|
I have received requests on how to try the model out: Search "Double Harvesting (TeamLiquid)" by ZeromuS as an Extension Mod in HotS Custom Games to try it out. Email your replays of your games on DH to: LegacyEconomyTest@gmail.com might have partnership with a replay website soon as well  In Game Group: Double Harvest |
On June 17 2015 17:23 BlackLilium wrote:I am actually considering creating my own "SC2-Improved" mod, with DH model, tweaked units and costs, but without those big changes that are present in other mods with similar goals (Starbow, CustomCraft, OneGoal etc...). It should still be HotS... just better
Work together with me, I would embrace it.
All I want is for SC2 to become more popular and arguably better.
|
On June 17 2015 17:23 BlackLilium wrote:I am actually considering creating my own "SC2-Improved" mod, with DH model, tweaked units and costs, but without those big changes that are present in other mods with similar goals (Starbow, CustomCraft, OneGoal etc...). It should still be HotS... just better
I've been thinking about doing exactly the same thing too once I finish my WC3 map. Maybe we should work together.
Clearly there is a need for a better SC2 (Starbow tries to be a better BW, which is a different thing).
On June 17 2015 19:00 RoomOfMush wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2015 17:23 BlackLilium wrote:I am actually considering creating my own "SC2-Improved" mod, with DH model, tweaked units and costs, but without those big changes that are present in other mods with similar goals (Starbow, CustomCraft, OneGoal etc...). It should still be HotS... just better Work together with me, I would embrace it. All I want is for SC2 to become more popular and arguably better.
CustomCraft tries to re-invent SC2 more than to make it evolve more naturally than it did. I'd like to see us go back to end of Wings and start from there, with three main goals in mind:
#1 Nerf Fungal
#2 Make Mech Viable
#3 Improve the Viability of Stargate units.
I still think a lot of my ideas are from here are still valid today, many of them already made their way into SC2 (like removing hardened shields, reducing Siege Tank cooldown, giving Protoss a better counter the Corrupter [new Void Ray ability]): http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2-hots/378373-how-to-make-mech-and-stargate-play-viable
|
On June 17 2015 17:23 BlackLilium wrote:Show nested quote +Anyway, I hope the TL Strategy Team will consider developing their own game now. When you can't join em, beat em. I am actually considering creating my own "SC2-Improved" mod, with DH model, tweaked units and costs, but without those big changes that are present in other mods with similar goals (Starbow, CustomCraft, OneGoal etc...). It should still be HotS... just better
I have to say that I'm really eager to see what you'll come up with !
|
On June 18 2015 02:10 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2015 19:00 RoomOfMush wrote:On June 17 2015 17:23 BlackLilium wrote:I am actually considering creating my own "SC2-Improved" mod, with DH model, tweaked units and costs, but without those big changes that are present in other mods with similar goals (Starbow, CustomCraft, OneGoal etc...). It should still be HotS... just better Work together with me, I would embrace it. All I want is for SC2 to become more popular and arguably better. CustomCraft tries to re-invent SC2 more than to make it evolve more naturally than it did. I'd like to see us go back to end of Wings and start from there, with three main goals in mind: #1 Nerf Fungal #2 Make Mech Viable #3 Improve the Viability of Stargate units. I still think a lot of my ideas are from here are still valid today, many of them already made their way into SC2 (like removing hardened shields, reducing Siege Tank cooldown, giving Protoss a better counter the Corrupter [new Void Ray ability]): http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2-hots/378373-how-to-make-mech-and-stargate-play-viable
I am very open about suggestions and changes, I dont have my mind set on many of the changes I did. I would gladly start on a new balance mod with others together. The more people the better it is going to be because testing and reviewing is key when balancing something.
