|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
Why 5?
It was very clear after our BWWI play test of Starcraft 2 that not one of us could bring an opinion that would include everything we had experienced. Naturally, we were inclined to write an article that would leave the reader to take the best and worst of our combined opinions and correlate his or her own conclusions. Starcraft 2 has not even entered an internal alpha, yet it is already in good shape. That being said, there are some key changes that we all took issue with. Some were more critical than others but we hope this presents a balanced opinion of the issues we saw, and the respective changes that could be made.
Rage
My view on SC2
Note that there is NO WAY for anyone to make a complete and definitive judgment on SC2. Not only is the game constantly changing, two days of playing are just not enough time to get an overall precise impression.
Unit Interface
Of course, as you all know, the GUI has been 'simplified'. Rallying a nexus to your minerals makes the spawning probe pick the available mineral chunk immediately. A hatchery even has two rally points, one for workers and one for units. Multiple Building Selection is also active, but in a limited way. Selecting all Barracks and pressing M once will only make one Marine.
I'm not going to sum up all the changes, but am going to give my opinion on how it felt.
I personally feel that macro has been oversimplified. Even with their 'limited' version of MBS things are just too simple. I would disagree with anyone saying this would completely block the development of SC2 as an e-sport though. Base management didn't feel "easy" at all, and I think my APM was still around 200 cause the game still feels so tense. You still get that SC feeling that every action counts, that every millisecond counts.
Overall Gameplay
While there was no real racial imbalance noticeable (although Protoss seemed the strongest to me), some units seemed relatively useless. I, for one, am not a Jackal fan.
When you play SC2, you just know and feel that the game dynamic is different from SC. I'm not only talking about the build orders here, but also resource management and army management. You sense the similarity with SC through high paced gameplay, but it feels like a different game.
One small example:
In SC the static defense buildings (Bunker, Cannon, Sunken) were a lot weaker than they are in SC2. That didn't make for passive gameplay at all though, since the SC2 units in general are a lot more mobile, and you can't be bothered putting static defense everywhere.
One of the downsides of SC2 was in my opinion the hard counters. The fact that some unit type just completely rape the other unit type, make the game seem really techbased. While it makes for both a back and forth gameplay and a timing based gameplay, the counters just seem so hard that build order wins and Rock-Paper-Scissors imbalance occur.
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/Kennigit/SC2FE/1.jpg) In siege mode, the Siege Tank's attack rips everything apart
Fun level
High. I can't imagine someone that enjoys the RTS genre not enjoying SC2. Just like SC, it has high-paced gameplay and seemed perfect as a spectator sport.
The Blizzard employees gave me the impression that they did everything to make this game as awesome as possible, and they will without a doubt succeed if they take enough time to do so.
Manifesto7
Introduction
First of all let me say that I did not get to play as much as most of the other TL people. Chill, Kennigit, and especially Nyvone played a healthy dose more than me. However, this was the second time I was able to get my hands on the game after Blizzcon last year, so I think I have a nice perspective.
One thing I am not going to touch on is units and balance, because that is still changing every week. I have confidence that through further testing the queen will find a role, terran units won't all feel the same, and all three races will not be so mobile that terrain becomes a non-factor.
So here are three things I was concerned with:
MBS
Let's get this out of the way now. Last time I played SC2 I was pro MBS. I loved the fact that I could actually do the things that I was thinking about and felt relatively freed from the limitations of my 110 apm hands. I am the type of gamer that MBS was designed for.
I'm going to have to go back on my word though. Much like what Chill and Rage have said, the macro is too simple. When I played zerg, my hatcheries had two rally points. One for drones to automine (which I could set directly to the minerals for each separate hatchery) and one for all other units (which I could group together). Thus, my drones automatically filled dutifully to their respective patches, while a single hotkey allowed all my hatcheries to be rallied to wherever I needed my units. No need to go home and manage my economy, no need to manage drones unless I wanted to build something.
AI
The AI of your units is really good, but much of what made BW skillful is gone. Grab all your workers in one pull, attack, and they will do their damnedest to surround the enemy with no help from you at all. It is very difficult to harass early on with such an effective counter unless you are using much faster units (and then you are unbeatable). The things that made BW fun in the first 4 minutes may be difficult to replicate.
Battles
My final criticism is that battles are too messy and slow. The glorious part of StarCraft was that the battles took seconds to play out, the outcome was easy to see, and because the units were so crisp it was fun to watch. Now the battles take much longer, and I had a hard time figuring out if my zealots were going to beat those marines or visa versa. Of course when I play the game I will learn these things, but as a first impression the fights were somewhere between BW and Warcraft 3. Not fast enough for my taste.
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/Kennigit/SC2FE/6.jpg) Battles in Starcraft 2 felt too long compared to it's predecessor
And now three things I hope for in the future:
UI
The UI is SO much better than last year. The glassy feeling on the buttons is gone, and the mini map looks great. I like the hotkeys showing me what I have selected, as it reminds me to use them! Even the idle worker button is not a big deal, and unlike WC will be much more useful. My hope is they continue to add articulation to the UI so that when I press a button it visually reacts. Two thumbs up for this.
E-Sport Potential
I was foisted on stage to commentate the SC2 matches between Naruto and Blizzard, them with no headphones and me not knowing the tech trees. Nevertheless I still had plenty to talk about. The game will make for great watching and I really hope Blizzard takes to heart the role spectating has played in the success of the original. Give observers more tools in the game. Provide in-game utilities for broadcasting and streaming so the TSL doesn't have to rely on duct tape and baling twine. Provide resources to those who will want to create content. The great thing about StarCraft is that Blizzard doesn't have to do everything, they just have to give support and there are plenty of volunteers who will move beyond what Blizzard could possibly have imagined.
A Closed Beta
Talking with IdrA we agreed on one thing. SC2 needs to be played on a larger scale, and by people who can articulate themselves well. Let them get their hands on the game and the rate of improvement will increase greatly. If this two-day event was any indication, the reaction from gamers themselves will be as valuable as anything else.
Chill
Brood War was successful for two simple reasons: Ease of entry and longevity of competition. Knowing this, my comments on StarCraft 2 will largely fall into these categories. I've always played StarCraft to win. I went into StarCraft 2 with that mentality. I wasn't there to look at the landscape, understand the story, or try out all the units. I went there to win, and to see if StarCraft 2 can have the success of it's predecessor in the world of competitive RTS games.
So first, to get this out of the way:
Art
As you've seen from the screenshots, StarCraft 2 looks pretty; Not Crysis pretty, where you know you won't be able to run it unless you have a top of the line machine, but WoW pretty, where it will run fine on an older computer and still look very nice on a new one. Art doesn't interest me too much, so I didn't take time to stop and look at the units. Some of the units were very hard for me to identify with. Because the units clip each other really easily (like workers mining minerals), it's very hard to distinguish what is what. When Zerglings are running through each other, it's hard to tell if he has 8 or 32. The units are unique enough, but I'd like to see a little more differentiation. Of course, once everyone has played thousands of games, I'm sure the difference will be clear, but out of the box the some of the units were not particularly awe inspiring.
Other than that, the art was fine. I don't remember much about the tilesets, I believe there was a Twilight map, a Platform map and a Jungle map. There were all acceptable. I can't reiterate how much I don't look at the art 
Ease of Entry
StarCraft 2 is very easy to play out of the box. Everyone from Teamliquid was playing at a "relatively high level" by the end of the second day.
The hotkeys. Oh God the hotkeys. I can't remember specifics, but a building like the "Dark Obelisk" would have a hotkey 'G'. It drove me crazy and needs to change before release. Either make the hotkeys intuitive like in StarCraft, or group them together @ QWERASDFZXCV like in Strifeshadow. It really drove me crazy all day that the hotkeys were so weird.
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/Kennigit/SC2FE/3.jpg) Proxy gates AND proxy cannons? Typical protoss -_-
All the things you've heard about simplifying the game are true in one form or another:
- Workers auto-split once they reach a mineral patch. This means 20 maynarding workers will reach an expansion, and fan out optimally to the 10 or so patches. It also means at the beginning of the game, there's almost no reason to try to split more than 3 of your starting 6 workers. Some games I would try to split all 6, but they would reach the patch first and fan out, and then I would tell a worker to move over to a patch that another worker had automatically transferred to, delaying my mining.
- You can select a lot of units. I don't know how many, but it was at least 36, and was probably 48. This is fine and doesn't really affect gameplay much. I support this change. ([i]Editor Note: As far as i know, the unit selection was unlimited. I remember this because i was laughing maniacally as i sent 120 zerglings through a nydus worm into some kid's mineral line with just a couple clicks)
- Your hot keys show up above the menu bar. When you've put something in hotkey 1, a little icon appears of the units with a 1 and the number of units / buildings in the group. It doesn't affect me, but others may have found it nice.
- MBS. More on this later.
- Rallied units are issued the attack command as opposed to the move command, INCLUDING WORKERS. I really do not support this change and hope it reverts back to the old method. It makes rallying too strong. Players should have to choose between watching their macro and supporting their in-base units, or having a harder time grouping up when they return. They shouldn't be able to have their cake and eat it too. Either way, this isn't a big issue. If you rally a worker to a resource, it begins mining.
- There's an idle worker button. I think this is really stupid, but it was in Warcraft 3 so Blizzard's hands are tied. Why not make a "Storm-ready Templar" button or a "Mutalisk-that-should-be-harassing" button? Come on.
