|
On June 10 2023 06:31 The_Red_Viper wrote:
Macro is like playing an instrument, you wanna play a song (execute a strategy), so you have to train the mechanical input to get it down as close to 100% perfect as possible. (for the argument's purpose we'll ignore that playing music is about more than just strictly hitting the right not at the right time). That gives a sense of accomplishment, but really the interesting part of it isn't that, it's the decision making, the ideas you then have to bring onto the server.
The decision making yes, and when each game is actually being played out on a strategic level, players shouldn't be executing their strategies like they are playing a song, because the song isn't pre-written! You should be making decisions on the fly adapting to what your opponent is doing at all times, not just in tactics but in strategy as well, if the game is a strategy game, and then it should not feel like playing a song (as games like Beatmania or other are about, being rythm games and not strategy games). I think when a strategy game feels like playing a song executing a pre-learned strategy, it's when the game has been figured out to have too few possibilities due to a lack of balance and then it's not much of a strategy game anymore. Some chess players have made a similar critic about chess, because the amount of openings can eventually be exactly memorized almost to the end of a game (which differs from RTS in the sense that there are always too many possibilities in the details of micro, at least).
|
My point is that the actual execution of the decision IS like playing a rhythm game. You want more of x (decision), you really wanna hit the timing of pressing the button to build x at the moment it is not in queue anymore. The better you are at that with all the macro mechanics, the better you'll do because you use your money the most efficient way possible. That's the prewritten song here.
But that isn't what makes these games interesting, it's a mechanical input test which takes up quite a lot of the actions of the players, on things which have no dynamic element to them, instead of trying to design away from that and make inputs count towards the pvp sections of the game mostly.
People on this forum are heavily biased towards starcrafts design because that is what they are used to, explaining that you really need all of this to even have a skillfull game, it's nonsense, lacks vision and is imo simply married to what one knows, instead of looking beyond that.
I get it, we all kinda like the flow of it i assume, there is a certain enjoyable nature to it, but this feeling could be generated in other ways, we also all love how good it feels to make some nice micro moves.
|
Grubby just confirmed there will be creep camps and creeping mechanics from WC3 in stormgate. What are everyone's thoughts on this?
|
Additionally they revealed a siege tank unit, 'Atlas'. It's siege fire can be dodged but will leave an aoe burn on the ground. Additionally, the unit can be picked up by dropships while in siege mode.
|
On June 10 2023 08:56 CicadaSC wrote:
Additionally, the unit can be picked up by dropships while in siege mode.
Nooo, did we not learn from this the first time?
|
On June 10 2023 08:33 CicadaSC wrote:
Grubby just confirmed there will be creep camps and creeping mechanics from WC3 in stormgate. What are everyone's thoughts on this?
Makes sense if they already announced some hero-type units. Definitely makes the game a bit more dynamic when you have more stuff to do out on the map, promotes active play and scouting among other things.
It really depends on what kind of creep camps those are (how hard they are to clear, are there different types, are they randomized, what you can get from clearing them).
|
On June 10 2023 10:30 Manit0u wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2023 08:33 CicadaSC wrote:
Grubby just confirmed there will be creep camps and creeping mechanics from WC3 in stormgate. What are everyone's thoughts on this? Makes sense if they already announced some hero-type units.
No hero units in the competitive multiplayer. They're only for campaign/coop like sc2.
On June 10 2023 10:30 Manit0u wrote:
Definitely makes the game a bit more dynamic when you have more stuff to do out on the map, promotes active play and scouting among other things.
It really depends on what kind of creep camps those are (how hard they are to clear, are there different types, are they randomized, what you can get from clearing them).
The map objective focused gameplay elements are preferable imo, but they're harder to balance in terms of snowballing.
|
On June 10 2023 11:10 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2023 10:30 Manit0u wrote:On June 10 2023 08:33 CicadaSC wrote:
Grubby just confirmed there will be creep camps and creeping mechanics from WC3 in stormgate. What are everyone's thoughts on this? Makes sense if they already announced some hero-type units. The map objective focused gameplay elements are preferable imo, but they're harder to balance in terms of snowballing.
Definitely agree, if we look at what this might look like in sc2, Zerg taking the entire map, having more mobility than the other races, would probably lead to them snowballing out of control if they got even the slightest lead.
|
On June 10 2023 11:10 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2023 10:30 Manit0u wrote:On June 10 2023 08:33 CicadaSC wrote:
Grubby just confirmed there will be creep camps and creeping mechanics from WC3 in stormgate. What are everyone's thoughts on this? Makes sense if they already announced some hero-type units. No hero units in the competitive multiplayer. They're only for campaign/coop like sc2. Show nested quote +On June 10 2023 10:30 Manit0u wrote:
Definitely makes the game a bit more dynamic when you have more stuff to do out on the map, promotes active play and scouting among other things.
It really depends on what kind of creep camps those are (how hard they are to clear, are there different types, are they randomized, what you can get from clearing them). The map objective focused gameplay elements are preferable imo, but they're harder to balance in terms of snowballing.