|
On June 18 2015 04:49 RoomOfMush wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2015 02:10 BronzeKnee wrote:On June 17 2015 19:00 RoomOfMush wrote:On June 17 2015 17:23 BlackLilium wrote:I am actually considering creating my own "SC2-Improved" mod, with DH model, tweaked units and costs, but without those big changes that are present in other mods with similar goals (Starbow, CustomCraft, OneGoal etc...). It should still be HotS... just better Work together with me, I would embrace it. All I want is for SC2 to become more popular and arguably better. CustomCraft tries to re-invent SC2 more than to make it evolve more naturally than it did. I'd like to see us go back to end of Wings and start from there, with three main goals in mind: #1 Nerf Fungal #2 Make Mech Viable #3 Improve the Viability of Stargate units. I still think a lot of my ideas are from here are still valid today, many of them already made their way into SC2 (like removing hardened shields, reducing Siege Tank cooldown, giving Protoss a better counter the Corrupter [new Void Ray ability]): http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2-hots/378373-how-to-make-mech-and-stargate-play-viable I am very open about suggestions and changes, I dont have my mind set on many of the changes I did. I would gladly start on a new balance mod with others together. The more people the better it is going to be because testing and reviewing is key when balancing something.
I see game design a bit differently.
The most important point is to make good design decisions. It takes a long time to come up with good ideas. Balancing them is the last step, and comes far more naturally when you're working with a good idea.
Things like Vortex, the Warhound, Fungal, ect are not good ideas, so balancing them doesn't come naturally at all.
And while Warpgate could be made a strategic choice (as it is in Customcraft) it doesn't need to be. Just because a choice could exist, doesn't mean it should exist, and people often make that mistake when talking about game design. Warpgate is a neat idea that isn't necessarily unbalanced, and the reason it is an upgrade is to prevent people from 2 gating from their main with a pylon.
Warpgate gives Protoss a good avenue to harass from and created a lot of neat timings for Protoss in WOL. It also made Protoss much different to play and I appreciate that. That said I think there are better ways to make it more of strategic choice.
Anyway, I think Customcraft has some good ideas in it but changes too much too quickly.
|
As I said, I am open to going back on several of the changes. I am really looking forward on working more seriously on a mod with a team.
Until now, I was just fooling around all by myself. I made the changes I made because I knew not too many people are going to test it out anyways (I am an unknown nobody in the community, with no backup) so I could just try things out. But with a team and some community backup and test data we could go a very methodical, thought out approach and analyse things in greater detail.
|
On June 18 2015 02:10 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2015 17:23 BlackLilium wrote:I am actually considering creating my own "SC2-Improved" mod, with DH model, tweaked units and costs, but without those big changes that are present in other mods with similar goals (Starbow, CustomCraft, OneGoal etc...). It should still be HotS... just better I've been thinking about doing exactly the same thing too once I finish my WC3 map. Maybe we should work together. Clearly there is a need for a better SC2 (Starbow tries to be a better BW, which is a different thing). Show nested quote +On June 17 2015 19:00 RoomOfMush wrote:On June 17 2015 17:23 BlackLilium wrote:I am actually considering creating my own "SC2-Improved" mod, with DH model, tweaked units and costs, but without those big changes that are present in other mods with similar goals (Starbow, CustomCraft, OneGoal etc...). It should still be HotS... just better Work together with me, I would embrace it. All I want is for SC2 to become more popular and arguably better. CustomCraft tries to re-invent SC2 more than to make it evolve more naturally than it did. I'd like to see us go back to end of Wings and start from there, with three main goals in mind: #1 Nerf Fungal #2 Make Mech Viable #3 Improve the Viability of Stargate units. I still think a lot of my ideas are from here are still valid today, many of them already made their way into SC2 (like removing hardened shields, reducing Siege Tank cooldown, giving Protoss a better counter the Corrupter [new Void Ray ability]): http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2-hots/378373-how-to-make-mech-and-stargate-play-viable
I think everyone will be happy to get rid of the boring and un-zergy infestor-BL combo from end of WoL. Question is what you will replace it with, to deal with collosus-based deathballs or mech, both of which you want to buff. I think the viper was a great solution to that, allowing zerg to have a zergy army (fast melee or short range) that can deal with death balls through blinding cloud and to some extent abduct. Blinding cloud also being good for punishing dense deathballs and encourages counter-micro etc. So I think some kind of viper/defiler could be a good ingredient.