So yes, there are tons of mechanics to help newbies learn the game, but above all, it's intuitive. Things work how you would think they do. The only thing I can remember not being able to figure out was how to shift+tab, and what the hell the Queen did.
Longevity
Longevity is related to competition, which depends directly on racial balance, strategic balance, and difficulty of mechanics.
There's no point in even touching on racial balance until the game has been out for six months. Too much will change.
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/Kennigit/SC2FE/5.jpg) A DT rush is just as viable as ever. Hi Artosis!
I see the other two points as being huge problems for the longevity of StarCraft 2. First off, I remember Blizzard making a big deal when I talked to them a year ago about bypassing chokes begin a problem because it removes strategy from the game. Unfortunately, somewhere along the way they seemed to ignore their own advice. EVERYTHING seems to jump, flies, or runs super fast. Setting up expansions and defending your base becomes a chore because something is burrowing from a worm, jumping up a cliff, or warping in from a floating Pylon. This needs to change. The races all feel so mobile and static defense feels largely useless. Further, I'm worried about Blizzard's mentality for hard counters. StarCraft is a game of hard counters (Firebats >>>> Zerglings, Zerglings >>>>>> Dragoons, Dragoons >>>> Firebats; etc.), but the hard counter units rarely get used. I picture Blizzard thinking "Immortals will kill Tanks" and then neither unit ever gets used as a result. Again, time will tell.
In terms of difficulty of mechanics, the game has less to do than StarCraft. Things automine, rally-attack, and you have MBS. Melee units run past enemies and surround, making targeting workers a nightmare and using Zealots vs Zerglings an experience in pain. Seriously, you just a-move Zerglings and they flank themselves, it's ridiculous. You drill workers and they fan out and surround Zerglings. This needs to change NOW. Units should go where they're told, this smart AI kills so much of a competitive game.
Also, I was beating someone by playing with one finger while Kennigit laughed and we talking about how imbalanced this build was. Admittedly he was a newbie, but even in StarCraft you needed to grab the mouse to attack (Not in SC2). I know Blizzard is thinking "with all this time freed up, high level gamers will have more time to harass and whatnot".
Before I went to BWWI, I was pro-MBS. I followed this same mentality. Imagine someone having enough time to micro 2 groups of Mutalisks at the same time because they didn't have to macro. It would be incredible to watch. Sadly, the majority of the units' harassment mechanics are easy mode. Blink up, kill something, Blink down. Anyone can do it, and how do you defend it without sitting in your base? This is touching on balance issues so I'm going to cut it off right now.
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/Kennigit/SC2FE/4.jpg) The early game has been slowed down by new core features like auto-mining.
With macro on easy-mode, the competition is going to be much harder. To make a terrible analogy, it would be like playing hockey with everyone wearing rocket skates. The competition would be much harder because everyone would suck but still would be moving really quickly (or at least as quick as the fastest players). There's no way to differentiate yourself from the plethora of newbies who also have MBS at their disposal. And that is worrisome, because it means people will peak very quickly and get bored of the game. Will that actually happen? I don't know, but I'm not confident in the competitive direction the game has gone.
That being said, two TL players who played the game for 30 minutes took down two Blizzard employees. EASY.
Problem Units / Themes
Without touching on balance, here's some things that are terrible / too good in SC2:
-Mutalisks. They have to be on top of units to attack them (no Muta micro), they turn like a spaceship (rotate and then move forward) meaning you can't run quickly, and I believe the Spire was 300 minerals. Idra tried to 3 Hatch Muta me and it was the biggest disaster ever. They're terrible. I never built them after that.
([i]editor note: Dustin Browder has noted a few times that they are looking for a solution to this. They have to "break" the engine in order to do it)
-Cobras (ground-attacking Terran air unit). They 2-shot workers and move faster than a Scout but slower than a Wraith. They cost 100 or 150 minerals (so little that it didn't matter). The majority of my Terran games I opened with 2 of these and killed 15 workers as they tried to run. They must be changed.
-Jackals (Vulture). You can still micro them. They were good, but not too good. I'm just putting this here to tell you that you can still micro Vultures.
-PsiStorm. It's like a third the area as before. I stormed one opponent's workers and killed 2. Storm is terrible and needs to be changed.
-Queen. The Queen is a Zerg "hero" that used to make defense structures and have a beefy attack. But now, it's beyond terrible. It dies to 4 Marines. It's expensive. It can mutate Larva, making a Larva that separates from the Hatchery and can walk, leaving me to ask why I wouldn't build the unit and then walk it, instead of spending 50 minerals to do it in the backwards order. The Queen needs to be revamped because there's no reason to get one. Ever.
-Overlord. Yes, Ovies are imbalanced, hahaha. Once you have a Lair, you can spew out Creep from your Ovie. We didn't confirm if it goes away after awhile (like 2 minutes) but I'm pretty sure it did. Anyways, the new Sunken Colonies can uproot and walk, meaning you can turtle up with 90 Sunkens, uproot, and Sunken push into his natural. Which is what I did, and it was imbalanced. This "cute" Ovie creep-spew needs to change. Or make Sunkens not be able to walk. Either way.
-Nydus Worms. Ok, imagine a Nydus colony that you can connect everywhere. Now if one of those exits dies, you can rebuild it somewhere else. That is the Nydus Worm, and it's so imba it makes me cry. Ovie creep-spew + Nydus Worm = EZ MODE. This is how I killed someone with one finger. It needs to change. ZvZ would turn into Nydus Worming your opponent over and over and over and over. Every time it doesn't work you get another chance to try again. Maybe I don't understand how they work, but from what I saw they need to be changed.
-The Medivac. It's so stupid I cringe every time I think about it, but it's good in the game. I hate it but it works. They should keep it.
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/Kennigit/SC2FE/7.jpg) In the build we played Archons felt underdeveloped due to their high cost. Using them late game was anything but necessary
Conclusions
From what I've heard of the latest build before BWWI, the game has come a long way. It's fun as hell to play. It's intuitive and quick to learn. No one is doubting that this is going to be another epic RTS that will break sales records.
But will it become StarCraft or Warcraft 3, in terms of competitive longevity? It's still much too soon to call.
Kennigit
Too Easy?
I cracked a smile as I started my first game of Starcraft 2. This game presents itself in much the same fashion that its predecessor did with the first peon units lined up beside your starting base structure. My immediate reaction was to select/move these units and begin splitting them to different mineral patches – an admirable technique of any good Broodwar player (and one I am yet to fully master). However, in Starcraft 2 I would learn that this is not really necessary. Broodwar players, for years were forced to adapt to the simple AI and it was essential for a player to fully control their forces lest they be lost due to sloppiness. In Starcraft 2, when I incorrectly split, I felt like the AI said “hey no problem!” and finished the process for me. Maynarding peon units is very easy as they automatically split to the best mineral patches. Despite being the worst Broodwar player on Teamliquid Staff, having my hand held felt a bit weak, but I would find it to be a recurring theme of the AI.
Thinking I was super clever and cheesy, I 1 zeal 1 probe harassed my first opponent. Even with my sick micro, the opponent laughed in my face as his entire peon force instantly surrounded my two units and slaughtered them. I believe this to be an issue with clipping and AI that is just too smart - i'm not a game designer but something needed to change with that.
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/Kennigit/SC2FE/8.jpg) The AI seemed to make attacks like this just a little too easy.
There is a Broodwar mindset that I had to get rid of in order to truly appreciate what Starcraft 2 was presenting. For months many of us roared curses at the design team for "destroying" our keenly tuned macro. It’s a fun game to play and I loved abusing how terrible my opponents were. I went 47-3 all weekend and I had to really think about whether things were “imbalanced”, flawed or if it was just a result of my terrible opponents. After discussing it with other Teamliquid members however, we did discover recurring themes and all came to agree on one key fact – the Starcraft 2 build we played is just too easy.
The Changes
Now that is a very blunt statement and one that deserves a lot of support. The best description I can give is that what made Broodwar so beautiful in that it was easy to learn but required so much dedication to master. There is a rich gradient of skill levels that can take years to climb, but the changes that have been made to Starcraft 2’s core play have made that gradient much more shallow. Neither automining, nor MBS are particularly bad, but together with a few other key additions and changes, they are just completely ridiculous. I would like to present a few scenarios to support this.
1) I was very interested in the nydus worm, the powerful roach and some which kind of combination I could perform – I hit the jackpot. In the build we played, the nydus worm is little more than a proxy nydus canal. Imagine being able to drop some new creep with a cliff overlord and sneak your entire army into someone’s base. When I first did this I squealed like a girl scout at this new found power – I could focus on base defense and leave my army in my base until the time was right. Once I hit lair tech I simply put all 6 hatcheries on one hotkey (18 larva now at my disposal) rallied them all into the worm and rallied the worm to my opponent’s mineral line. Despite my opponents being terrible, it just seemed too powerful to be able to press 5aaaaaaaaaaaaa to make Roaches and then 6u to unload them all (they would automatically attack).
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/Kennigit/SC2FE/2.jpg) A sneaky nydus worm like this will ruin your day
SUGGESTIONS FOR THIS PROBLEM
i. Creep drop for the overlord needs to be an upgrade
ii. Nydus tech should be hive tech. One can not be expected to have their base surrounded in cannons or turrets that early in the game and risk missing a sneaky cliffed overlord.
iii. From what I could tell, the worms themselves were relatively weak but it mattered little if you lost a worm – all your units survived. Perhaps in the event of a lost worm, a player loses 25% of his units so there is more risk involved.
iv. If I had needed more focus on an attack like this, (perhaps multiple worms that couldn’t be so close to each other, giving my opponent a better chance of seeing it), then it would have seemed less like an instant win because I had snuck a worm in. If a worm could only hold say 10 units and they had to be spread out more (makes sense given their massive size) perhaps there would be more balance to this.
