EPT12 Worker start is ultimately bad for the game - Page 6
| Forum Index > Legacy of the Void |
|
mishimaBeef
Canada2259 Posts
| ||
|
ZenithM
France15952 Posts
I still remember losing to a random player who blind 8-8 proxy reapered me on a 4 player map. Like wtf, how gambling can you be? | ||
|
B-royal
Belgium1330 Posts
On July 20 2015 22:45 mishimaBeef wrote: back in the day, i found it quite tedious to diligently scout my entire base proximity for a proxy... heck i am not going to let those cheesy ladder scrubs get one off me for free... but it was a lot of tedious work to scout for something that only happened once in a while... this change is welcomed So you are dismissing a part of starcraft's strategies on the basis that you are too lazy to scout accurately and consistently? This sums up the sc2 community so well... | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9407 Posts
On July 20 2015 23:10 B-royal wrote: So you are dismissing a part of starcraft's strategies on the basis that you are too lazy to scout accurately and consistently? This sums up the sc2 community so well... With that attitude we would still be riding horses. This is about making changes that improve the experience of the customer, and scouting for dumb cheese is honestly not very fun. Similarly driving a car instead of riding a horse has made the transportation experience a ton better. | ||
|
Ovid
United Kingdom948 Posts
On July 20 2015 22:49 ZenithM wrote: Man, these are really the dumbest ladder experiences... If they're gone, I will not be sad. I still remember losing to a random player who blind 8-8 proxy reapered me on a 4 player map. Like wtf, how gambling can you be? Was it deadwing or one of the maps where it wasn't random 4 spawn? Even on random 4 spawn maps it's an effective strategy due to the perceived safety of your opponent not knowing where you are. (Anyway off topic) On July 20 2015 22:41 Hider wrote: The problem with the poll is also that it doesn't specify what type of feedback it is, which is pretty relevant. Apparently my feedback here is less valuable according to Ovid because he assumed I had to be a low-level player in order to say that (?) One could easily think that the poll would be about gamebalance or dynamics. Honestly if I just looked at that poll without knowing the context, I would probably have voted that high level player feedback matters more. Like in Starcraft the assumption was made on the information or lack of information provided. I'm glad you posted that last bit, there is no context to the poll it's a vacuum question. And yes there's the poll isn't non ambiguous polling isn't a strong suit. | ||
|
egrimm
Poland1199 Posts
| ||
|
Hider
Denmark9407 Posts
The problem is that there will be less "micro-scale" engagements at the beginning of the game. Interactions like 1-2 stalkers vs couple of marines or 4 ling vs 1 marine are probably going to disappear because both players will be able to produce much more units than previously 4 lings vs 1 marine was never actually a thing in HOTS. 1 stalker vs 5 marines was also very rarely a thing due to terrans opening Reaper and seldomly moving out before stimmed medics anyway. Yes occationally (depending on the meta) you will see these Marine move outs, but they were mostly just to waste Photon Overcharges so your stim follow up could do more damage. Did any protoss who kited with stalkers vs 4-5 marines really thought that was super fun? The only early game interaction I honestly enjoyed in HOTS was Reaper/hellion vs zerg. Otherwise early game was just something that should end as fast as possible without dying to cheese so you could actually do interesting stuff in the mid and late game. Not saying it was a bad thing, but even if it was true that the 12-worker start removed that from the game, it would at most be a small disadvantage. And IMO the advantage of getting quicker into the interesting phase of the game outweights tthat. That said, I think you are gonna see a lot of small army pressure early game anyway with how LOTV unit design promotes harass. | ||
|
flipstar
226 Posts
On July 20 2015 22:40 Ovid wrote: I think you are doing yourself a disservice, mechanical ability is probably enough to get you to masters but I'm willing to bet you would have more game knowledge than your average gold league player. Me doing myself a disservice is irrelevant to the point I was making. I know & see plenty of masters who are totally shit at strategy outside of the bo1 ladder format. I do have a ton of experience since I spend my time playing a macrostyle and can pull from 8k+ games of experience, but it's far from rare to see Masters who knows a few good timings \ gimmicks, but falls apart if their particular gimmick doesn't work \ do enough damage. My particular weakness would be that I'm not able to gather enough information in a reliable way and not being aware of many of the different timings. This makes my opinion less valuable, because I might be having problems others have solved, making my viewpoint non-objective. Gold players may know that they should look for gas at X:XX to look for certain builds, but they're not fast enough to gather that info while also maintaining good macro and so on. I'll concede that on average game knowledge is higher in Master than Gold, but you should reconsider it being a badge of relevance \ validity or the opposite if gold. Read up on logical fallacies while you're at it, you can find the particular one you're guilty of here. | ||