|
On June 18 2015 17:00 Cascade wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2015 02:10 BronzeKnee wrote:On June 17 2015 17:23 BlackLilium wrote:I am actually considering creating my own "SC2-Improved" mod, with DH model, tweaked units and costs, but without those big changes that are present in other mods with similar goals (Starbow, CustomCraft, OneGoal etc...). It should still be HotS... just better I've been thinking about doing exactly the same thing too once I finish my WC3 map. Maybe we should work together. Clearly there is a need for a better SC2 (Starbow tries to be a better BW, which is a different thing). On June 17 2015 19:00 RoomOfMush wrote:On June 17 2015 17:23 BlackLilium wrote:I am actually considering creating my own "SC2-Improved" mod, with DH model, tweaked units and costs, but without those big changes that are present in other mods with similar goals (Starbow, CustomCraft, OneGoal etc...). It should still be HotS... just better Work together with me, I would embrace it. All I want is for SC2 to become more popular and arguably better. CustomCraft tries to re-invent SC2 more than to make it evolve more naturally than it did. I'd like to see us go back to end of Wings and start from there, with three main goals in mind: #1 Nerf Fungal #2 Make Mech Viable #3 Improve the Viability of Stargate units. I still think a lot of my ideas are from here are still valid today, many of them already made their way into SC2 (like removing hardened shields, reducing Siege Tank cooldown, giving Protoss a better counter the Corrupter [new Void Ray ability]): http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2-hots/378373-how-to-make-mech-and-stargate-play-viable I think everyone will be happy to get rid of the boring and un-zergy infestor-BL combo from end of WoL. Question is what you will replace it with, to deal with collosus-based deathballs or mech, both of which you want to buff. I think the viper was a great solution to that, allowing zerg to have a zergy army (fast melee or short range) that can deal with death balls through blinding cloud and to some extent abduct. Blinding cloud also being good for punishing dense deathballs and encourages counter-micro etc. So I think some kind of viper/defiler could be a good ingredient.
Here is the deal with deathballs, they aren't necessarily bad. Tanks sieging and unsieging and leap frogging forward creates interesting dynamics. And, I don't want to buff Colossus based deathballs, I want to make the Colossus into a positional unit by slowing it way down as I mentioned in the my long post. So it's still an A-move unit of sorts, just a really slow one that is easy to counter and difficult to protect. And protecting it becomes the challenge, much like protecting the Guardian in BW or protecting the Siege Tank.
The problem is that A-move deathballs that are mobile. Any mobile A-move deathball (MMM) should be much weaker in a straight up fight than a positional (read slower) composition.
Without the deathball concept of two big armies fighting each other for a position. the game would just be a bunch of harrass-skirmish battles across the map. And the only way for that too work is to make static defense terrible, either by doing what LOTV did by constantly mining out bases, or reduce their stats.
But I don't see a problem with games evolving into both players building build fortresses and then smashing each other with slow moving positional death balls, like the old TvT.
|
What would have more effect, sending one of the DH guys to Irvine to sit face to face with the devs or 1000$ so they can dedicate time to community activism?
Also, I wish there could be a TLopen on a weekend. I mean the player base is probably all gone again for this mod but the open was at a pretty bad time of day for most of NA.
|
I think coming up with an even better system as proof of concept would have a better effect than either of those Gofarman. Just gotta keep searching.
|
I am of the opinion that breaking the worker pair will be the most important thing when it comes to the longevity of SC2. In front of me I see a system that achieves that. I've never had a reasonable opportunity to affect sc2 but with the beginning of change happening internally at blizzard this is probably the best opportunity we get to have direct input.
|
I'd just like to remind everyone/Blizzard that this (with some tweaking/balancing of course) is a far more elegant and interesting solution to many of the problems Starcraft 2 has and the current LotV model forces rushed gameplay that does more to hurt the precious casual players than removing macro mechanics helps.
