balance it this way and here's why" -- I want to be sold on your ideas not flamed.)
So then there's the emotional attachment issues, some of which Blizzard has built into the issue.
1) The lore. The Terran's are a scrappy race. They've been portrayed as somewhat nomadic and adaptable. This has been translated into their building design. The core and most important buildings have the built in ability to relocate (perhaps even between planets?). A base can fly in from out of nowhere and set up shop and immediately produce troops (if the production buildings are handy!). This was done a few times in the original SC/BW campaigns. Supply depots are not one of these buildings that have the ability to relocate. They are temporary structures to the extent that an army or settlement or mining colony might pick up and leave if the resources of the area run dry. The Protoss did not care much for the way the Terran race would essentially strip mine a planet and then leave. What part of this fits with requiring a supply depot before being able to produce troops?
2) The game's history. For 9-10 years, supply depots have not been required for the continuation of the Terran tech tree. Throughout all of SC1/BW and through all however many years of SC2 design, and alpha, and beta, and even the beginning of retail (even through 1.1.1 of patches) supply depots have not been required for the continuation of the Terran tech tree. Many a SC1/BW game I have played where a game has gotten me close to destruction, only to pull out a hidden expansion and get back in the game. Now, granted these were against the AI* in a very early stage of my SC "career", but it was significant with money in the bank to be able to throw down that barracks and bunker and then factory with only a command center left and a handful of SCV's. It didn't always work, but there were times when I could pull a small fleet of BC's out of my, uh, thin air only to beat back those pesky AI to victory. Relevant to competitive play? Perhaps not. But certainly a consideration for those who play casually.
3) Pro-gaming history. This ties into the game play section quite a bit, but it is still an emotional attachment issue as a Pro Starcraft fan. It seems to be somewhat of a slight to all of the great Terran innovators, who have timed their bunker rushes throughout the years to such perfection. It seems especially a slight, though perhaps indirect and unintentional, to Boxer who can be thought of as the reason for SC2 as it currently seems to be dreamt of by Blizzard -- a professionally played (e-)sport, and not just a some sequel video game. It's almost taunting, like: "what can you do with the race now?! Can't bunker rush!" Now obviously they don't want to break the race the other way, making terran try to compete macro-wise with two significantly more macro oriented races *every game* without variation. But it certainly feels like little thought was put into making it a balanced race that someone like Boxer, or TLO, etc. can still make shine by mixing up all three opening modes of play (Eco/Cheese/Tech). I'm sure they will, but it's like making them castle king side every time. Sorry, future VOD's, no bunker rush for you.
Well, I think I covered all of the major issues I wanted to. Please discuss! Again, with the game play issues keep your posts critical but productive. For the emotional attachment stuff, I do not need to be psychoanalyzed or told how to think or feel, please just share your own impressions of the issue. We all start with different premises, if you have an issue with one of mine for some reason, please keep your posts critical but productive. Flames and trolls have been warned.
Next up... reapers..... balance or banish? Stay tuned!
*As a casual gamer (I wish I could be pro, but alas, I do not even have a home PC good enough to play league games on... qq.. much less the time or circumstances required to begin to undertake such a thing), I like to play lots of different types of SC, including comps stops, FFA's, 2v2v2v2's, custom maps, single player, etc. -- in other words I am well rounded in my love of Starcraft. However, the pro scene has become my passion for some time now. That doesn't for me make non-pro issues insignificant.
Edit: changed one of probably many speeling erorrs. Thanks (for the bump) SilentCrono!
|
There are a number of reasons why your post (although well written and thought out) are wrong, each corresponding with your reasoning (i agree that supply depot before rax is a retarded change and I'm toss)
1 - you say that it isn't in the "lore" that the terran didn't float supplies with their other buildings. If you're going to try and use some kind of ingame or storywise logic then how do the units have any food or housing to survive? You need that infrastructure before you can have an army
2 - its a new game, it doesn't need to continue with the same exact tech structure as the first game. "Why don't zerg have lurker or terran have science vessel in multiplayer? They had it in bw?" Same kind of incorrect reasoning. Its balance changes that aren't really required, but it makes sc2 different from scbw
3 - how does this change have anything to do with preventing bunker rushes or fast tech? Bunker rushes never happened that early (before supply) so that point is void. And how often has a rush to some kind of tech worked even with rax before supply? Again, more theorycraft that isn't applicable to the actual game. Rushing tech was risky before, its no different than it always was.
|
On October 16 2010 02:16 YiukeDukem wrote:
2 - its a new game, it doesn't need to continue with the same exact tech structure as the first game. "Why don't zerg have lurker or terran have science vessel in multiplayer? They had it in bw?" Same kind of incorrect reasoning. Its balance changes that aren't really required, but it makes sc2 different from scbw
But as he pointed out, this is a huge tech tree change made after the game was released. If the game was even still in beta, fine. But after release? While trying to establish a (world-wide) competitive scene? Ridiculous.