|
weikor
Austria580 Posts
Rush builds are less effective due to expanding and teching beeing possible earler in the game. On the other hand, rush builds also got more effective, since you have the recources to pump units quicker - and its likely your opponent will expand. | ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
On July 20 2015 23:12 Hider wrote: With that attitude we would still be riding horses. This is about making changes that improve the experience of the customer, and scouting for dumb cheese is honestly not very fun. Similarly driving a car instead of riding a horse has made the transportation experience a ton better. With that attitude you make products and not games. That's precisely what Blizzard did wrong with SC2. Your comparison with horses & cars would be fitting in response to someone complaining about not having to spend days traveling from library to library now that the Internet exists, but for the subject at hand, a better, more accurate comparison would be : with that attitude we would still have no unlimited selection, smartcast and buildings control groups. And, you know... | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9407 Posts
With that attitude you make products and not games. That's precisely what Blizzard did wrong with SC2. Both games and products are about satisfying needs, and if the current product on the market can be improved upon in order to make the user experience better = Good. Gaming is the exact same thing. If a large enough group of people likes a part of the game, but dislikes another part of it, you have to look for solutions to make all of it more enjoyable. but for the subject at hand, a better, more accurate comparison would be : with that attitude we would still have no unlimited selection, smartcast and buildings control groups. And, you know.. Yeh maybe. I think they are both similar. It's just that some people think those are good mechanics, while everyone can appreciate cars over horses. (OT) To continue with the analogy. I see DK as a guy who sells horses that can ride faster for those who are really good at riding. But at the same time he also makes it less comfortable to sit on the horse and thus makes the ride less enjoyable. | ||
|
phantomfive
Korea (South)404 Posts
On July 21 2015 03:15 Hider wrote: Yeh maybe. I think they are both similar. It's just that some people think those are good mechanics, while everyone can appreciate cars over horses. Your car won't drive you home drunk. Your car won't appreciate a hug (or oats). Your car won't get to know you so well that it can figure out where you want to go before you tell it. You can't whistle and have your car come running. Your car doesn't know much of anything. You heathens. | ||
|
tokinho
United States792 Posts
On July 20 2015 21:05 Ovid wrote: Tokinho I had written a much longer response but I managed to lose it all so I'm going to go for short and sweet. My timings are correct for what I tested which was when the first army production could take place. You completely gloss over the statements you made about me that were false. Your timings are actually very interesting and it's a good way of setting about, it also highlights my point of the game contracting in time much more rapidly losing the distinct phases of the game. I would just like to clarify about your timings post, you listed 2 base spire in the LOTV section at 9:00 which is obviously incorrect. Secondly for clarity why haven't you converted the HOTS timings into LOTV timing so you can distinctly see the differences in times? As far as scaling all the builds so they are equal. I'm not sure if just scaling the builds by time will actually work. For example, protoss has a falloff pretty early in mineral income where as the other two races don't experience this. So if i just did a converstion time to time. using the factor 1.34/1.38 I'm not sure it will actually be accurate. I'm still doing some testing on the builds for two base muta. This is the build DRG and True do. The approximate timing is 5:30. This is still consistent with the linear relationship in timings. I'll put the build order here so