I'd like to hope that David Kim and the rest of the Blizzard design team take a serious look at this for once and actually try to understand it, because from statements made by Blizzard it has been evident that they do not at all.
With only a few weeks left in the "major design" part of the LotV beta, this is our last chance to get Blizzard to actually try this out instead of blindly dismissing it through ignorance and misunderstanding. If we want LotV to be the best game possible, which it is far from being at this point, then we need to make it known.
|
Are there examples that demonstrate this economy being a 'far more elegant and interesting solution'? I've heard the rhetoric and I've seen the pseudo-analysis with rough numbers. Next, I would want to see some demonstrations, examples, or concrete evidence.
From what I heard, there were some trials at some point that ended up with unexpected conclusions. Namely, the mid to end game scenarios didn't quite play out drastically different (despite initial expectations) but the early game was behaving in a new and different way. Mind you this was before the macro boosters cut.
|
On August 24 2015 13:38 mishimaBeef wrote:
Are there examples that demonstrate this economy being a 'far more elegant and interesting solution'? I've heard the rhetoric and I've seen the pseudo-analysis with rough numbers. Next, I would want to see some demonstrations, examples, or concrete evidence.
From what I heard, there were some trials at some point that ended up with unexpected conclusions. Namely, the mid to end game scenarios didn't quite play out drastically different (despite initial expectations) but the early game was behaving in a new and different way. Mind you this was before the macro boosters cut.
Drastic difference was never the intention. The early game needed some tweaking, sure, that's what a beta test would be for. But the whole point was to offer greater incentive to expand without forcing it like the current LotV model does and that was somewhat successful, and could be even more so with additional balancing.
The few showmatches that happened weren't far too small of a sample size to determine anything conclusive. Once players have time to figure out the new economy and practice a significant number of games in it I'm sure it will prove to be superior. And what do we have to lose? If this turns out not to be the case, we can always switch back to what we currently have and call it good.
|
On August 24 2015 13:38 mishimaBeef wrote:
Are there examples that demonstrate this economy being a 'far more elegant and interesting solution'? I've heard the rhetoric and I've seen the pseudo-analysis with rough numbers. Next, I would want to see some demonstrations, examples, or concrete evidence.
From what I heard, there were some trials at some point that ended up with unexpected conclusions. Namely, the mid to end game scenarios didn't quite play out drastically different (despite initial expectations) but the early game was behaving in a new and different way. Mind you this was before the macro boosters cut.
http://www.twitch.tv/bacon_infinity/c/6607600
This is Scarlett vs Parting double harvest show match. I preferred the Scarlett vs Ruff, but I didn't find it on twitch. Maybe search youtube.
The latter I felt demonstrated the late game effect of the double harvest mod which allowed Scarlett to mass expand in response to a turtle mech terran.
I am a fan of double harvest and don't see why they couldn't included it or just test it with the new LOTV. In fact, with the removal of macro mechanics I have heard the game slows a lot in the beginning stages. Adding DH would actually boost the beginning economy slightly and maybe even restore the fast early game progression to LOTV. People might like that, if that's what actually would happen.
For what it's worth, I agree with setguitarstokill. I like the DH model and would like to see it tried, but it might be too much to experiment with no macro mechanics and DH economy....
Then again it might be the perfect combination... To bad blizzard didn't give this a chance before. Maybe there is still time.
|
On August 24 2015 14:29 ShambhalaWar wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2015 13:38 mishimaBeef wrote:
Are there examples that demonstrate this economy being a 'far more elegant and interesting solution'? I've heard the rhetoric and I've seen the pseudo-analysis with rough numbers. Next, I would want to see some demonstrations, examples, or concrete evidence.
