|
On July 09 2015 21:13 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2015 19:02 boxerfred wrote:On July 09 2015 01:10 BisuDagger wrote:
The new, fast paced economy actually has me playing Starcraft again. I rather enjoy the heavy focus on macro. I have no argument here, but if you asked me, "Am I having fun with new LoTV economy?" then the answer is YES. Actually I'm fine with the new econonmy but the combination of "macro is really challenging" and "room for 0 mistakes in fights and micro" is just plain stupid. I feel like the most important thing about sc2 is how unforgiving it is. The more I play LotV, the less I feel like the "new economy" impacts the early-midgame strategies a lot. The time my main starts falling to half minerals is like 9:00, which with HotS-time is like 12:30. But with the accelerated start, I think at 12:30 you should be easily able to have a 4th base anyways, so you never really fall below 3-4base saturation in the midgame. The real deal is imo that you are just cut off resources at some much earlier point in the lategame as previously. As the rough strategy is still the same - rush and saturate 3bases and eventually a 4th - what happens is that your first 3bases run out in quick succession early and the game drags on on a 1-2basish economy, because you still cannot hold more than 4-5bases. And then it starts feeling weird because you have all that production built up that you can no longer afford, but not building it up in the midgame for when you have 3bases running is just not really possible. It's a bit like the conclusion of the FRB-mod from Barrin back in the days, without a defensive mechanism like high ground it is very hard to actually spread out. Especially against the mobile styles like Zerg and Bio.
You're just playing this rare endgame scenarii where you get everything except money most of the games compared to a game out of dozens in hots/wol.
|
On July 09 2015 21:33 sAsImre wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2015 21:13 Big J wrote:On July 09 2015 19:02 boxerfred wrote:On July 09 2015 01:10 BisuDagger wrote:
The new, fast paced economy actually has me playing Starcraft again. I rather enjoy the heavy focus on macro. I have no argument here, but if you asked me, "Am I having fun with new LoTV economy?" then the answer is YES. Actually I'm fine with the new econonmy but the combination of "macro is really challenging" and "room for 0 mistakes in fights and micro" is just plain stupid. I feel like the most important thing about sc2 is how unforgiving it is. The more I play LotV, the less I feel like the "new economy" impacts the early-midgame strategies a lot. The time my main starts falling to half minerals is like 9:00, which with HotS-time is like 12:30. But with the accelerated start, I think at 12:30 you should be easily able to have a 4th base anyways, so you never really fall below 3-4base saturation in the midgame. The real deal is imo that you are just cut off resources at some much earlier point in the lategame as previously. As the rough strategy is still the same - rush and saturate 3bases and eventually a 4th - what happens is that your first 3bases run out in quick succession early and the game drags on on a 1-2basish economy, because you still cannot hold more than 4-5bases. And then it starts feeling weird because you have all that production built up that you can no longer afford, but not building it up in the midgame for when you have 3bases running is just not really possible. It's a bit like the conclusion of the FRB-mod from Barrin back in the days, without a defensive mechanism like high ground it is very hard to actually spread out. Especially against the mobile styles like Zerg and Bio. You're just playing this rare endgame scenarii where you get everything except money most of the games compared to a game out of dozens in hots/wol.
Yeah, it's kind of like that. You get into this sort of game very often in LotV as it often starts around 10-12mins (14-17 HotS mins). But besides that, I don't feel that much difference between economies of HotS and LotV in macro games.