On October 16 2010 02:16 YiukeDukem wrote:
3 - how does this change have anything to do with preventing bunker rushes or fast tech? Bunker rushes never happened that early (before supply) so that point is void.
iirc, in the usual bunker rush (vs 12 hatch, say) in BW the bunker would go down while the supply was building, and could in fact be dropped immediately after the rax finished. Adding the however-many-seconds of depot build time to that earliest possible time for a bunker changes the possible timings.
|
On October 16 2010 02:16 YiukeDukem wrote:
3 - how does this change have anything to do with preventing bunker rushes or fast tech? Bunker rushes never happened that early (before supply) so that point is void. And how often has a rush to some kind of tech worked even with rax before supply? Again, more theorycraft that isn't applicable to the actual game. Rushing tech was risky before, its no different than it always was.
In TvZ, a 10rax fast reaper can be timed to reach the Zerg's natural hatchery with a bunker waiting for it because the barracks could be thrown down early enough. A supply depot is still built, but the order of buildings makes all the difference. Now the threat of cheese from a Terran has been entirely eradicated. Early aggression remains sure, but cheese is gone. I'm not saying I love cheese, but I do love the threat of cheese that makes your opponent always cautious that Blizzard took out.
|
You can still throw down a bunker on a natural hatchery after supply and still come out at a reasonable timing....a bunker rush can still happen later on in the game.
Cheese can still happen...its just now much more similar to a proxy gateway in that you have to wait for the supply building first and then the unit producing structure.
The fact that they are updating a game while it is still in the developing "competitive scene" is a good thing, not bad. The game came out officially around 2 months ago...games like dota which has been around for years continue getting large updates frequently. Maybe another better analogy would be warcraft/broodwar having game changing updates while having a competitive scene.
Think about the update in context with sc2 and not bw...it doesn't matter how things used to work before...its about how the current game plays now. Sc2 =/= bw and it shouldn't have to be.
|
|
|
I don't think it's such a horrible thing... I always build the depot first anyway. seems like rax 1st is simply for cheese.
|
you spelled "pro gaming" wrong
|
On October 16 2010 02:16 YiukeDukem wrote:
1 - you say that it isn't in the "lore" that the terran didn't float supplies with their other buildings. If you're going to try and use some kind of ingame or storywise logic then how do the units have any food or housing to survive? You need that infrastructure before you can have an army
The command center is the source of small operations supply, which ought to and up until now had the potential to include a small armed force. Obviously a larger force would require additional housing/food/etc.
On October 16 2010 02:16 YiukeDukem wrote:
2 - its a new game, it doesn't need to continue with the same exact tech structure as the first game. "Why don't zerg have lurker or terran have science vessel in multiplayer? They had it in bw?" Same kind of incorrect reasoning. Its balance changes that aren't really required, but it makes sc2 different from scbw
I like SC2. I accept it as a different game, and not just a more of the same but with add-ons kind of sequel. However, I'm not talking about the neat ways that they've made it different, I'm talking about the only core tech that they've changed. Zerg is the same all the way up (Queens vs. Infestor is pretty commensurate) in core tech. Protoss is the same all the way up in core tech. Why change Terran, and at such a fundemental level? You know the answer, and it begins with "reape". To me, this not a justifiable excuse for such a drastic change to the core tech. The problem was and still is a fairly broken novelty unit (that I like in theory, just fix the unit). It was also not intended to be one of those things that made SC2 different from SC1/BW, it was a snap decision, and a poor one.
On October 16 2010 02:16 YiukeDukem wrote:
3 - how does this change have anything to do with preventing bunker rushes or fast tech? Bunker rushes never happened that early (before supply) so that point is void. And how often has a rush to some kind of tech worked even with rax before supply? Again, more theorycraft that isn't applicable to the actual game. Rushing tech was risky before, its no different than it always was.
It doesn't prevent all bunker rushes, but it severely delays some key timings that again until now have been a part of the game. The entire race should not be punished for a broken unit with a silly method of "fixing" it. True the fast tech is more theorycraft (as I said) but now we won't know if it is applicable because the option is not *possible*. As a race of adaptation, Terran ought to retain these possibilities.
On October 16 2010 02:58 AssiRoyal wrote:
sc:bw 4 life
nuff said
While I appreciate the sentiment, please add something to the discussion. I think the SC1/BW scene has some application in this discussion, but an emotivist I am not.
On October 16 2010 03:55 GreatFall wrote:
I don't think it's such a horrible thing... I always build the depot first anyway. seems like rax 1st is simply for cheese.