2) I am a D- Broodwar player, but I had IloveOov style macro in Starcraft 2. For my first day I felt mineral starved as each peon unit was only bringing in 5 units – this same problem happened to Chill until I flat out told him in the middle of a game “yo, automine and mbs”. Once we harnessed the power of automining, it became apparent that what made good macro in Broodwar has been dumbed down – that skill gradient has been shallowed.
One key point id like to make is that none of us (save the progamers I talked to) found MBS to actually be that bad. Its quite clear when you play SC2 that tweaks have been added to the MBS process so its not simply spamming units. However, the problem with macro in Starcraft 2 lies in the ability to MBS, automine, que buildings (ie tell 1 scv to build 20 supply depots) and mass rallying. Yes some of these are standard in the modern RTS, but together they make Starcraft 2 just too easy.
SUGGESTIONS TO THIS PROBLEM
i. Get rid of automine – While MBS can be tweaked, I cant think of any way that one would “balance” automining and everyone I spoke to agreed with this issue.
ii. Perhaps some tweak to the queing of building production – im not a game designer so I don’t know what the solution is, but hitting 80 pop and not having to worry about supply depots for the rest of the game is just one more subtraction from the necessity of macromanagement.
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/Kennigit/SC2FE/10.jpg) Early game management has had it's finese lessened. Not due to a single new feature, but their combination.
Thoughts on Competitive Play
The pro gamers and coaches I talked to were not happy about MBS but this is too be expected. Even at my D- skill level I had muscle memory to click through factories, gateways and other buildings to macro when it wasn’t necessary. I think once a player gets out of the “broodwar” and goes into Starcraft 2 level headed, it is much easier to appreciate the changes that are being made. I still dont think automine is conducive to competitive play. If i wanted to sit on top of my units all day long, i would go play Warcraft 3 - SC2 is coming along, but the macro is not there yet.
Despite my earlier complaints, Starcraft 2 was very entertaining to watch on stage and there were many breathless moments that carried over from Broodwar (Naruto fending off a 10 pool with 2 marines and a few scvs and slaming the Teamliquid hammer down on the Blizzard employees). The question that remains then is once the novelty has worn off, will Starcraft 2 remain competitive and revitalize the esports community? Most likely. I have little doubt that Blizzard will fix or compromise the “key issues” and that it will be a great game to play and watch – during our Teamliquid dinner I talked to many good and bad players who agreed that Starcraft 2 in its current build is in better shape than many RTS games released by other publishers. When one considers the amount of time and dedication Blizzard will put into this game before its final release, there is a great sense of confidence that it will last as long as its predecessor.
Thedeadhaji
Unit AI
Surround AI
In Starcraft 2, the AI of units has been significantly altered. One prime example of this is the surround AI most notably exhibited by speedlings and also workers. A single attack move from the speedling user will surround zealots on the ramp within 2 seconds (that is not an exaggeration). Right click past, then attacking onto the zealot is no longer required. When I first did this to Meat using a 10pool speed build, I was extremely shocked at the results.
The scv AI was demonstrated during my 1 zealot 1 probe rush against Xeo. In a situation where the Terran player usually struggles to deflect the zealot pressure and protect his scvs, he was instead able to simply select 8 or so of his workers, attack move in a general direction, and if I had any inclination to engage the scvs, my zealot would be surrounded immediately.
The Surround AI is extremely powerful, and makes early worker harass obsolete, as well as making certain defense situations extremely difficult.
Rally AI
In the current build, rallied units from gateways and other production facilities come out with an attack move command. What this means is that an early rush where every second counts can be easily interfered by a scouting scv lurking around near your gateways. This should be a simple fix, and should be fixed in order to uphold the integrity of the game.
IdrA commented that his retreat command (right click) away from enemy units was overridden when they were engaged by hostile fire. I myself do not think I experienced this (or at least it was not clear), but any possibility of this issue should be looked into. Units should do "exactly as told" in a game like starcraft 2 and currently there are certain areas where this is not exactly the case.
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/Kennigit/SC2FE2/567.jpg) One problem some of us encountered was having our units not retreating properly. If they were attacked while moving back, they would return to counter. A simple but desperately needed fix.
Mining AI
Automining AI is incredibly smart. it will find the optimum mineral patch to move to and rally the worker to it, maximizing efficiency with minimal user control. Furthermore, it seemed very difficult to disrupt mining with buildings, although I did manage to mess up pathing once with a couple buildings that were impassable.
Economy
As you know, in SC2 workers gather 5 minerals at a time and 6 gas at a time. The mineral income rate causes some awkward worker cutting early game. I am a Protoss player in Starcraft 1, so I was naturally inclined to test out my main race more than others when actually constructing build orders for SC2. What I found was that you must cut probes constantly even from the early game. Cut probe, 10 gate, make one probe, cut probe assimilator at 11, cut probe, etc. Perhaps this is not a big deal, and will be part of the overall schematic of SC2 - managing your worker production more than ever before, tweaking exact timings and priorities - but at the current stage, as a SC1 player, I must admit it felt a bit unnatural.
Gas geysers will deplete at around 7 minutes of harvest time. There are abilities that restore healthy gas production, or increase mining rates in general, but to be honest these functionalities seem more contrived than necessary. The existence of 2 gas geysers in every main and natural seems to have a positive effect on decision making on when to take that second gas and what tech route to pursue. In the current setup, players of any race are strapped down by gas limitations, and must manage the timings very carefully. Units are gas heavy, buildings are gas heavy, and your gas income is low in both rate and quantity. Double gasses and restricted gas income are concepts that could very well add another dimension of economy management to the realm of Starcraft - which is exciting without a doubt - but in its current incarnation, there are clear holes in the dynamic.
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/Kennigit/SC2FE2/7.jpg) These golden minerals are a favorable addition to the economy of Starcraft 2. They create new strategic locations which will likely be hot spots during high end play.
Interface
The interface had the feel of Starcraft 1 while upgrading its capabilities big time. For instance, above the center bottom box, it would show you what buildings were bound to your hotkeys, which I thought was a cute addition (though not too relevant to the more dedicated players).
There was some "jitter" of the building preview grid when trying to place a building in certain locations, most notably near a ramp. It would jump back and forth between the two locations until I nudged the mouse a bit to settle it down. Obviously this would be fixed by release.
And finally, MBS. The current incarnation of mbs is one where you can bind all sorts of buildings together and tab through them, like in War3. Notable is the fact that a Rax with no addon, a Rax with Reactor, or Rax with Tech lab are treated as different buildings altogether. To queue units - for example with a control group with 3 raxes - pressing 'm' once makes one marine in one rax. Pressing 'm' again makes another marine in the 2nd rax, etc.
This is actually the most powerful variant of mbs possible. You can control the number of units created, as well as the type and ratios perfectly. The best example is with zerg larvae. In the initial form of mbs, going '5sd' would have created 9 drones when selecting 3 hatcheries. While offering the power to create many units with minimal user input, this would have been very inflexible in sitations when you would want, say 6 drones and 6 zerglings. It would have encouraged the better player to perhaps bind his hatcheries individually, or in groups of two, etc in order to allow better control over his unit production. With the current, most powerful variant of mbs, the player can enter in 5sddddzzzhhh and get exactly the unit mix he desires. *Easy Button*
Strategy
There are certain areas regarding strategy I'd like to address - not many, but some key points.
There is "brush (tall grass)" present in some areas of the maps at bwwi that prevent vision from the other side. Xeo was able to exploit this nicely in tvp, building a factory outside my scout path vision behind some grass, lifting it into my main and doing a nice jackal harass. The move was enabled by the tall grass, as well as the faster floating speeds of Terran buildings in Starcraft 2. Such features should hopefully allow for some creativity in Starcraft 2 that was lacking overall in Warcraft 3 when I was playing seriously.
Detection seems to come very late for all 3 races, making them vulnerable to dt and lurker rushes more than ever. While I did not have the opportunity to test timings of detection vs invisibility rushes against another competent player, the overall consensus amongst us was that detection was indeed high up in the tree, and that they were too far out in the branches, if that makes any sense. To clarify, what I mean is that if a player opts to play it very safe in terms of detection and does the equivalent of a 1 gate observer build pvt in SC1, then that player is set back quite a bit unless his opponent went for a dt/lurker rush. The problem is particularly dire with Terran, who must get a rax, a factory, a merc haven, and then finally the scanner upgrade for their cc. Overall the timings and sacrifices combined in achieving detection and achieving invisible ninjas seems to be at a discord with 'strong' overall builds.
Carrier micro is impossible as they are unbelievably clumsy and do not stack. I heard similar complaints about mutalisks, but apparently mutalisk control is something Blizzard does want to maintain into SC 2 so hopefully air unit control can be revamped to reward players who can control them well and upkeep their economies simultaneously.
Feel
To me the overall feel of the game and its atmosphere wasn't quite SC1, wasn't quite War3, but somewhere in the middle. Overall, the feeling I had that differed greatly from SC1 was a sensation of "floatiness".