you can see it. I still have a pretty good build for this as well as far as follow up, as its my most used build ZvT at the moment. So I feel its good to continue testing things. + Show Spoiler + 2 base muta lotv true, drg http://www.twitch.tv/redbullesports/v/6891715?t=299m00s 14 ovie 17 pool 0:45 17 gas 0:57 17 hatch 1:14 17 queen 1:32 19 ovie 1:39 20 ling speed 1:58 22 second queen 2:08 (start rallying workers back on gas from production) 26 third queen 2:27 30 overloard 2:38 2:50 creep tumor between main and natural 38 Gas 3:06 40 lair 3:20 43 baneling nest 3:30 43 gas 3:35 (put down creep tumor at the natural) 48 2 overloards 3:55 48 start making lings 3:50 52 spire 4:17 5:00 morph 8 banes across map and 5:20 break them 5:00 gas 5:00 2 overloards 5:20 5 workers, 2 for expanding 3 for gas 5:30 build 6 mutas then 7, then back to droning 6:10 start saving gas again 6:15 third base 6:25 centrefugal hooks 6:40 +1 muta glave attack 6:40 start making lings again (about 10 before droning) 7:10 transfer workers to third base 7:40 add 6 more mutas and queens 7:50 take 2 gas at third counter attacks will come 8:15 at the earliest 8:30 start +1 air attacks for mutas 9:00 start making a few banes 9:10 make 2 evos for ground upgrades 9:10 make overloard speed 9:30 take 4th base (start making safety banelings) Again the clocks are different between the two games, and the translation of time where so much is skipped early is the key point. I feel skipping 1:51 hots time more strongly supports your ideas than the current post does (37-40 seconds) or saying 1:21 in lotv time, which is why I took the time to write so much information. One of the best examples of changes is the timing of 2 gas roach vs ling bane allin timings. It feels like you can actually get out roaches and hold most ling bane play, so it seems possible to even skip the baneling nest, unless they gas/pool first and hit you with a 3:10 ling bane timing which is comparable to going 13gas/12pool in hots. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16912 Posts
On July 21 2015 02:20 weikor wrote: i was also a little sad about certain builds dying, but for every old opener that died - theres a new opener to take its place. Rush builds are less effective due to expanding and teching beeing possible earler in the game. On the other hand, rush builds also got more effective, since you have the recources to pump units quicker - and its likely your opponent will expand. if u expand before your opponent you are weaker in both games. if you expand later your economy is weaker and you must do something to your opponents superior economy. the whole build/expand/tech-up triangle of love still applies in LotV. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11616 Posts
On July 21 2015 04:34 phantomfive wrote: Your car won't drive you home drunk. Your car won't appreciate a hug (or oats). Your car won't get to know you so well that it can figure out where you want to go before you tell it. You can't whistle and have your car come running. Your car doesn't know much of anything. You heathens. I'd guess that it is not legal to ride a horse around the city drunk. | ||
ZeromuS
Canada13389 Posts
On July 21 2015 05:33 JimmyJRaynor wrote: if u expand before your opponent you are weaker in both games. if you expand later your economy is weaker and you must do something to your opponents superior economy. the whole build/expand/tech-up triangle of love still applies in LotV. yeah but the time in which you can interact before one corner of that triangle becomes too strong is a lot smaller. Especially on the economy scale. That being said that has nothing to do with the new worker count. I agree that more than 6 is good but I can't help but feel that 12 is just a LITTLE too much. Not a lot, just a little. | ||
|
ZenithM
France15952 Posts
On July 21 2015 06:21 ZeromuS wrote: yeah but the time in which you can interact before one corner of that triangle becomes too strong is a lot smaller. Especially on the economy scale. That being said that has nothing to do with the new worker count. I agree that more than 6 is good but I can't help but feel that 12 is just a LITTLE too much. Not a lot, just a little. They could probably nerf it down to 9-10 so that everyone could do their favorite proxies again. | ||
|
CometNine
New Zealand87 Posts
Similar to BisuDagger, I've been watching SC2 from 2010 to date and I think I have a pretty decent idea of the various strategies about each match up. I will freely admit, mechanically - I suck at the game (and that's highly unlikely to change as I pretty much only play in the weekends or after work if I'm feeling up to it). But I play to have fun. In saying all of that, however, I do try to study build orders and try my best to follow them in game when I do play on the ladder. Like Artosis, I sit with a notepad and make notes about build orders when my Favourite players are playing. So, I think it's unfair to paint everyone with the same brush and say that gold league players are invalid vs. a masters league player. A lot of us do follow the professional scene closely enough to understand the various strategies and timings but for one reason or another, mechanically aren't good enough to replicate it ourselves. | ||