|
On July 09 2015 21:47 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2015 21:33 sAsImre wrote:On July 09 2015 21:13 Big J wrote:On July 09 2015 19:02 boxerfred wrote:On July 09 2015 01:10 BisuDagger wrote:
The new, fast paced economy actually has me playing Starcraft again. I rather enjoy the heavy focus on macro. I have no argument here, but if you asked me, "Am I having fun with new LoTV economy?" then the answer is YES. Actually I'm fine with the new econonmy but the combination of "macro is really challenging" and "room for 0 mistakes in fights and micro" is just plain stupid. I feel like the most important thing about sc2 is how unforgiving it is. The more I play LotV, the less I feel like the "new economy" impacts the early-midgame strategies a lot. The time my main starts falling to half minerals is like 9:00, which with HotS-time is like 12:30. But with the accelerated start, I think at 12:30 you should be easily able to have a 4th base anyways, so you never really fall below 3-4base saturation in the midgame. The real deal is imo that you are just cut off resources at some much earlier point in the lategame as previously. As the rough strategy is still the same - rush and saturate 3bases and eventually a 4th - what happens is that your first 3bases run out in quick succession early and the game drags on on a 1-2basish economy, because you still cannot hold more than 4-5bases. And then it starts feeling weird because you have all that production built up that you can no longer afford, but not building it up in the midgame for when you have 3bases running is just not really possible. It's a bit like the conclusion of the FRB-mod from Barrin back in the days, without a defensive mechanism like high ground it is very hard to actually spread out. Especially against the mobile styles like Zerg and Bio. You're just playing this rare endgame scenarii where you get everything except money most of the games compared to a game out of dozens in hots/wol. Yeah, it's kind of like that. You get into this sort of game very often in LotV as it often starts around 10-12mins (14-17 HotS mins). But besides that, I don't feel that much difference between economies of HotS and LotV in macro games.
The other main difference is that your income speeds up way quicker than your tech does. You still need to build a twilight and blink ie, but you'll get way more money which means that massing core units quickly should be way more efficient vs tech builds generally speaking. That's the main reason that explains Protoss current state, they rely on tech and upgrades to be efficient and both have been kinda "nerfed" with the lotv economy expanding way more quickly than the hots one.
|
On July 09 2015 18:43 TurboMaN wrote:
OMG Canata jumped on the Casual train. Must have something to do with his job as a commentator.
Imo LotV needs to fall back to the BW origins in terms of
a) no deathballs
b) no hard counters
You could even win fights with weaker units in BW if you micro better than your opponent. In SC2 you will lose almost always if you opponent has a hard counter, no matter how good you micro.
I dont think thats even possible... not at this point.
|
Bisutopia19299 Posts
On July 09 2015 21:00 sAsImre wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2015 03:25 BisuDagger wrote:On July 09 2015 03:01 sAsImre wrote:
I guess if ppl enjoy watching pro games being decided by one mistake they'll enjoy lotv. the comeback potential isn't exactly huge in hots but it is non existant in lotv.
And downfall must be happy to see his exact concept being used by Canata. Hyper-development and making everything goes faster isn't actually good for the game. Your statement is such a blatant lie. There is comeback potential in LoTV. I'd say even if you are in the beta and make your statement it's just plain wrong. Just to be clear, you are saying in no game what so ever where you fall behind there is no chance of winning. I guess I've never been behind in any game of LoTV I've played. But by all means preach another myth that people will just spread around these forums. edit: sAsImre, your words carry a heavier weight then an average poster. When people hear a caster quote stuff like "non existent comeback potential" and those same people haven't played LoTV then it causes pitch forks to rise over something that isn't proven. Please present data that actually backs up a statement such as yours. The thing is that if you lose a base you're fucked so hard because you're mined out so fast. Like if you lose your 4th you're probably dead if you can't deal a blow back immediately since your econ will be gone in 2 minutes. Tbh I should've said almost non existant, since you can always bounce back in the next minute if you have an army. Losing a fight while being on scrappy eco will be gg 99% of time except if huge maps are the norm. And by huge it means deadwing cross pos minimum and losing the fight in your opponent side. Lotv is basically end game economy at minute 10, and don't tell me that in these situations there is much comeback potential when you either lose a base or a fight and you've got no income/bank. On the other hand it creates really tenses moment, as a caster it'll be a cool thing if we can avoid the whole "I cannot engage my opponent army and he cannot either" scenario. And yes I'm really really bitter and sad about lotv right now but the one thing I'd like to be changed is macro mechanics. Keep them but tune them down and suddenly you slowed down the game a bit while keeping the need to expand rather quickly since you'll still mined out when you'll reach the late game but you'll allow the mid game to exist, and a bit the early game despite the 12 worker start. btw you can call me imre, sAs is just my first clan haha 
Thanks for getting back to me imre. I get defensive lately because I really want people to be thorough about their stance on issues. The feedback in your post is really good. One point I really like is the "end game economy at 10 minutes'". If I had to pick at something, the fast paced economy really prevents early game units from being able to shine. Battles between teir 1 units is a rare thing and a decision to go for let's say a 4 zealot warp prism drop in the first 6 minutes of the game doesn't mean quite the same thing.