The best example I feel is the siege tank, which didn't feel nearly as 'grounded' to the terrain as I felt it should have - they are tanks after all. They looked and felt light, as if they weren't really connected to the grounded they were trampling over.
Looking back, much of the preceding may seem very critical and only focus on negative aspects of the Starcraft 2 build we played. However, thats why we went to WWI - if you want to hear how amazing and "cool" every new feature is, you should read a main stream gaming news site. Starcraft 2 is a very fun game to play and we have little doubt that the solutions to the addressed issues will have been found by launch.
In an industry where RTS games are routinely released incomplete, Starcraft 2 is a breath of fresh air - we all agreed that in its current condition it surpasses anything that major publishers have released to this date. Huge steps have been taken since the first play test at Blizzcon 07 and it is evident that the game we have been waiting for is finally taking form.
Further Reading
Nyovne's BWWI SC2 Review - http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=75527
|
Wow. Nice Starcraft II megapost guys It's nice having 5 different people comment on the game, and all end up with the same points (MBS is too easy, AI is too easy, etc.)
Thanks
EDIT : btw, the link in the FE section on the right links to the Final Edits index, not this article itself :p
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
Yeah that was intentional, more people should appreciate that tlfe page lol.
|
Canada7170 Posts
Thanks guys!
Not much to say from me, as I haven't played SC2 at all yet. Just a big thank you.
Shallow, it's been that way for a while with the link. EDIT: Kenningit you ninja -_-
We definitely need a beta of some sort.
|
|
|
Thanks for the great posts, guys...
I'm a bit worried at the current state of the game, though, especially in light of the consensus of MBS too easy, AI is too automatic, some units don't move or feel right, etc.
Another concern is that Blizzard seems to need more experienced players to balance out the game... I have no doubt of the programming and art talents of the team, but skill-wise, they are just terrible, which was apparent from the low skill of the employees as compared to completely "noob" players who only touched the game for half an hour...
|
Im glad that MBS and other macro issues are a concern and that blizzard is fiddling with it but I am most worried about the AI. The auto surronding and the not retreating/auto attacking seems to be wrong, I dont even remember War3 having that.
|
Nice. Very good read! Good job, I can't wait to play at blizzcon!
|
Germany1302 Posts
Great Post and I agree on most parts. I did not play SC2 too much there but even as a D~D+ Player you could micro/macro as my 120APM would never allow me in SC1 and bringing the noobs closer to the pros by default just removes many of the "ooohh" moments when they do things you would need to train days to pull off..
It is fun, it is too easy, but I'm sure it will be good "when it's done" :-)
|
3 Lions
United States3705 Posts
yay, this is great to people who have never played sc2 like me
|
Wow, good job! Can't wait for SC2, hope they fix the problems.
|
Wow, nice writeup!
Glad to see these reviews; I haven't really been keeping tabs on SCII but I enjoy reading stuff from WWI and such about it.
I'm really starting to get excited about the game.
|
is awesome32274 Posts
|
Sweden33719 Posts
A little worried about the surround AI :O
But very excited for the game.
Enjoyed this report the most out of all WWI reports I've read so far!
|
Finally some near professional review to SC2. I'm not happy that they prove me right with my negative view of the game, I was actually hoping that most of these things could be nerfed somehow but it seems they cannot, at least not without cracking many brains.
This almost makes me sad. I'm only talking so negative about SC2 because I'd love to play that game competitively someday. Being right about something never felt so bad before... :/
|
Personally I think the basic mechanics of SC2 should simply mirror that of SC:BW.
|
Very nice read, SCII sounds like it''s coming along well.
|
Wow, great reporting, well-digested (and, I thought, very objective). Freakin sweet.
Sounds like you guys were actually more disappointed with automine than MBS.
I really hope the surround AI is changed. The fact that units in SC:BW do "exactly" what you say, no matter how "dumb" facilitates all kinds of creativity.
You guys touched a little on the terrain and it sounds like choke points are less valuable than before. Did you all have this reaction?
Considering the expectations, sometimes I think BW fans forget that the original reason for playing the game is that it's insanely fun...but it doesn't look like that's something we have to worry about.
Edit: oops tense
|
The auto surround thing is retarded, no other word for it. Perhaps Blizz just counted on having a lot of noobs going to WWI, and didn't want them to get owned (:D). I also think they should change psi storm back to the original version, why change something that worked so perfectly?
But anyways, great reporting, btw, no one mentioned reapers sucking?
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
On July 21 2008 07:37 Ra.Xor.2 wrote:
But anyways, great reporting, btw, no one mentioned reapers sucking?
Your right, none of us mentioned it but they were super expensive and we didn't really see a need to invest in them save "investigating" if they worked or not. Personally most of my games were too short to get both high tech and high volume of units.
Through alpha/beta testing, im sure the reaper will find it's role
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On July 21 2008 07:37 Ra.Xor.2 wrote:
The auto surround thing is retarded, no other word for it. Perhaps Blizz just counted on having a lot of noobs going to WWI, and didn't want them to get owned (:D). I also think they should change psi storm back to the original version, why change something that worked so perfectly?
But anyways, great reporting, btw, no one mentioned reapers sucking?
Well, with how much tigher units clump now it needs some change.
|
thedeadhaji
39489 Posts
Chill's section is by far the best out of us 5 btw ^.^
|
Netherlands19135 Posts
On July 21 2008 07:37 Ra.Xor.2 wrote:
The auto surround thing is retarded, no other word for it. Perhaps Blizz just counted on having a lot of noobs going to WWI, and didn't want them to get owned (:D). I also think they should change psi storm back to the original version, why change something that worked so perfectly?
But anyways, great reporting, btw, no one mentioned reapers sucking?
I disagree with the autosurround assesment but most of all psitorm wouldnt work the same due to new unit pathing and clutter AI combined with the implementation of smart casting in SC2. So something had to be done, whatever that will be exactly is material more fit to be tested in beta.
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
On July 21 2008 07:32 DeepGreen wrote:
You guys touched a little on the terrain and it sounds like choke points are less valuable than before. Did you all have this reaction?
I think alot of this is going to be based on map design. The maps we played were very luna/pythonesque. Some of the chokes/ramps were simply massive (i had a 2 depot 2 rax wall on one map) but this isn't really relevant because it will all change.
|
I'm happy i actually read this Final Edit, you guys really made the game seem promising and I'm more excited than ever for it's release, thank you for a truly honest review.
|
Great article, the game is looking very hopeful. Seems like making micro harder (the surround/flank ai) and getting rid of automine are the main problems.
|
|
|
Good stuff. Thanks for taking the time to put this together.
|
|
|
Great writeup, I enjoyed reading it and made me excitied for the game (again).
IdrA commented that his retreat command (right click) away from enemy units was overridden when they were engaged by hostile fire. I myself do not think I experienced this (or at least it was not clear), but any possibility of this issue should be looked into. Units should do "exactly as told" in a game like starcraft 2 and currently there are certain areas where this is not exactly the case.
This sounds really annoying, frustating even, I hope they correct this since this would annoy me (and others) to no end. "What part of retreat did you not understand? Move, today is not a good day to die."
'Autosurrounding' sounds pretty scary, workers slaughtering a Zealot+Probe with a single attack-move is just wrong. I remember reading in an earlier report that the Zealots' charge ability works like an autosurround, is still the case?
Still, you all mention SC2 is already looking pretty solid and a lot of fun even in pre-alpha, this gives good hope for the future of SC2.
|
ugg... this made me excited and a little scared.
good writeup
|
Cool writeup. I've been looking forward to something like this since I haven't gotten to test the game myself.
|
I hope they add some kind of "YouTube compatibility" option to the game, because clips released so far have been really difficult to follow. What I mean is an option to turn on:
* Orthographic projection - the background gets too much attention now when people are scrolling around, since everything "moves".
* Simplified color depth (cel shading) - to make units easier to see.
Btw, I registered on TL just to say this, hehe. Been visiting the site for a while now, it's awesome.
|
Netherlands19135 Posts
On July 21 2008 08:36 jeb wrote:
I hope they add some kind of "YouTube compatibility" option to the game, because clips released so far have been really difficult to follow. What I mean is an option to turn on:
* Orthographic projection - the background gets too much attention now when people are scrolling around, since everything "moves".
* Simplified color depth (cel shading) - to make units easier to see.
Btw, I registered on TL just to say this, hehe. Been visiting the site for a while now, it's awesome.
Welcome .
|
Wow nice review! I totally agree no MBS and automining. I hope Blizzard will give options to just disable or throw it out entirely. But a beta would be nice.
|
Very nice article, it saddens me to think they're taking away all the work involved that made bw a challenging game.
They've said they're using progaming sources to conduct balance tests, but the more in-depth I got with this, the more doubtful I became :>
They should really start curbing their creativity for more practicality, some of the implementations are just ridiculous it seems.
|
oh god...I'm actually kinda scared now...the unit AI really disgusts me (and I'm the optimist here that always wanted things to be tested before we went on whining).
|
Was this the post that you guys were complaining about in IRC?
It's very nice.
|
Good read, but made me worry a lot more about the AI then i previously thought it would be.
|
SC AI really smart? APOCALYPSE?! (seriously >_>)
Good read, I dont want bliz to rip their foundations to shreds, but i do hope they can incorporate our needs too...
|
i got an email about me, spamming non content posts but i have to post here now..
i am very scared now...
AI,Hard Counters,MBS/Automine...