|
ShambhalaWar
United States930 Posts
On July 20 2015 04:48 Geiko wrote: The main argument for 12 worker start is the gain in time imo. Games last on average about 7-8 real time minutes (estimate, feel free to correct me if you have concrete data), with the occasional 20 minute macro game. This means that 1-2 minutes less on down times allows you to play 10-20% more games. Seriously, it feels terrible going back to playing HotS economy after you've played enough LotV, like you're losing your time making workers. YES! This is what I like about the 12 worker start. I don't want to play a 30 min game where I do amazing for 25 min of the game and then have a couple misclicks and derp my army dead in 10 seconds or less, and lose the game because of that... I also don't want to play 1-2 games per hour (Who's got the time to play 1 hour games. Ps. I once played a 3 hour mech game... was one of the dumbest things I have ever experienced. Nothing say "excitement" like trying to abduct one tank at a time into mass swarmhost), I would MUCH rather play 5 games in an hour and try different strats with different match ups. In lotv, In LOTV I have found there are more engagements with smaller armies more frequently, and this appears to make for more tug of war style games, which I think is great for the game. This feels much better than 200/200 battles for 10 seconds. Maybe other people are having different experiences in the beta, but this has been mine. I vote keep it at 12 worker start, 10 lowest. If the game explodes, revert 2 years from now  To be honest, if the game had stayed like HOTS I would have put it down for good. Just didn't feel good to play hots. WOL felt good, sometimes frustrating. HOTS felt mostly frustrating till I eventually put the game down. LOTV is bringing me back in slowly. | ||
|
egrimm
Poland1199 Posts
On July 20 2015 23:45 Hider wrote: 4 lings vs 1 marine was never actually a thing in HOTS. 1 stalker vs 5 marines was also very rarely a thing due to terrans opening Reaper and seldomly moving out before stimmed medics anyway. Yes occationally (depending on the meta) you will see these Marine move outs, but they were mostly just to waste Photon Overcharges so your stim follow up could do more damage. But it sometimes happens and I believe it is good for the game. Allows for some interactions, poke & scout etc. Did any protoss who kited with stalkers vs 4-5 marines really thought that was super fun? The only early game interaction I honestly enjoyed in HOTS was Reaper/hellion vs zerg. I can only say for myself - Yes I really like to poke with my 1-2 stalkers at terrans, see what are they doing, is there a bunker, how many marines etc. sometimes meet them on map and perform some simple shoot-retreat micro, little dance with a couple of units. Otherwise early game was just something that should end as fast as possible without dying to cheese so you could actually do interesting stuff in the mid and late game. The thing is a game needs a flow. An early game with slow build-up which leads to action packed mid-game and ultimately late-game with big epic armies clashing. If I were to make a comparison it would be to a movie which needs some introduction to accommodate with characters, settings, atmosphere and only then the action-packed "core" of film and the ending makes sense. I feel like with sped up economy we are missing that little moves and tiny advantages that players can create with a couple of units and then ride the momentum, like killing a reaper with zerglings/MsC early game or losing 1 stalker to better microed/positioned marines. Such things creates story of a game and adds depth to next moves in mid-game - He lost his 1 inital stalker? I can try to drop him more as it is going to be harder for him to defend! etc. Not saying it was a bad thing, but even if it was true that the 12-worker start removed that from the game, it would at most be a small disadvantage. And IMO the advantage of getting quicker into the interesting phase of the game outweights tthat. This is a thing of preference, I'd rather spend that ~30sec and have early game with that small interactions to "fell out" my opponent than be "thrown right into the action". That said, I think you are gonna see a lot of small army pressure early game anyway with how LOTV unit design promotes harass. If that's true then I'm gonna be a happy man  | ||
| ||