|
Totally agree with Canata.
|
On July 09 2015 22:52 BisuDagger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2015 21:00 sAsImre wrote:On July 09 2015 03:25 BisuDagger wrote:On July 09 2015 03:01 sAsImre wrote:
I guess if ppl enjoy watching pro games being decided by one mistake they'll enjoy lotv. the comeback potential isn't exactly huge in hots but it is non existant in lotv.
And downfall must be happy to see his exact concept being used by Canata. Hyper-development and making everything goes faster isn't actually good for the game. Your statement is such a blatant lie. There is comeback potential in LoTV. I'd say even if you are in the beta and make your statement it's just plain wrong. Just to be clear, you are saying in no game what so ever where you fall behind there is no chance of winning. I guess I've never been behind in any game of LoTV I've played. But by all means preach another myth that people will just spread around these forums. edit: sAsImre, your words carry a heavier weight then an average poster. When people hear a caster quote stuff like "non existent comeback potential" and those same people haven't played LoTV then it causes pitch forks to rise over something that isn't proven. Please present data that actually backs up a statement such as yours. The thing is that if you lose a base you're fucked so hard because you're mined out so fast. Like if you lose your 4th you're probably dead if you can't deal a blow back immediately since your econ will be gone in 2 minutes. Tbh I should've said almost non existant, since you can always bounce back in the next minute if you have an army. Losing a fight while being on scrappy eco will be gg 99% of time except if huge maps are the norm. And by huge it means deadwing cross pos minimum and losing the fight in your opponent side. Lotv is basically end game economy at minute 10, and don't tell me that in these situations there is much comeback potential when you either lose a base or a fight and you've got no income/bank. On the other hand it creates really tenses moment, as a caster it'll be a cool thing if we can avoid the whole "I cannot engage my opponent army and he cannot either" scenario. And yes I'm really really bitter and sad about lotv right now but the one thing I'd like to be changed is macro mechanics. Keep them but tune them down and suddenly you slowed down the game a bit while keeping the need to expand rather quickly since you'll still mined out when you'll reach the late game but you'll allow the mid game to exist, and a bit the early game despite the 12 worker start. btw you can call me imre, sAs is just my first clan haha Thanks for getting back to me imre. I get defensive lately because I really want people to be thorough about their stance on issues. The feedback in your post is really good. One point I really like is the "end game economy at 10 minutes'". If I had to pick at something, the fast paced economy really prevents early game units from being able to shine. Battles between teir 1 units is a rare thing and a decision to go for let's say a 4 zealot warp prism drop in the first 6 minutes of the game doesn't mean quite the same thing.
I've lots of respect for you man, you're doing a lot for the community so the answer was a pleasure.
If we could've this kind of early game harass and the end game scrappy eco it'd be an amazing game to watch and would truly test players decision making abilities to their full extent. Flash vs Curious g2 was a really exciting game regarding that, a timing at the beginning of the mid game transitioning into a "normal" macro game and they finally got to the end game when they kept denying bases and workers on both sides for a period.
Tuning down the macro mechanics would be really good since it would curb down the exponential growth of economics which makes everything not a greedy build quite a commitment into aggression. I think the best example is current TvZ builds where you get banshees and hellbats, but after a 3rd cc since a later timing will most of the time be largely compensated by 3mules + scv production.
And you're right I should stop shitposting in general. Except for lr.
|
the easiest way to make the game easier to control is to enable the use of more different skills while units are grouped together in one control group
at the same time, this would make the game more fun for casuals, who right now cant, for example, force-field and psi storm at the same time
|
Bisutopia19299 Posts
On July 09 2015 23:40 sAsImre wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2015 22:52 BisuDagger wrote:On July 09 2015 21:00 sAsImre wrote:On July 09 2015 03:25 BisuDagger wrote:On July 09 2015 03:01 sAsImre wrote:
I guess if ppl enjoy watching pro games being decided by one mistake they'll enjoy lotv. the comeback potential isn't exactly huge in hots but it is non existant in lotv.