Didn't they say that there would be hero units in 3v3? Not sure if you count that as competitive multiplayer or not but that's what I have seen.
|
On June 10 2023 10:00 Turbovolver wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2023 08:56 CicadaSC wrote:
Additionally, the unit can be picked up by dropships while in siege mode. Nooo, did we not learn from this the first time?
For starters, that doesn't necessarily mean you can then drop it in that mode.
But more importantly, the mechanic itself doesn't have a positive or negative effect without the rest of the game, and we simply do not know what that looks like. It was bad in sc2 due to its way of playing it, not because the idea itself is fundamentally bad.
|
Northern Ireland25771 Posts
On June 10 2023 23:38 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2023 10:00 Turbovolver wrote:On June 10 2023 08:56 CicadaSC wrote:
Additionally, the unit can be picked up by dropships while in siege mode. Nooo, did we not learn from this the first time? For starters, that doesn't necessarily mean you can then drop it in that mode. But more importantly, the mechanic itself doesn't have a positive or negative effect without the rest of the game, and we simply do not know what that looks like. It was bad in sc2 due to its way of playing it, not because the idea itself is fundamentally bad.
So much we don’t know, hopefully the gameplay reveal carries a lot in that regard
The issue with siege tanks being picked up by medivacs that could fucking boost, but also re-dropped in their siege mode. At a phase of the game where counters to the medivac itself were in short supply
I have no innate issue with a siege mode kind of unit being evacuable via dropships. Retreat potential is fine in my book
|
Right, and in sc2 you always wanted to build medivacs anyway, as they don't only act as dropships, but also as healers for your bio army.
Also this stormgate 'tank' is shooting projectiles you apparently can dodge, which intrinsically alters the interaction (though ofc it depends on the actual balancing).
In any case, the important factor is that all elements of a game interact with each other, looking at something in isolation in a dogmatic manner makes no sense.
|
One of the things Grubby stated in his "tell all" was that the gameplay footage they will be featuring in the PC Gaming Show is outdated. It will not be the same version of the game he and other playtesters got to try a few weeks ago.
Source
So they are showing pre-alpha footage.We don't know how far the other races are.
|
Northern Ireland25771 Posts
On June 11 2023 02:04 The_Red_Viper wrote:
Right, and in sc2 you always wanted to build medivacs anyway, as they don't only act as dropships, but also as healers for your bio army.
Also this stormgate 'tank' is shooting projectiles you apparently can dodge, which intrinsically alters the interaction (though ofc it depends on the actual balancing).
In any case, the important factor is that all elements of a game interact with each other, looking at something in isolation in a dogmatic manner makes no sense.
This, just wait and bloody see!
Dropships in BW were a unit you made for that specific tactical purpose alone. Medivacs in SC2 had that function but were basically a pre-requisite if you ever wanted to go even part bio for any period of time.
BW it’s way harder to move a sizeable army around.
You could conceivably add drop while sieged to BW without having all that much of an impact comparatively. It 100% did have a pretty big impact in SC2 and it wasn’t a very good one so hey, remove it.
Before BW purists go mental, it would have SOME impact but probably not that much. Cutting into your tank count to have a couple of more mobile tanks, while being harder to control. May have situational uses but in general wouldn’t be all that useful.
TLDR we have to see how a unit functions in its wider context to really be able to pass judgement
|
On June 11 2023 02:04 The_Red_Viper wrote:
Right, and in sc2 you always wanted to build medivacs anyway, as they don't only act as dropships, but also as healers for your bio army.
Also this stormgate 'tank' is shooting projectiles you apparently can dodge, which intrinsically alters the interaction (though ofc it depends on the actual balancing).
In any case, the important factor is that all elements of a game interact with each other, looking at something in isolation in a dogmatic manner makes no sense.
This is a good point. Shouldn't be nearly as powerful if you can dodge it's shots though I do worry about tankivac fire targeted at the resource line. Not only would you have to take the workers off mining to dodge, the fact that it leaves a lasting aoe burn field seems... strong. I don't know how quickly you can get these out though with a "standard" build and what kind of anti air defenses you will have.
|
On creeping: Never minded it, but my days of RTS pvp are probably behind me anyways. I think it's good for campaign design and gives devs more incentive to vary threats.
On June 10 2023 06:54 The_Red_Viper wrote:
My point is that the actual execution of the decision IS like playing a rhythm game. You want more of x (decision), you really wanna hit the timing of pressing the button to build x at the moment it is not in queue anymore. The better you are at that with all the macro mechanics, the better you'll do because you use your money the most efficient way possible. That's the prewritten song here.
But that isn't what makes these games interesting, it's a mechanical input test which takes up quite a lot of the actions of the players, on things which have no dynamic element to them, instead of trying to design away from that and make inputs count towards the pvp sections of the game mostly.
People on this forum are heavily biased towards starcrafts design because that is what they are used to, explaining that you really need all of this to even have a skillfull game, it's nonsense, lacks vision and is imo simply married to what one knows, instead of looking beyond that.