I think they should try reverting the new damage system to the old one, but buffind some units(ghost for example) to make them worth their price,bw battles used to be about micro, where even higher tier units would die to marines, and this rock paper scissor made me cry
|
Good shit guys. Seems like we have a ways to go
|
There has been a great deal said about Sc2 since BWWI but this is the good shit. Thanks guys.
|
The AI doing stuff could really screw up micro..
|
I haven't played SC2, but I knew the AI problem would prop up just from watching the videos. Workers and lings seem insanely auto-pro.
BTW thanks for the final edit... I've been waiting for this one!!
|
It sounds like they have come a long way since Blizzcon.
|
Storm ready button^^
Very nice article, sounds very true
|
Really Chill? Is that your best reason for why an idle worker button shouldn't be implemented?
|
Great article, loved the different perspectives. MBS doesn't sound too ridiculous, but they'd have to do something about the unit AI. It always made sense to me that BW's workers would be retarded, since they were probably the uneducated dregs of their society 
The hard counters are probably there to force people to mix up unit compositions, but that might fall under balance issues.
|
This FE brings me hope about the future of SC2. The future of RTS is in good hands.
|
Wow.... from this the game sounds HORRIBLE.
It really seems like the only thing left to do is pick a build and then watch the game unfold.... Doesn't even seem like a game anymore to me.
|
Good read. Very interesting.
Don't like the sound of being able to have epic macro so easy..
|
Hong Kong20321 Posts
wow this mega sc2 post is like the awesome. i love it
thank u tl agin >3
|
- There's an idle worker button. I think this is really stupid, but it was in Warcraft 3 so Blizzard's hands are tied. Why not make a "Storm-ready Templar" button or a "Mutalisk-that-should-be-harassing" button? Come on. loool
do units w/ special abilities play a role like in sc1 where good micro would be incredibly cost efficient (like high templar) or are all units just like have this type of unit to counter that type of unit tank spam
|
On July 21 2008 10:54 stacker wrote:
Really Chill? Is that your best reason for why an idle worker button shouldn't be implemented?
You need a better one?
|
MyLostTemple
United States2921 Posts
On July 21 2008 10:54 stacker wrote:
Really Chill? Is that your best reason for why an idle worker button shouldn't be implemented?
i think his point is that keeping track of your workers should be on the same grounds as keep track of any other unit in the game. it's a good reason too. trust me, the game is WAY WAY to easy as it is. i played it a lot at blizcon and WWI and i was very disappointed.
|
MyLostTemple
United States2921 Posts
oh and i'm still very against MBS
|
Well, I guess this article has given me a little faith about StarCraft 2. But until they completely remove AI unit intelligence [seriously, why dont you play the game for me and I'll just watch? In fact, pick my race, who am I to determine the course of my own game?], alter MBS, fix muta/carrier stack, and remove hard counters, I will not even consider buying it.
|
On July 21 2008 12:30 ScarFace wrote:
I will not even consider buying it.
Bullshit. You're gonna buy SC2 no matter what, and so am I.
Nice review of SC2 so far. While I haven't exactly seen how the surrounding AI works in SC2, but let me just say that improving the ability to surround units can actually add a lot of micro to the game, especially in melee-melee battles. E.g. the zealot + probe harasser must be extremely careful not to get surrounded when coming near the mineral line, and has to react even before the surround occurs. It will take even more skill to properly take down workers and such without getting surrounded compared to the original game.
|
On July 21 2008 12:38 teamsolid wrote:Bullshit. You're gonna buy SC2 no matter what, and so am I. Nice review of SC2 so far. While I haven't exactly seen how the surrounding AI works in SC2, but let me just say that improving the ability to surround units can actually add a lot of micro to the game, especially in melee-melee battles. E.g. the zealot + probe harasser must be extremely careful not to get surrounded when coming near the mineral line, and has to react even before the surround occurs. It will take even more skill to properly take down workers and such without getting surrounded compared to the original game.
If they do not change this stuff then i will NOT buy this shitty shitty game. Oh btw, how does doing things for the player make it more micro intensive. People just won't zealot probe harrass any more since its a waste of time.
|
Fantastic writeup guys. My guess is most of the game issues (Mobility, purposeless units) will be resolved, but many of the interface issues won't, (MBS, automine) previous to release. I guess we'll see.
|
Finally some of you guys see the light.
It was painfully obvious that it would be problematic.
Let's hope they make the proper changes soon.
|
On July 21 2008 12:38 teamsolid wrote:Bullshit. You're gonna buy SC2 no matter what, and so am I. I know  I'm weak when it comes to StarCraft. Lol.
|
more proof that blizzard is blatantly lying when they say they have former pros working on the staff team.
|
Actually before the Koreans dominated, in a time when players like Grrrr and Elky could hold down the fort, players like Pillars, Kained-the-feared, Slayer etc. held their own.
So yes, Blizzard has been surrounded by good people.
Today the Korean Pro Scene is more solid than ever, so I would agree with you on those terms.
The Blizzard Development team is based out of Cali man. They need to be surrounded by English speakers to make life easier around the Office space. I'm sure they're going to get a lot of Professionals playing during a Closed beta and getting feedback directly from the team coaches.
|
On July 21 2008 07:42 thedeadhaji wrote:
Chill's section is by far the best out of us 5 btw ^.^
Agreed.
I readed all the shit, here's my opinions:
I think that macroing lost of stuff should be more harder IMO.
Auto mining is just BLEH, they should remove it.
As Chill said: The hotkeys. Oh God the hotkeys. I can't remember specifics, but a building like the "Dark Obelisk" would have a hotkey 'G'. It drove me crazy and needs to change before release. Either make the hotkeys intuitive like in StarCraft, or group them together @ QWERASDFZXCV like in Strifeshadow. It really drove me crazy all day that the hotkeys were so weird.
I really laughed out of loud at that point.
- There's an idle worker button. I think this is really stupid, but it was in Warcraft 3 so Blizzard's hands are tied. Why not make a "Storm-ready Templar" button or a "Mutalisk-that-should-be-harassing" button? Come on.
LOOOL.
I dunno, zerg sounded a bit strong to me (Macro Macro Nydus Worm eZ) but i did not get a chance to play so i could be REAALLLY wrong.
|
Maybe we shouldn't bitch about attack move out of rally points give high level players the ability to fuck people over by sending units to fuck up the rally forcing people to do more lol but still that surround ai is too sexxy for sc
|
On July 21 2008 16:39 Hyperionnn wrote:
I dunno, zerg sounded a bit strong to me (Macro Macro Nydus Worm eZ) but i did not get a chance to play so i could be REAALLLY wrong.
That was one of my main concerns about imbalances that cannot be nerfed easily because it's more a question of the mechanic itself than the cost of it. I don't understand why they try so hard to make all three races even more different than they are in SC. From a competitor's view every technical imbalance (e.g. lurkers vs mnm's) must be balanced out strategically (combined with the right tech at the right time, some micro skills, positional understanding and good scouting they're balanced) and vica versa. The Nydus is imbalanced technically and strategically because if it's too cheap it's too much, but if it's too expensive it won't be of good use until zerg got mass expansions.
This is what I think the Blizzard team underestimates a lot. Technical imbalances vs strategical imbalances, if you want to have a balanced game in the end you must try hard and understand these things, otherwise you'll end up with 100 different strategical or technical imbalances and you cannot ever balance them out, no matter how hard you try.
One more good reason to remove the mothership because its technical imbalance is too great (it's also just too big. Nobody mentioned that before but it's true... xX
An even better example is the Queen. That unit is so strategically imbalanced that balancing it will be tough as hell especially because they keep removing and adding ideas. I mean how are they supposed to finish SC2 as a competitive game at any point in the future?
They are like: lets put everything together and make the best out of it. EEEH. Very bad.
Ask good map-makers. First they take a standard map, then they start changing a few things, add something, remove it again, remove something else, add something, done. That's how good work gets done. Not brainstorming and then mindmapping is the correct approach. Mindmapping and then a little bit of brainstorming under critical eyes is!
|
Spenguin
Australia3316 Posts
Well this game sounds good for people with no skills
Just that's fucked up about the AI
|
Great read
I think its a pretty strong message that 5 very respected members of the starcraft community all came out to very similar conclusions about what needs to be changed in SC2. I really hope blizzard reads this, and can use your opinons to make starcraft 2 the epic game that it could be.
Also, Mani said that he commentated a starcraft 2 game on stage. Was there any video footage from that?
|
Regarding the Surround AI and Auotmining, has anyone even tried to exploit the new AI instead of applying apparently obsolete SC1 tricks?
Like blocking minerals with a single zealot giving him the opportunity to not beeing able to be surrounded by drones and also still messing up the economy?
I'm kinda sad that it seems like players want SC1.5, old mechanics in a new dress. One will need to adapt to the new mechanics instead of simply overthrowing them, i mean if mbs+automining is too easy and should be removed, then why shouldnt they also remove move-attack order? The only difference is that one of the both was present in SC1.
I for one am extremely happy about the changes, making up for a new competetive scene, which needs to evolve again like the SC1 scene, and not simply taking over most strategies.
|
Awesome writeup guys  . I really hope Blizzard will read this - I can wait more (even more than more) and I know every SC fan can do this, but what I want is to be able to enjoy SC2 at his 10th anniversary as I can enjoy Broodwar now  .
|
On July 21 2008 17:48 ForAdun wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2008 16:39 Hyperionnn wrote:
I dunno, zerg sounded a bit strong to me (Macro Macro Nydus Worm eZ) but i did not get a chance to play so i could be REAALLLY wrong.