And downfall must be happy to see his exact concept being used by Canata. Hyper-development and making everything goes faster isn't actually good for the game. Your statement is such a blatant lie. There is comeback potential in LoTV. I'd say even if you are in the beta and make your statement it's just plain wrong. Just to be clear, you are saying in no game what so ever where you fall behind there is no chance of winning. I guess I've never been behind in any game of LoTV I've played. But by all means preach another myth that people will just spread around these forums. edit: sAsImre, your words carry a heavier weight then an average poster. When people hear a caster quote stuff like "non existent comeback potential" and those same people haven't played LoTV then it causes pitch forks to rise over something that isn't proven. Please present data that actually backs up a statement such as yours. The thing is that if you lose a base you're fucked so hard because you're mined out so fast. Like if you lose your 4th you're probably dead if you can't deal a blow back immediately since your econ will be gone in 2 minutes. Tbh I should've said almost non existant, since you can always bounce back in the next minute if you have an army. Losing a fight while being on scrappy eco will be gg 99% of time except if huge maps are the norm. And by huge it means deadwing cross pos minimum and losing the fight in your opponent side. Lotv is basically end game economy at minute 10, and don't tell me that in these situations there is much comeback potential when you either lose a base or a fight and you've got no income/bank. On the other hand it creates really tenses moment, as a caster it'll be a cool thing if we can avoid the whole "I cannot engage my opponent army and he cannot either" scenario. And yes I'm really really bitter and sad about lotv right now but the one thing I'd like to be changed is macro mechanics. Keep them but tune them down and suddenly you slowed down the game a bit while keeping the need to expand rather quickly since you'll still mined out when you'll reach the late game but you'll allow the mid game to exist, and a bit the early game despite the 12 worker start. btw you can call me imre, sAs is just my first clan haha Thanks for getting back to me imre. I get defensive lately because I really want people to be thorough about their stance on issues. The feedback in your post is really good. One point I really like is the "end game economy at 10 minutes'". If I had to pick at something, the fast paced economy really prevents early game units from being able to shine. Battles between teir 1 units is a rare thing and a decision to go for let's say a 4 zealot warp prism drop in the first 6 minutes of the game doesn't mean quite the same thing. I've lots of respect for you man, you're doing a lot for the community so the answer was a pleasure. If we could've this kind of early game harass and the end game scrappy eco it'd be an amazing game to watch and would truly test players decision making abilities to their full extent. Flash vs Curious g2 was a really exciting game regarding that, a timing at the beginning of the mid game transitioning into a "normal" macro game and they finally got to the end game when they kept denying bases and workers on both sides for a period. Tuning down the macro mechanics would be really good since it would curb down the exponential growth of economics which makes everything not a greedy build quite a commitment into aggression. I think the best example is current TvZ builds where you get banshees and hellbats, but after a 3rd cc since a later timing will most of the time be largely compensated by 3mules + scv production. And you're right I should stop shitposting in general. Except for lr.
I think mules are the dark horse of the Terran arsenal. If you over use them, bases dry out so quickly it's scary. Once your SCV count is solid, it has become more efficient to supply drop then mule out your bases rapidly. I'm wondering if better players then me will also pick up on this.
|
On July 09 2015 23:48 summerloud wrote:
the easiest way to make the game easier to control is to enable the use of more different skills while units are grouped together in one control group
That is an incredible idea that should receive significant attention.
On July 09 2015 17:18 My_Fake_Plastic_Luv wrote:
Complexity arising out of simplicity is always the best way to go.... Complexity for the sake of complexity doesn't work.
That is very well said. Frankly, I think SC2 is difficult enough to play.