From what I heard, there were some trials at some point that ended up with unexpected conclusions. Namely, the mid to end game scenarios didn't quite play out drastically different (despite initial expectations) but the early game was behaving in a new and different way. Mind you this was before the macro boosters cut. http://www.twitch.tv/bacon_infinity/c/6607600This is Scarlett vs Parting double harvest show match. I preferred the Scarlett vs Ruff, but I didn't find it on twitch. Maybe search youtube. The latter I felt demonstrated the late game effect of the double harvest mod which allowed Scarlett to mass expand in response to a turtle mech terran. I am a fan of double harvest and don't see why they couldn't included it or just test it with the new LOTV. In fact, with the removal of macro mechanics I have heard the game slows a lot in the beginning stages. Adding DH would actually boost the beginning economy slightly and maybe even restore the fast early game progression to LOTV. People might like that, if that's what actually would happen. For what it's worth, I agree with setguitarstokill. I like the DH model and would like to see it tried, but it might be too much to experiment with no macro mechanics and DH economy.... Then again it might be the perfect combination... To bad blizzard didn't give this a chance before. Maybe there is still time.
The Scarlett vs Parting showmatch was not the best demonstration, since the skill disparity between the two players was massive. Scarlett expanding more didn't make up for Parting simply being a better player. But that's actually kind of how it should be. DH would add an extra option on how to play, especially useful against turtling players, not become the core of the game and force faster expansion.
Sadly, with the recent community feed back update, it seems like Blizzard has completely laid to rest the idea of even trying it.
"-Reducing the number of workers per base so that army sizes become bigger
When trying out this change, we determined that reducing the workers needed per base isn’t good for the game because many of the coolest moments in StarCraft II come from worker harassment. With fewer workers, it was just too easy to rebuild after taking economic damage, making these moments less meaningful.
We also looked into feedback suggesting we reduce the efficiency of workers when more than 1 is mining at a single mineral patch. This was aimed at making expanding result in a higher income more often than not, even when on an equal worker count. What we found is that expanding quickly and often already feels like a big advantage in Void, so this change does not feel all that different in terms of when you want to expand. Also, when you do expand faster and have your workers more spread out, it’s easier to replenish workers that you’ve lost to harassment. As we stated above, this is the opposite of what we’re looking to accomplish with the economy changes."
From what they said above, they completely missed the point and seem to think that the DH model is made to have bigger armies or harass or something stupid like that. It's a copout that literally makes no sense.
|
DH showed that with a decreased efficiency it not only encourages expanding, but also promotes cutting worker production for stronger aggression (which is not an all-in). Consequently you have fights early game and fights late game.
However, you need to prepare for that: e.g. going greedy fast expansion without scouting is that much more risky.
Players need to adapt for that.