That was one of my main concerns about imbalances that cannot be nerfed easily because it's more a question of the mechanic itself than the cost of it. I don't understand why they try so hard to make all three races even more different than they are in SC. From a competitor's view every technical imbalance (e.g. lurkers vs mnm's) must be balanced out strategically (combined with the right tech at the right time, some micro skills, positional understanding and good scouting they're balanced) and vica versa. The Nydus is imbalanced technically and strategically because if it's too cheap it's too much, but if it's too expensive it won't be of good use until zerg got mass expansions. This is what I think the Blizzard team underestimates a lot. Technical imbalances vs strategical imbalances, if you want to have a balanced game in the end you must try hard and understand these things, otherwise you'll end up with 100 different strategical or technical imbalances and you cannot ever balance them out, no matter how hard you try. One more good reason to remove the mothership because its technical imbalance is too great (it's also just too big. Nobody mentioned that before but it's true... xX An even better example is the Queen. That unit is so strategically imbalanced that balancing it will be tough as hell especially because they keep removing and adding ideas. I mean how are they supposed to finish SC2 as a competitive game at any point in the future? They are like: lets put everything together and make the best out of it. EEEH. Very bad. Ask good map-makers. First they take a standard map, then they start changing a few things, add something, remove it again, remove something else, add something, done. That's how good work gets done. Not brainstorming and then mindmapping is the correct approach. Mindmapping and then a little bit of brainstorming under critical eyes is!
So very true. How do you balance the queen? It's either a must have in every situation or a very bad unit. SC isn't a game that should have limitations on making units. Even if the queen is somewhat balanced you'll still be making it all the time, this is just something they added to satisfy those who wanted sc2 to have heroes.
|
On July 21 2008 13:24 Tinithor wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2008 12:38 teamsolid wrote:On July 21 2008 12:30 ScarFace wrote:
I will not even consider buying it. Bullshit. You're gonna buy SC2 no matter what, and so am I. Nice review of SC2 so far. While I haven't exactly seen how the surrounding AI works in SC2, but let me just say that improving the ability to surround units can actually add a lot of micro to the game, especially in melee-melee battles. E.g. the zealot + probe harasser must be extremely careful not to get surrounded when coming near the mineral line, and has to react even before the surround occurs. It will take even more skill to properly take down workers and such without getting surrounded compared to the original game. Oh btw, how does doing things for the player make it more micro intensive. People just won't zealot probe harrass any more since its a waste of time.
You're only looking at it from one side of the story. While it's easier for one player, it's also made more difficult for the other player to avoid being surrounded. The harasser has to be even more careful, focused and precise to make sure he doesn't get surrounded, which can make harassment and battles like zealot vs zealot or zerglings vs zealot much more intense than just a-attack or simple positioning, when you add the ability to surround into the repertoire of micro techniques. Trust me, this can be very spectator friendly if it works out well.
So you need like perfect reaction time in order to avoid a surround BEFORE it happens while the other player will actively seek out chances to surround your units. Maybe effective zealot harass will require training and be something only the progamers will be able to pull off effectively just like muta harass in SC1, which adds to the skill depth of the game.
Also, how exactly is this "auto-surrounding" AI anyways? Isn't that a bit of a misnomer and wouldn't a more accurate term be "better pathing"? With proper pathing, melee units that are ordered to attack should naturally move in to surround in order to get their attacks in. It was basically a faulty pathing AI in SC that caused melee units to clump up, rather than any automatic "overriding" of player's manual actions on SC2's engine. I'd like to see a video clip demonstrating this so-called auto-surrounding.
|
Too much balance connected complaints in the previews, other stuff was pretty good though.
It seems that macro is still a big problem though and I agree that auto-mine should be removed, idle worker notification should be removed, AI should not overwrite player command and this is with BOLD as its extremely important for a player to have full control, i don't fucking want the AI playing the game for me!
If I want a simulation game I can play Majesty, for SC2 I want to be in full control.
|
Seems like blizzard are too eager to show off that they can make the best AI of any RTS in history, rather than making a game that is actually up to par with Starcraft 1...
Blizzard really need to find ways to make this game accessable to a wider audience without dumbing the entire game down. It will only end up like warcraft 3.. people will get bored of it so fast.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On July 21 2008 17:26 IzzyCraft wrote:
Maybe we shouldn't bitch about attack move out of rally points give high level players the ability to fuck people over by sending units to fuck up the rally forcing people to do more lol but still that surround ai is too sexxy for sc
It's just hugely annoying --
Like imagine this scenario:
I am 2 gate rushing a zerg, rallying my gateways to his natural, microing my zealot/probe force frantically.
I am winning the fight, lings fall, drones die, sunkens morph with 1 hp and get sliced up. All I need now are fresh zealots.
..WHERE THE FUCK ARE MY ZEALOTS?
OH, they are chasing a drone...
.. on the other side of the map.. How.. how did they get there?
Do you see how this would suck?
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
You guys are so negative and pessimistic about everything. I mean, look at MBS:
Let's get this out of the way now. Last time I played SC2 I was pro MBS. I loved the fact that I could actually do the things that I was thinking about and felt relatively freed from the limitations of my 110 apm hands. I am the type of gamer that MBS was designed for.
I'm going to have to go back on my word though. Much like what Chill and Rage have said, the macro is too simple. When I played zerg, my hatcheries had two rally points. One for drones to automine (which I could set directly to the minerals for each separate hatchery) and one for all other units (which I could group together). Thus, my drones automatically filled dutifully to their respective patches, while a single hotkey allowed all my hatcheries to be rallied to wherever I needed my units. No need to go home and manage my economy, no need to manage drones unless I wanted to build something.
That's not MBS. That's something else entirely. From what Rage said, MBS is essentially useless in SC2 because you can't make a lot of units at once anyway. It's only faster to set rallies (I think?), and the Zerg system of setting rallies makes it a little easier, sure.
What I've always been at a loss at is why these particular interface enhancements are so devastating to the game, so damaging, when the interface enhancements between War2 and SC were not. Players adjusted to being able to hotkey their buildings, casting multiple spells at the same time by selecting multiple units, and found other ways to differentiate. Is easier rallying really going to influence the game in any meaningful way? Won't it possibly have other effects?
So for example, the fact that rallied units attack instead of move - I mean, how important is that really? And take a 2gate PvZ rusher - right now he can rally his gates to the Zerg base and be assured that the zeals will go there on a move command - now he has to pay attention and make sure his zealots don't chase after a drone or ling or something. Accordingly, I'm not going to come to Chill's conclusion that "It makes rallying too strong." Whether or not this is a good or bad change, I feel it is too soon to tell - let's not jump to conclusions.
In summary: I think that the interface enhancements in this game seem minor, intuitive, and something that the professional scene can easily adapt to. I'm super looking forward to this - I think Blizzard is going to make a SC2 that is going to be a ton of fun.
|
Yeah I also think that this ralley-attack is pretty bad, it shouldn't be in the game. Either way it hurts the competition.
If it's togglable it becomes an impossible task to come back from a positional disadvantage (not to mention that it would be way too easy to finish a game having the advantage, you shouldn't be able to lean back watching the rest of the game as if you were a spectator).
If it's not togglable it would be pretty disturbing to find all your units doing everything except what you want them to as FA pictured very well. This is no option of course.
It's a lose-lose scenario.
edit:
@ GrandInquisitor
I don't mean to be offensive but what you said there: "You guys are so negative and pessimistic about everything." is just wrong. We are criticizing only certain points. You make it sound like we're biased as whatsoever and have never ever thought deeper about these things. Come on... that's a bad way to go into a debate, is it?
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
lol GI did you read what we wrote?
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
On July 21 2008 23:21 GrandInquisitor wrote:
That's not MBS. That's something else entirely. From what Rage said, MBS is essentially useless in SC2 because you can't make a lot of units at once anyway. It's only faster to set rallies (I think?), and the Zerg system of setting rallies makes it a little easier, sure.
No. MBS is more powerful now because you can ratio your units with great precision. You dont hit 5t and make 50 tanks. you go 5tttttttvvvvvvvvvvvvvv and do a 2:3 tank/bike ratio or something like that. We didn't say MBS was that bad because its been nerfed - we said its bad because it has automine, queing, rallying and too smart AI to back it up. Please read ~_~.
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
Sorry if I came off myself as too negative! I'm just saying, you guys sound way less enthusiastic than I would have been. Most of your comments are directed at what you don't like about the game rather than what you do. I understand that
Looking back, much of the preceding may seem very critical and only focus on negative aspects of the Starcraft 2 build we played. However, thats why we went to WWI - if you want to hear how amazing and "cool" every new feature is, you should read a main stream gaming news site. Starcraft 2 is a very fun game to play and we have little doubt that the solutions to the addressed issues will have been found by launch.
but at the same time, what was present that will benefit competitive play? What new features do you think could help accelerate or improve the professional scene? You guys treat a lot of the new features as 'bugs' or 'issues' to be fixed.
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
On July 21 2008 23:37 Kennigit wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2008 23:21 GrandInquisitor wrote:
That's not MBS. That's something else entirely. From what Rage said, MBS is essentially useless in SC2 because you can't make a lot of units at once anyway. It's only faster to set rallies (I think?), and the Zerg system of setting rallies makes it a little easier, sure.