A lot of this thread is just a less intellectual discussion of what TheDwf brought up. He articulated quite well that making the game faster and more difficult to play actually makes it far worse. If you think otherwise, I invite you to check out his thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/legacy-of-the-void/482697-razzia-of-the-blizzsters
TheDwf wrote:
The theoretical skill ceiling in SC2 is infinite and out of reach, and thus does not matter at all; you could indeed always try to micro each of your individual units, but the absolutely massive diminishing returns make it worthless in practice (not to mention you have other, more important things to do). What matters is thus the practical skill ceiling, i.e. how far you can push human limits to achieve the most within a given time frame. Contracting time does raise the skill floor (the threshold of difficulty) but it decreases the practical skill ceiling too (the potential room for mistake-free play).
Therefore, it contracts the skill gap itself: on average, the authentic skill difference between players produces less and less difference in actual results, which means that players become increasingly closer to each other and have less and less ways to differentiate themselves. The terminal phase of this movement is the very disparition of skill.
Another example (which TheDwf also brought up) was introducing a strict time limit on moves in Chess. Think about playing chess where you only have 5 seconds to make your move. The game would move so fast and be so difficult that even Grandmasters would make terrible mistakes. Blizzard has increased the pace and made the game faster by not only putting an expansions on a timer, but by increasing the amount of unit abilities that need to be managed without increasing the time you have to manage them.
Do we really want to watch sloppy play from even the best players? Do we really want to play a game where each of us individually can't counter certain strategies because you don't have the APM to manage all the abilities? I don't.
|
On July 09 2015 18:43 TurboMaN wrote:
OMG Canata jumped on the Casual train. Must have something to do with his job as a commentator.
Imo LotV needs to fall back to the BW origins in terms of
a) no deathballs
b) no hard counters
You could even win fights with weaker units in BW if you micro better than your opponent. In SC2 you will lose almost always if you opponent has a hard counter, no matter how good you micro.
Brood War has death balls and hard counters. It just has other stuff, too.
If you mean to tell me that a death ball style isn't possible to play as Terran or as Protoss, then you are wrong.
It's there, just like many other styles are there. And it's a fun style to use and to play against.
And if you're going to tell me that firebats don't hard counter zerglings, or that devourers don't hard counter corsairs...
|
Bisutopia19299 Posts
On July 10 2015 01:54 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2015 23:48 summerloud wrote:
the easiest way to make the game easier to control is to enable the use of more different skills while units are grouped together in one control group
That is an incredible idea that should receive significant attention.
I certainly have thought about that too. Reducing rapid tabbing to get to abilities or hot keys certainly would make using abilities even easier. Only issue could be spells that bind to the same hotkey if there are any. Otherwise I would be all for this. This is most definitely lowers the skill floor.
|
On July 09 2015 18:43 TurboMaN wrote:
OMG Canata jumped on the Casual train. Must have something to do with his job as a commentator.
Imo LotV needs to fall back to the BW origins in terms of
a) no deathballs
b) no hard counters
You could even win fights with weaker units in BW if you micro better than your opponent. In SC2 you will lose almost always if you opponent has a hard counter, no matter how good you micro.
First of all, BW had both of these, and in fact, the deathballs were the greatest thing to watch.
I loved big Dragoon, Zealot, Arbiter deathballs fight againt Siege Tank, Vulture, Goliath deathballs. It was fun to watch.
The problem in SC2, in my opinion, is not the deathballs but the fact that deathballs evaporate so fast. If a P deathball attacked a T deathball in BW the fight could take quite a long time with huge siege lines, zealot bombs, mine drags, stasis, etc.
In SC2 its 2 seconds of laser light show and then its all gone.
|
ITT: People who for some reason believe that "hard = more like BW = good" without actually listening to what Canata said, all the while also forgetting that Canata was a professional BW player for more than 8 years, and one of the more notable Terrans at that. Pretty sure if LotV were to take after BW in a good way, Canata would approve. 
I don't know what's more laughable, the above, or that guy who said the community changes its mind too much, as if Blizzard actually implemented what we asked for at any point. Please.... -_-
|
On July 10 2015 17:41 RoomOfMush wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2015 18:43 TurboMaN wrote:
OMG Canata jumped on the Casual train. Must have something to do with his job as a commentator.