On the other hand, game needs some rebalancing as well (something I am trying to do as well, but it is a long process)
|
On June 18 2015 17:00 Cascade wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2015 02:10 BronzeKnee wrote:On June 17 2015 17:23 BlackLilium wrote:I am actually considering creating my own "SC2-Improved" mod, with DH model, tweaked units and costs, but without those big changes that are present in other mods with similar goals (Starbow, CustomCraft, OneGoal etc...). It should still be HotS... just better I've been thinking about doing exactly the same thing too once I finish my WC3 map. Maybe we should work together. Clearly there is a need for a better SC2 (Starbow tries to be a better BW, which is a different thing). On June 17 2015 19:00 RoomOfMush wrote:On June 17 2015 17:23 BlackLilium wrote:I am actually considering creating my own "SC2-Improved" mod, with DH model, tweaked units and costs, but without those big changes that are present in other mods with similar goals (Starbow, CustomCraft, OneGoal etc...). It should still be HotS... just better Work together with me, I would embrace it. All I want is for SC2 to become more popular and arguably better. CustomCraft tries to re-invent SC2 more than to make it evolve more naturally than it did. I'd like to see us go back to end of Wings and start from there, with three main goals in mind: #1 Nerf Fungal #2 Make Mech Viable #3 Improve the Viability of Stargate units. I still think a lot of my ideas are from here are still valid today, many of them already made their way into SC2 (like removing hardened shields, reducing Siege Tank cooldown, giving Protoss a better counter the Corrupter [new Void Ray ability]): http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2-hots/378373-how-to-make-mech-and-stargate-play-viable I think everyone will be happy to get rid of the boring and un-zergy infestor-BL combo from end of WoL. Question is what you will replace it with, to deal with collosus-based deathballs or mech, both of which you want to buff. I think the viper was a great solution to that, allowing zerg to have a zergy army (fast melee or short range) that can deal with death balls through blinding cloud and to some extent abduct. Blinding cloud also being good for punishing dense deathballs and encourages counter-micro etc. So I think some kind of viper/defiler could be a good ingredient.
I suggest instead of abduct (which looks weird because it violates physics or something), neural parasite should be buffed until it is usable.
Not only would neural parasite be more natural, it would also be cool to watch, and cool to play. There's no better feeling than taking control of half a battlecruiser fleet.
|
On August 25 2015 17:03 phantomfive wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2015 17:00 Cascade wrote:On June 18 2015 02:10 BronzeKnee wrote:On June 17 2015 17:23 BlackLilium wrote:I am actually considering creating my own "SC2-Improved" mod, with DH model, tweaked units and costs, but without those big changes that are present in other mods with similar goals (Starbow, CustomCraft, OneGoal etc...). It should still be HotS... just better I've been thinking about doing exactly the same thing too once I finish my WC3 map. Maybe we should work together. Clearly there is a need for a better SC2 (Starbow tries to be a better BW, which is a different thing). On June 17 2015 19:00 RoomOfMush wrote:On June 17 2015 17:23 BlackLilium wrote:I am actually considering creating my own "SC2-Improved" mod, with DH model, tweaked units and costs, but without those big changes that are present in other mods with similar goals (Starbow, CustomCraft, OneGoal etc...). It should still be HotS... just better Work together with me, I would embrace it. All I want is for SC2 to become more popular and arguably better. CustomCraft tries to re-invent SC2 more than to make it evolve more naturally than it did. I'd like to see us go back to end of Wings and start from there, with three main goals in mind: #1 Nerf Fungal #2 Make Mech Viable #3 Improve the Viability of Stargate units. I still think a lot of my ideas are from here are still valid today, many of them already made their way into SC2 (like removing hardened shields, reducing Siege Tank cooldown, giving Protoss a better counter the Corrupter [new Void Ray ability]): http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2-hots/378373-how-to-make-mech-and-stargate-play-viable I think everyone will be happy to get rid of the boring and un-zergy infestor-BL combo from end of WoL. Question is what you will replace it with, to deal with collosus-based deathballs or mech, both of which you want to buff. I think the viper was a great solution to that, allowing zerg to have a zergy army (fast melee or short range) that can deal with death balls through blinding cloud and to some extent abduct. Blinding cloud also being good for punishing dense deathballs and encourages counter-micro etc. So I think some kind of viper/defiler could be a good ingredient. I suggest instead of abduct (which looks weird because it violates physics or something), neural parasite should be buffed until it is usable. Not only would neural parasite be more natural, it would also be cool to watch, and cool to play. There's no better feeling than taking control of half a battlecruiser fleet.
Viper abduct is offensive to me every time I see it. It's "silly" looking and doesn't feel like starcraft. I hate it so much that I'm a zerg player and I won't even use the spell.
|
^ i feel exactly the same way. i almost do the same with the entire mothership core. i try to play without it as much as possible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