No. MBS is more powerful now because you can ratio your units with great precision. You dont hit 5t and make 50 tanks. you go 5tttttttvvvvvvvvvvvvvv and do a 2:3 tank/bike ratio or something like that. We didn't say MBS was that bad because its been nerfed - we said its bad because it has automine, queing, rallying and too smart AI to back it up. Please read ~_~.
Sorry, I didn't get that from the story. But MBS and 'automine/queueing/rallying/smart AI' are totally different things, aren't they?
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
Yes they are different but because they are all there you can just sit back, alt-tab and fap for a bit then come back and still macro fine.
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
MBS isn't bad. Building que isn't bad. Even the smart AI isn't that bad MBS+Building Que+Smart AI+Automine = Bad.
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
Oh the "good" things about sc2 is that alot of the timings still worked out really nicely. Like when you 12 hatch, you had 150 minerals for your 3 drones exactly as your ovie popped. Thats not really relevant though because its timing/mineral balance.
|
So the game feel is like SC and even better but the mechanics are worse. That roughly sums up our (or at least my) opinion.
|
Great post guys. It sounds like the game is doing pretty good as of now, but it looks like they have a long way to go. I was also scared of automining more than MBS, but it sounds like the sum of all of the additions make the game easier. I really hope that once the beta hits, Blizzard will be hounded by constant complaints about the upgraded system.
|
On July 21 2008 23:21 GrandInquisitor wrote:
What I've always been at a loss at is why these particular interface enhancements are so devastating to the game, so damaging, when the interface enhancements between War2 and SC were not.
Would you say that constant interface enhancements are a vital necessity for competition? Isn't the big goal here to enhance the expirience in general? If we automaticaly assume that anything that is old is outdated (and thus somehow less fun) arent we ignoring a big portion of the general expirience then?
I'm very positive that starcraft 2 is going to be a great game but i think its naive to just expect things to work out themself. Even tough it's blizzard there are still 10 years to beat.
If i see a real reason why it improves the gameplay expirience i'm down with it. In a splitsecond.
But i think one has to be very carefull with discarding old systems altogheter just because we have another solution. And then at the end of the day all these changes add up to something that just erased a large slice of the pie that should have been cherished.
|
Thanks for the review guys. But I think most of you exceeded too much in nostalgia which hurt the objectiveness of your review. I'd rather read something with less emotion and more objective analysis. Many paragraphs are simply contradictory with each other and others were simply nostalgia rants (such as deadhaji using a whole paragraph only to say that gathering 6 instead of 8 minerals is just... different). But overall it was a great read.
Just one thing that I would like you guys to clear up is about the "surround AI". Please stop saying that, there is no such thing as "new bad surround AI". The AI that finds pathing uses the exact same logic as in SC1 and any other RTS that ever existed. The only difference from SC1 to SC2 is that the game responds faster. So instead of a zergling trying to find a way around a target every 1 sec it will find a way around every 0.01 sec (ex. numbers). Which is also why units respond instantly to user commands (even why mutalisk micro as we know is extinct, but this can be changed individually). So what you are complaining about is basically the game being faster.
|
Who is complaining about the game being faster? I haven't seen any. I don't see anyone complaining about the AI either, not at all. You do realize that we're mostly criticizing the UI or other game features, not the AI?
|
Great update tx.
|
Hey, Im really dissapointed that they added new units and stuff to SC2. I mean, how am I going to show what a pro I am if they keep changing the game with each new Starcraft?
EDIT: Nice article though!
|
On July 22 2008 01:10 ForAdun wrote:
Who is complaining about the game being faster? I haven't seen any. I don't see anyone complaining about the AI either, not at all. You do realize that we're mostly criticizing the UI or other game features, not the AI? Did you even... read the review? O.o
"Surround AI
In Starcraft 2, the AI of units has been significantly altered. One prime example of this is the surround AI most notably exhibited by speedlings and also workers. A single attack move from the speedling user will surround zealots on the ramp within 2 seconds (that is not an exaggeration). Right click past, then attacking onto the zealot is no longer required. When I first did this to Meat using a 10pool speed build, I was extremely shocked at the results."
|
Well that's one example out of how many? I don't see why this should be discussed more than the current UI features. The topic is just so much smaller, it's ok to debate it but it got nothing to do with the UI which everyone is talking about mostly. There is no relation between AI and UI and I'd want that to be clear in topics like these.
|
I'm not gonna discuss with you. It's a great review and I'm not gonna let some random pub derail it to non-sense. Believe what you wish I could care less.
For the staff I think it would also be nice if you posted a link to Nyovne's review in the article:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=75527
It's very objective and in-depth. He's prolly the guy with the most experience with the game so far (outside of blizz). Recommended for anyone who is interesting in reading more about sc2.
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
Yeah Nyovne's was actually going to be part of the FE. The problem was a) length b) it took forever to finish lol c) its not the same style that we wrote at all.
|
Can you at least edit and put a link at the bottom "for further reading" or something? I just loved his review and believe it deserves a small spot on the first page news ^^
|
Not sure why we needed 5 views to state the same thing - that you don't like automine and MBS.
Some skills will be lost in the transition, new skills will arise. It is time to get used to it.
Back in the early days of motor racing you needed to be physically strong to turn the steering wheel and drive the car. Now in Formula 1 you don't need to be strong to turn the steering wheel (even less effort to change gear - just press a button), but you need to be even fitter to withstand the g-forces and stuff.
I feel like a lot of the complaints are like old drivers complaining about how easy it is to turn the steering wheel now - just completely oblivious to, or selectively failing to recognize, all the new skills that will become more apparent 6 months into the game.
(ok this is a bad analogy, because motor racing is boring as hell, but I hope you get the idea).
"Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes
Turn and face the strain
Ch-ch-changes"
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
On July 22 2008 02:09 teacake wrote:
Not sure why we needed 5 views to state the same thing - that you don't like automine and MBS.
<font size = "4">Why 5?</font>
It was very clear after our BWWI play test of Starcraft 2 that not one of us could bring an opinion that would include everything we had experienced. Naturally, we were inclined to write an article that would leave the reader to take the best and worst of our combined opinions and correlate his or her own conclusions.
(ok this is a bad analogy, because motor racing is boring as hell, but I hope you get the idea).
No actually thats a good analogy because seeing someone control a massive army with drops, and a variety of spells all going off at once while visually impressive, wouldn't necessarily be as impressive at the highest level of play.
|
I believe that blizzard will wait until well into the beta to consider whether MBS is a good idea. I mean, why make the determination now when only a few people have played the game. Why not wait until there has been some real competition and then get the informed opinion of many players.
This is why I am not overly concerned about the fact that blizzard hasn't touched MBS.
|
I dont like that surround thing at all, zvt and zvp micro (and zvz too i guess) depend so much on how well you MANUALLY surround, its the difference between losing all your shit to marines/few storms and whatever while not doing any damage and totally raping.
|
On July 22 2008 07:57 Cloud wrote:
I dont like that surround thing at all, zvt and zvp micro (and zvz too i guess) depend so much on how well you MANUALLY surround, its the difference between losing all your shit to marines/few storms and whatever while not doing any damage and totally raping.
Have you actually watched gaming vods of SC2 yet? Watch Savior vs Hwasin for example, when Savior hunts down Hwasin's marines. It's just the pathfinding that makes it seem like there's some kind of "auto-surround" but there really isn't.
I absolutely adore the new AI, it's amazing and I can't imagine SC2 without it. I'd never criticize it, there's no reason. It just rocks
|
Very nice read but I don't agree about idle worker button.
Sorry but there is no keeping track of workers in BW. In mid-late games there is always few of them scattered over bases and the only thing needed is to remember where they are and grab closest one to build something. Rest do nothing during that time?
I'm surprised idle worker button was mentioned at all oO
Is it purging attempt or what?
I agree about SBS making BW better by constant need of doing something, bigger and bigger as games progress;
I agree there are too many things making macro oversimplifying = Auto-Mine, Attack Move to rally points need to go;
I just don't think turning whole UI to SC1 before trying to compensate for some enhancement in other way is the best way to go.
EVERYTHING seems to jump, flies, or runs super fast.
Wouldn't that be better to make units working in more dynamic way, taking enough attention and management as better way to (further?) compensate for things like MBS?
Maybe after getting used to it after few (>2) days of playing versus players who play FTW, not to check out the game?
Scouting much harder than in BW to embrace what is going on the map and not be surprised by flying pylons is good way to go IMO.