Imo LotV needs to fall back to the BW origins in terms of
a) no deathballs
b) no hard counters
You could even win fights with weaker units in BW if you micro better than your opponent. In SC2 you will lose almost always if you opponent has a hard counter, no matter how good you micro. First of all, BW had both of these, and in fact, the deathballs were the greatest thing to watch. I loved big Dragoon, Zealot, Arbiter deathballs fight againt Siege Tank, Vulture, Goliath deathballs. It was fun to watch. The problem in SC2, in my opinion, is not the deathballs but the fact that deathballs evaporate so fast. If a P deathball attacked a T deathball in BW the fight could take quite a long time with huge siege lines, zealot bombs, mine drags, stasis, etc. In SC2 its 2 seconds of laser light show and then its all gone.
Laser show and Stim + occasional EMP*, say it all.
I think that is a problem of PvT mostly because of how Bio and Protoss unit work, because it is not the case in PvZ / ZvT, where strategic matters more. However PvT is about who has the biggest d*** because either you either Stimroll me/ Doom drop or I burn you down with my lasers. There is relatively less impact of unit control in fights unless we are talking about HT vs Ghost Fights (compared to other matchups where control plays a more impactful role like ZvT)
In LotV, Zerg matchups are going to be more diverse and based on micro and positioning because of Ravager and Lurker, so that is going to be improved. But Protoss still needs more work, real impact of micro / more active early game and IMAO MSC needs to be reworked a ton. Recall needs to be more available to promote multiskirmshes, even at high cost, not promoting it as a Deathball ass-saver as it is now since MSC is a "heroic" unit.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On July 08 2015 15:27 G5 wrote:
imo the LOTV developers are making the game with eSport spectators in mind more so than any of their other games. As someone who hasn't played Starcraft (or any game) what so ever and still enjoys watching Starcraft, I can appreciate what they are doing. From a players perspective... well... let's just say I'm happy I'm not playing. I can see Canata's point. Makes perfect sense. I don't think about the casual gamer much I suppose and never really thought about it like that.
What?
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/G5
Did you mean 'doesn't' as in 'doesn't currently play' rather than 'hasn't' as in 'hasn't ever'  ?
|
Bisutopia19299 Posts
On July 10 2015 19:45 Liquid`Jinro wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2015 15:27 G5 wrote:
imo the LOTV developers are making the game with eSport spectators in mind more so than any of their other games. As someone who hasn't played Starcraft (or any game) what so ever and still enjoys watching Starcraft, I can appreciate what they are doing. From a players perspective... well... let's just say I'm happy I'm not playing. I can see Canata's point. Makes perfect sense. I don't think about the casual gamer much I suppose and never really thought about it like that. What? http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/G5Did you mean 'doesn't' as in 'doesn't currently play' rather than 'hasn't' as in 'hasn't ever' ?
I re-read that several times myself when I saw the post. I believe he meant, "for people who haven't played starcraft he can appreciate what blizzard is doing for them". But yeah regardless, it was a confusing sentence lol.
|
Any idea, after being proposed by the community, cannot be put in the game.
If you don't want Blizzard to not put good ideas in the game, don't propose them. Once you do you will have scooped them and they will, in their eyes, be unable to use them.
People have said before that SC2 is not 'easy to master, hard to learn', but now Blizzard is taking it one step further? We already had many crazy confusing units that fight against the player's will to control them, but with the pace up it is now too hard even for good players to enjoy dealing with?
Ooh, how nice it was to control zealots at low latency. No abilities, no delay, no units with a mind of their own clumping in a ball.
As someone who has been beaten by G5 several times, maybe he meant 'For someone'.
|
Russian Federation4235 Posts
On July 08 2015 13:43 -NegativeZero- wrote:
kind of ironic that this is a common attitude nowadays given so many people's initial complaints that sc2 was too dumbed down compared to bw...
Those don't really contradict each other. You can easily make and extremely fast and taxing, but ultimately dumbed down and shallow game.
Blizzard already had to admit incompetence and do a 180 turn with Diablo 3, now it's Starcraft time?
|
On July 09 2015 21:13 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2015 19:02 boxerfred wrote:On July 09 2015 01:10 BisuDagger wrote:
The new, fast paced economy actually has me playing Starcraft again. I rather enjoy the heavy focus on macro. I have no argument here, but if you asked me, "Am I having fun with new LoTV economy?" then the answer is YES. Actually I'm fine with the new econonmy but the combination of "macro is really challenging" and "room for 0 mistakes in fights and micro" is just plain stupid. I feel like the most important thing about sc2 is how unforgiving it is. The more I play LotV, the less I feel like the "new economy" impacts the early-midgame strategies a lot. The time my main starts falling to half minerals is like 9:00, which with HotS-time is like 12:30. But with the accelerated start, I think at 12:30 you should be easily able to have a 4th base anyways, so you never really fall below 3-4base saturation in the midgame. The real deal is imo that you are just cut off resources at some much earlier point in the lategame as previously. As the rough strategy is still the same - rush and saturate 3bases and eventually a 4th - what happens is that your first 3bases run out in quick succession early and the game drags on on a 1-2basish economy, because you still cannot hold more than 4-5bases. And then it starts feeling weird because you have all that production built up that you can no longer afford, but not building it up in the midgame for when you have 3bases running is just not really possible. It's a bit like the conclusion of the FRB-mod from Barrin back in the days, without a defensive mechanism like high ground it is very hard to actually spread out. Especially against the mobile styles like Zerg and Bio.
Very interesting. It echoes a lot of my fears about expanding. It's also imo why DH and HMH aren't the revolutions everyone makes them to be. Expanding needs to be made more possible if such models are to be worth it.
On July 09 2015 21:52 sAsImre wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2015 21:47 Big J wrote:On July 09 2015 21:33 sAsImre wrote:On July 09 2015 21:13 Big J wrote:On July 09 2015 19:02 boxerfred wrote:On July 09 2015 01:10 BisuDagger wrote:
The new, fast paced economy actually has me playing Starcraft again. I rather enjoy the heavy focus on macro. I have no argument here, but if you asked me, "Am I having fun with new LoTV economy?" then the answer is YES. Actually I'm fine with the new econonmy but the combination of "macro is really challenging" and "room for 0 mistakes in fights and micro" is just plain stupid. I feel like the most important thing about sc2 is how unforgiving it is. The more I play LotV, the less I feel like the "new economy" impacts the early-midgame strategies a lot. The time my main starts falling to half minerals is like 9:00, which with HotS-time is like 12:30. But with the accelerated start, I think at 12:30 you should be easily able to have a 4th base anyways, so you never really fall below 3-4base saturation in the midgame. The real deal is imo that you are just cut off resources at some much earlier point in the lategame as previously. As the rough strategy is still the same - rush and saturate 3bases and eventually a 4th - what happens is that your first 3bases run out in quick succession early and the game drags on on a 1-2basish economy, because you still cannot hold more than 4-5bases. And then it starts feeling weird because you have all that production built up that you can no longer afford, but not building it up in the midgame for when you have 3bases running is just not really possible. It's a bit like the conclusion of the FRB-mod from Barrin back in the days, without a defensive mechanism like high ground it is very hard to actually spread out. Especially against the mobile styles like Zerg and Bio. You're just playing this rare endgame scenarii where you get everything except money most of the games compared to a game out of dozens in hots/wol. Yeah, it's kind of like that. You get into this sort of game very often in LotV as it often starts around 10-12mins (14-17 HotS mins). But besides that, I don't feel that much difference between economies of HotS and LotV in macro games. The other main difference is that your income speeds up way quicker than your tech does. You still need to build a twilight and blink ie, but you'll get way more money which means that massing core units quickly should be way more efficient vs tech builds generally speaking. That's the main reason that explains Protoss current state, they rely on tech and upgrades to be efficient and both have been kinda "nerfed" with the lotv economy expanding way more quickly than the hots one.
Is there any proof that your economy speeds up way quicker compared to tech? Theoretically it should be the same as HotS, the only thing affecting that are a slight difference in resources at the 12 supply mark and the main building which now provide more supply (so you can skimp on pylons).
I get that this is the general "feeling", but it could just be that Protoss feels pressured to expand way before important tech is up (this is due to resource starvation, not the quicker start), and so feels pressured to build more core units to defend the extra bases, delaying tech. And when I say expand, I mean the 3rd base, the natural is kind of free these last few years :D.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