Yes, but the point is that the options that were open to you before, even if you never used them, help in the mind game part of SC2. While I disagree with the potential and demonstrated brokenness of certain early reaper builds, that doesn't mean other more balanced (and historically backed) cheese should not still be available. If what the oGs coach said in his interview is true, that SC2 will evolve into more of a mind game than a mechanic game, then supply depot before barracks is a *major* nerf to the Terran arsenal.
|
I just do not see how Terran players can complain about this... Protoss (the greatest race, mind you) are forced to make their supply building before unit production. why you ask? because we are legion. That is why. So only makes sense to impose our supply constraints onto you the Hoomen. Choices? we don't get any, for we are legion. Lore? We were around before history itself, BEFORE TIME! This is all because you pesky hoomen rose up to fight us, and God did not like that, or you. So he smote you with ye olde Nerfhammah of Thor and now you complain after months of abusing imbalance? I say tough. Your meddling complaints fall upon ears that have heard the machinations of time for millenia, for we are legion. Be happy you still have your cheap faceroll Firebears. Cheap as in cost efficient. I'm sure you saw some of the less respectful of the legion cry about our Zealot timing pushes huh? Case in point, we got too cocky and got nerfed, the same has happened to you, all endings are beginnings and all beginnings signal an end in the Wheel of Time.
|
Barracks tech is much stronger than in BW because of Marauders, Reapers, +5 marine hit points, +50 bunker hit points +1 bunker armor (and salvage!), and the Orbital Command. By comparison, Zealots are unchanged, and Zerglings are nerfed (although queens are introduced, making it hard to attack the Zerg's main but easy to attack the natural). It's not surprising that Terran's ability to cheese would need a compensatory nerf.
I don't like the nerf Blizzard chose, however. I think the Tech Lab should cost 50/50/50, and the bunker should have lower durability, but it's stupid for the Reaper to take 45 game-seconds to build, and it's stupid that Terran can't go rax-before-depot anymore.
|
On October 16 2010 03:55 GreatFall wrote:
I don't think it's such a horrible thing... I always build the depot first anyway. seems like rax 1st is simply for cheese.
It's also anti-cheese as well..... I've been doing it since the middle of the beta (10 rax 10 depot 12 OC)..... It also works well for a fast tech opening (10 rax 10 depot 11 gas). Now I've gotta change every strat I've worked on to work with a 10 depot 11 rax opening (which is not as good as an anti-cheese build). And I came up with them with the idea that they would be "standard" play for me.....
|
On October 16 2010 04:51 Kakera wrote:
I just do not see how Terran players can complain about this... Protoss (the greatest race, mind you) are forced to make their supply building before unit production. why you ask? because we are legion. That is why. So only makes sense to impose our supply constraints onto you the Hoomen. Choices? we don't get any, for we are legion. Lore? We were around before history itself, BEFORE TIME! This is all because you pesky hoomen rose up to fight us, and God did not like that, or you. So he smote you with ye olde Nerfhammah of Thor and now you complain after months of abusing imbalance? I say tough. Your meddling complaints fall upon ears that have heard the machinations of time for millenia, for we are legion. Be happy you still have your cheap faceroll Firebears. Cheap as in cost efficient. I'm sure you saw some of the less respectful of the legion cry about our Zealot timing pushes huh? Case in point, we got too cocky and got nerfed, the same has happened to you, all endings are beginnings and all beginnings signal an end in the Wheel of Time.
This made me laugh, thought I think it is somewhat inaccurate. Protoss do not require Pylon first because they are legion, but because they have the most powerful tier 1 unit (not 1.5, or 1.25). It is balanced out with the extra cost and the extra time to make. Protoss also "generally" have the most powerful units, which I think was a little more true in SC/BW than it is in SC2. Regardless, Protoss lore-wise are also fairly rigid in their customs and it makes sense for them to have a fairly rigid opening pattern as opposed to either Zerg or Terran. Besides, Protoss have cannons which is a second viable opening which can strike as early if not earlier than bunker cheese (definately earlier now).
On October 16 2010 06:16 Impervious wrote:
It's also anti-cheese as well..... I've been doing it since the middle of the beta (10 rax 10 depot 12 OC)..... It also works well for a fast tech opening (10 rax 10 depot 11 gas). Now I've gotta change every strat I've worked on to work with a 10 depot 11 rax opening (which is not as good as an anti-cheese build). And I came up with them with the idea that they would be "standard" play for me.....
Exactly. Terran needs to be able to throw down the barracks at a moment's notice against incoming cheese. You can bet that the next 100 minerals is not going to be going toward a depot but a bunker in that case.
Also, in another thread demonstrating the fast tech options that are gone: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=162031.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