Not keeping track of workers.
|
|
|
On July 22 2008 08:52 ForAdun wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2008 07:57 Cloud wrote:
I dont like that surround thing at all, zvt and zvp micro (and zvz too i guess) depend so much on how well you MANUALLY surround, its the difference between losing all your shit to marines/few storms and whatever while not doing any damage and totally raping. Have you actually watched gaming vods of SC2 yet? Watch Savior vs Hwasin for example, when Savior hunts down Hwasin's marines. It's just the pathfinding that makes it seem like there's some kind of "auto-surround" but there really isn't. I absolutely adore the new AI, it's amazing and I can't imagine SC2 without it. I'd never criticize it, there's no reason. It just rocks
Better path finding for melee means melee units will get damage nerfs or speed nerfs that they would otherwise wouldn't have. Better AI which makes units easier to use means something is going to take a hit in the damage department. Good players can surround for themselves but now the units kind of do it for themselves so there's no point in doing it so theres no reward for being better, just takes away from the real power melee units should have with proper control. It's similar to scarabs. the only thing that keeps reavers from being OMGimba is the fact that their scarabs can miss alot, imagine what if they had perfect pathing? the result would be weaker reavers. ANY improvement to the AI means a weaker unit and that makes longer battles and no reward for being good.
|
On July 22 2008 12:48 sylonto wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2008 08:52 ForAdun wrote:On July 22 2008 07:57 Cloud wrote:
I dont like that surround thing at all, zvt and zvp micro (and zvz too i guess) depend so much on how well you MANUALLY surround, its the difference between losing all your shit to marines/few storms and whatever while not doing any damage and totally raping. Have you actually watched gaming vods of SC2 yet? Watch Savior vs Hwasin for example, when Savior hunts down Hwasin's marines. It's just the pathfinding that makes it seem like there's some kind of "auto-surround" but there really isn't. I absolutely adore the new AI, it's amazing and I can't imagine SC2 without it. I'd never criticize it, there's no reason. It just rocks Better path finding for melee means melee units will get damage nerfs or speed nerfs that they would otherwise wouldn't have. Better AI which makes units easier to use means something is going to take a hit in the damage department. Good players can surround for themselves but now the units kind of do it for themselves so there's no point in doing it so theres no reward for being better, just takes away from the real power melee units should have with proper control.
Hello, this is just what I said before and I'm asking you too now. -> HAVE YOU <- actually watched any vods yet? As I said, watch Savior vs Hwasin first before you complain. I don't argue with someone who's not even informed and since you don't take that vod or a similar one as an example we have no base for a discussion.
|
I expect to see many Force Fields... wonder about early tho
|
On July 22 2008 12:54 ForAdun wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2008 12:48 sylonto wrote:On July 22 2008 08:52 ForAdun wrote:On July 22 2008 07:57 Cloud wrote:
I dont like that surround thing at all, zvt and zvp micro (and zvz too i guess) depend so much on how well you MANUALLY surround, its the difference between losing all your shit to marines/few storms and whatever while not doing any damage and totally raping. Have you actually watched gaming vods of SC2 yet? Watch Savior vs Hwasin for example, when Savior hunts down Hwasin's marines. It's just the pathfinding that makes it seem like there's some kind of "auto-surround" but there really isn't. I absolutely adore the new AI, it's amazing and I can't imagine SC2 without it. I'd never criticize it, there's no reason. It just rocks Better path finding for melee means melee units will get damage nerfs or speed nerfs that they would otherwise wouldn't have. Better AI which makes units easier to use means something is going to take a hit in the damage department. Good players can surround for themselves but now the units kind of do it for themselves so there's no point in doing it so theres no reward for being better, just takes away from the real power melee units should have with proper control. Hello, this is just what I said before and I'm asking you too now. -> HAVE YOU <- actually watched any vods yet? As I said, watch Savior vs Hwasin first before you complain. I don't argue with someone who's not even informed and since you don't take that vod or a similar one as an example we have no base for a discussion.
I saw all the sc2 vods and what you said was that there is no reason to complain about better path finding in which the AI sorta knows that since theres 5 zealots fighting in front the back zealot should go from the side, this is way too smart and will make the zealots weaker in some other areas to compensate for this power.
"It's just the pathfinding that makes it seem like there's some kind of "auto-surround" but there really isn't.
I absolutely adore the new AI, it's amazing and I can't imagine SC2 without it. I'd never criticize it, there's no reason. It just rocks"
that's exactly what you said and that's exactly what causes units to be toned down
|
|
|
What if this game is meant to, you know, make money? Wouldn't it make sense to make the basics easy. I mean, its not 1998 anymore, wouldn't the majority of the rts community expect Mbs and automining and the rest. Critics would have a fit and rip Sc2 a new one (like IGN did on broodwar because they said it was too hard, idiots) if they were missing these features? I want the game to be like Sc1 like the rest of the community here, but arent we a minority? Just my thoughts, but when i 1st played sc 8 years ago, I cheated my thru the campaign, thought it was fun and stopped playing, then came back and played it right. In sc2 couldnt these easy mode macro and mirco tricks be on in campaign, and then on b-net, turned off?
|
Yea they could, they could also make a toggle, but they probably won't ....
Anyways, i think that most of the so called "casual" gamers would not care wheather or not these features are in (Or even know what they are...) and would buy the game anyways just cause its from blizzard and it looks pretty.
I mean if they were really casual then it doesn't mean a thing to them, unless people are determined to do almost nothing when playing a video game...
|
yeah making SC2 too easy mode could be very bad for the community.
I used to play super smash brothers melee very competitively, but when brawl came out and was way too EZ mode the community really died down.
|
Calgary25980 Posts
I wish all the people from other communities would post here with their rebuttals and concerns with the article, rather than playing off each other on their own forums. We're not unreasonable
I do feel like we need to be careful not to fall into the trap of wanting StarCraft 1.5. Tactics will adapt to the new mechanics. For example, saying you can't harass workers with Zerglings anymore because of the new surrounding unit AI simply means the harassment mechanic will change (or early game harassment will be no longer viable), rather than the entire surround AI being needed to change.
Reading the feedback on other websites has made me realize I personally took the pessimistic view a little too much and should have taken a glass half full approach.
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
|
I'd still like to see a VOD of SC2's "auto-surrounding" in action before I make a judgment on it. I highly doubt there's any overriding of player control in this case, and it's more along the lines of improved unit pathing (which they will never purposely remove).
|
Calgary25980 Posts
On July 24 2008 05:18 teamsolid wrote:
I'd still like to see a VOD of SC2's "auto-surrounding" in action before I make a judgment on it. I highly doubt there's any overriding of player control in this case, and it's more along the lines of improved unit pathing (which they will never purposely remove).
It is improved unit pathing. I never experienced a unit given a manual "move" command being overridden by a reactionary "attack" command.
|
Netherlands19135 Posts
On July 24 2008 06:04 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2008 05:18 teamsolid wrote:
I'd still like to see a VOD of SC2's "auto-surrounding" in action before I make a judgment on it. I highly doubt there's any overriding of player control in this case, and it's more along the lines of improved unit pathing (which they will never purposely remove). It is improved unit pathing. I never experienced a unit given a manual "move" command being overridden by a reactionary "attack" command.
Same, it's a bug I didn't experience myself and I played at least a game or 70. The surrounding isn't something new either, it's something units do in the original as well and is just more prominent now as a result of the new and improved unit pathing and clutter programming.
|
Why not show them some FPVODs of progamers? This would show the amount of skill involved in playing the game and why their skill is admired so much across the world.
|
Thanks for an amazing read, Chill please have my babies.
|
so many reasons why I like starcraft better then warcraft
get rid of auto mine, rallying, and multiple building selecting and I'll be happy.
starcraft is for hardcore gamers thers no reason why they cant keep it that way
|
Just finished Chill's review and this scared me:
'In terms of difficulty of mechanics, the game has less to do than StarCraft. Things automine, rally-attack, and you have MBS. Melee units run past enemies and surround, making targeting workers a nightmare and using Zealots vs Zerglings an experience in pain. Seriously, you just a-move Zerglings and they flank themselves, it's ridiculous. You drill workers and they fan out and surround Zerglings. This needs to change NOW. Units should go where they're told, this smart AI kills so much of a competitive game.'
That's really, really lame And the lack of hit and run with muta is also pretty whack.
Ok, reading on.
|
thedeadhaji
39489 Posts
damn it FA what did you delete!
|
Awesome report! I'm sure all of us were looking forward to this!
As a response to the advanced AI (auto-mine/auto-attack rally, auto surround, etc.) maybe Blizzard should add an options menu to turn that stuff on/off. I'm no programmer so I wouldn't know how difficult or impractical programming-wise that would be, but I feel that this flexibility would allow for new RTS players or those (like myself) who have retardedly low APM to have fun with the game while keeping the interest of competitive level players.
P.S. Sorry if this suggestion was already discussed/added in other discussions of SC2, but I really didn't see any of it in the reviews above so I thought I would give my 2 cents. Again, though, thanks Team Liquid for the reviews!
|
Allthough they make macro easier, the do things that add some deph to it as well, like the mutant larvae, the terran ad-ons and the new gas mechanics
btw: great report
|
hm the auto surround and auto attack things sound like big issues, what i like about sc is that the units do exactly what i tell them, and makes micro all that more worthwhile.
anyway looks like you guys were very objective and articulate and hope blizz makes changes for the better.
thanks for the writeup it was awesome =D
|
On July 24 2008 06:04 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2008 05:18 teamsolid wrote:
I'd still like to see a VOD of SC2's "auto-surrounding" in action before I make a judgment on it. I highly doubt there's any overriding of player control in this case, and it's more along the lines of improved unit pathing (which they will never purposely remove). It is improved unit pathing. I never experienced a unit given a manual "move" command being overridden by a reactionary "attack" command.
i figured out what was causing that actually
it was if you had ctrl pressed while giving the move command they would just begin to move then turn around and go back to attacking whatever was nearby.
if you didnt have it pressed they responded normally.
not really sure why, but ya it isnt an auto override or anything horrible like that.
|
Battles in Starcraft 2 felt too long compared to it's predecessor
Really o.O? Obviously this was written 2 years before release, but still. Would be a welcome change nowadays, imho
|
|
|
holy thread revival! I thought I was reading something from 2013 before I looked at the date.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/pachi/fe/0708_cov_baneling.jpg)