I get it, we all kinda like the flow of it i assume, there is a certain enjoyable nature to it, but this feeling could be generated in other ways, we also all love how good it feels to make some nice micro moves.
The mechanical input test is an error generator and errors are what makes these games interesting. If you can entirely overview what's happening and spend your entire time in one area you'll likely hit a mechanical cap eventually and things will just run down optimal buildorders with little variation.
Obviously you can design a game to be more circumstantial and randomized with little macro-mechanical demand where it becomes more about getting the most out of the hand you were dealt, but then we're talking about different genres and not action packed fair pvp strategy games.
If you dislike the macro mechanics specifically Dawn of War 1 and 2 minimized base building and mainly are about moving units on the map and in skirmishes. They are still clickfests though.
|
On June 11 2023 10:20 Archeon wrote:
The mechanical input test is an error generator and errors are what makes these games interesting. If you can entirely overview what's happening and spend your entire time in one area you'll likely hit a mechanical cap eventually and things will just run down optimal buildorders with little variation.
Go achieves a lot of depth in the variations with "buildorders" and follow ups (more than you can count) without ofc having any mechanical input test, because of simple but balanced rules. It's harder to balance a game with less simple rules as well as go is, but should be possible. This would be high level balance.
|
On June 11 2023 07:47 CicadaSC wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2023 02:04 The_Red_Viper wrote:
Right, and in sc2 you always wanted to build medivacs anyway, as they don't only act as dropships, but also as healers for your bio army.
Also this stormgate 'tank' is shooting projectiles you apparently can dodge, which intrinsically alters the interaction (though ofc it depends on the actual balancing).
In any case, the important factor is that all elements of a game interact with each other, looking at something in isolation in a dogmatic manner makes no sense. This is a good point. Shouldn't be nearly as powerful if you can dodge it's shots though I do worry about tankivac fire targeted at the resource line. Not only would you have to take the workers off mining to dodge, the fact that it leaves a lasting aoe burn field seems... strong. I don't know how quickly you can get these out though with a "standard" build and what kind of anti air defenses you will have.
if people start doing this i can proudly say i was the first person who thought of, and invented this strat. Seems like the most powerful use for the tanks afterburn effect. denying mining time when combined with a dropship.
|
On June 11 2023 11:15 ProMeTheus112 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2023 10:20 Archeon wrote:
The mechanical input test is an error generator and errors are what makes these games interesting. If you can entirely overview what's happening and spend your entire time in one area you'll likely hit a mechanical cap eventually and things will just run down optimal buildorders with little variation. Go achieves a lot of depth in the variations with "buildorders" and follow ups (more than you can count) without ofc having any mechanical input test, because of simple but balanced rules. It's harder to balance a game with less simple rules as well as go is, but should be possible. This would be high level balance.
Go is symmetrical, however. With three distinct factions, balance needs to be achieved with unachievable skill checks. This means you can't get it perfect, but you can do things a lot better than the opponent. Now, with different areas of unachievable skill checks, player styles can emerge. Once balance looks somewhat ok, it moves to maps and small buffs and nerfs that move the win rates of specific match-ups closer to 50-50 for professional players. This was the SC2 approach, and it works pretty well for professional play. However, this approach does not work across different skill levels, as seen by Protoss dominance at non-professional levels and Zerg dominance at professional level for a long time.
|
On June 11 2023 10:20 Archeon wrote:On creeping: Never minded it, but my days of RTS pvp are probably behind me anyways. I think it's good for campaign design and gives devs more incentive to vary threats. Show nested quote +On June 10 2023 06:54 The_Red_Viper wrote:
My point is that the actual execution of the decision IS like playing a rhythm game. You want more of x (decision), you really wanna hit the timing of pressing the button to build x at the moment it is not in queue anymore. The better you are at that with all the macro mechanics, the better you'll do because you use your money the most efficient way possible. That's the prewritten song here.
But that isn't what makes these games interesting, it's a mechanical input test which takes up quite a lot of the actions of the players, on things which have no dynamic element to them, instead of trying to design away from that and make inputs count towards the pvp sections of the game mostly.
People on this forum are heavily biased towards starcrafts design because that is what they are used to, explaining that you really need all of this to even have a skillfull game, it's nonsense, lacks vision and is imo simply married to what one knows, instead of looking beyond that.
I get it, we all kinda like the flow of it i assume, there is a certain enjoyable nature to it, but this feeling could be generated in other ways, we also all love how good it feels to make some nice micro moves. The mechanical input test is an error generator and errors are what makes these games interesting. If you can entirely overview what's happening and spend your entire time in one area you'll likely hit a mechanical cap eventually and things will just run down optimal buildorders with little variation. Obviously you can design a game to be more circumstantial and randomized with little macro-mechanical demand where it becomes more about getting the most out of the hand you were dealt, but then we're talking about different genres and not action packed fair pvp strategy games.
Strongly agreed. Further, it's not just a big part of the general RTS genre (or at least, its most know instances) - but it is one of the core elements of the blizzard RTS games, which is what StormGate is very clearly selling itself as.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
