|
I can see I'm a minority here but the more I think about it the less I get importance of high ground mechanics - with exceptions of maps like Heartbreak I've never got a feeling it mattered as much as metagame. Metagame is the real thing on which people should focus IMO.
So speaking of it, where exactly do defences fail to deliver, in what MUs after which openings, when? Are you sure unit mixes you use are the best in situations you have in my mind?
For example it disturbed me that 2 days ago Strelok tried to win TvZ simply by making and A-moving 2 types of units, making just a single drop in his broadcasted games.
Is a person who tries to do that a true betatester or just a casual expecting things to work instead of thinking and experimenting what works and how should it be used to work properly?
|
|
|
Can't ZvZ players make an Overseer and scout?
Personally, I think defensive play is something that will develop in time. It will of course be significantly different than SCBW defensive play, but whatever. From what I see, the T>Z>P>T balance has been formed in the opposite direction-- but with the added benefit that certain timing attacks from the defensive player can crush an unsuspecting offense.
|
Nice read.
Speedling in ZvZ has been full of fail since day 1. Try this: Banelings (and Roaches) vs Zerglings.
|
Norway28706 Posts
On March 30 2010 04:48 RetroDeatRow wrote:
Can't ZvZ players make an Overseer and scout?
Personally, I think defensive play is something that will develop in time. It will of course be significantly different than SCBW defensive play, but whatever. From what I see, the T>Z>P>T balance has been formed in the opposite direction-- but with the added benefit that certain timing attacks from the defensive player can crush an unsuspecting offense.
The problem is that by the time you have overseers, the winner is very often already decided.. in a zvz game where both players are doing the same thing, if one player makes 18 drones and then starts producing units while the other player makes 16 drones and then starts producing units, then those two drones will grant him an economical advantage big enough to eventually win him the game. basically there's a window now where you can't scout whether he is producing drones or units, and by the time you get a chance to do it, drone production has already ceased, the advantage has already been benefitted from and there's essentially been given a semi-random advantage to one player.
As for solutions to the problems of scouting..
I'm not really sure what to do with terran. scan is a very strong ability, it might have been too good in BW and it might be good if it's a little worse now. It is a problem in TvT though, one I have been abusing quite a bit lately.
as for zvz, I think one possible solution is giving the queen a shorter attack range. (and slightly increase its damage to avoid worsening it vs void rays and banshees.) This would increase the ability of an overlord to scout and it would normally enable it to take a peek at drones and thus solve one major problem with the matchup.
|
Norway28706 Posts
I've also been encountering the speedling build quite a bit after i wrote this article, but I'm not convinced it's viable at all. once roaches reach critical mass they seem to destroy zerglings quite handily, which isn't strange taking their armour into consideration.. I think people adjusting to the speedling trend through being less reckless is going to turn the matchup into mostly all roach again.
edit: actually, thinking about it speedling builds might be very viable on maps without ramps like kulas ravine, and probably also scrap station. (especially because you'll be able to hold exp with lings but definitely not without.) But I think maps like metalopolis and LT will still be dominated by roach builds.
|
lack of defenders advantage and inability to scout ZvZ has worried me since I started playing beta. Recently going back to BW and actually playing some ZvZ (like Ret, I used to play a different race instead of ZvZing) the importance of scouting and knowing just what my opponent is doing were highlighted for me. It's very disturbing not having that ability in SC2
|
|
|
what was liquid'drone's alias?
|
I actually really like zvz...I think it is more interesting to drop changelings than to have constant ovie maphack over the zerg base for a large portion of the game.
I do agree with the points about defense and high ground, though.
|
Calgary25987 Posts
On March 30 2010 04:27 beetlelisk wrote:
Metagame is the real thing on which people should focus IMO.
Yes, I also agree people shouldn't focus on strategy and should focus on things outside the game. (I'm being sarcastic)
|
Very nice article, thanks!
I agree with all of the points you made.
|
On March 30 2010 06:23 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2010 04:27 beetlelisk wrote:
Metagame is the real thing on which people should focus IMO. Yes, I also agree people shouldn't focus on strategy and should focus on things outside the game. (I'm being sarcastic)
No, I just can't recall any examples where it's so crucial. In early game enemy units walk up ramps anyways, later it's more important how wide they are than just who's standing on a higher ground.
Units that abuse [edit] higher ground the most are Siege Tanks but they outrange anything that would like to shoot back anyways.
Maybe using terrain obstacles like cliffs is big enough without any sort of damage reduction, just avoiding flanking, especially done by melee units (with their new pathing) is big.
I have no idea if there is going to be any tension around sniping spotters. In this regard there better be some.
Maybe being a BW noob I'm not as attached to some things as others but I like your articles too.
|
Calgary25987 Posts
On March 30 2010 06:38 beetlelisk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2010 06:23 Chill wrote:On March 30 2010 04:27 beetlelisk wrote:
Metagame is the real thing on which people should focus IMO. Yes, I also agree people shouldn't focus on strategy and should focus on things outside the game. (I'm being sarcastic) No, I just can't recall any examples where it's so crucial. In early game enemy units walk up ramps anyways, later it's more important how wide they are than just who's standing on a higher ground. Units that abuse [edit] higher ground the most are Siege Tanks but they outrange anything that would like to shoot back anyways. Maybe using terrain obstacles like cliffs is big enough without any sort of damage reduction, just avoiding flanking, especially done by melee units (with their new pathing) is big. I have no idea if there is going to be any tension around sniping spotters. In this regard there better be some. Maybe being a BW noob I'm not as attached to some things as others but I like your articles too.
I'm not being rude, but I've read your comment three times and I:
a) Can't see how it related to anything we were talking about;
b) Don't understand your point at all;
c) Are confident you don't understand what metagame means.
The solution to c) is to read my signature down there. I, however, don't have a solution for a) and b).
|
I really like this approach of tackling the beta: giving lots of encouragement to it, but being very constructive and sensible about how it could be changed.
This can only come from a person who's very clear in their mind about what they wanted to say and what they wanted to see SC2 evolve into. eSports needs more people like you, good sir.
|
Somehow I can't help feeling that something is missing from this article. Yes it's all valid, but Blizzard already said they know about Zerg diversity issues, and I'm sure they know about defense complaints as well. I don't know, maybe I'm just tired of Brood War veterans making prophecies rather than keeping an open mind and trusting that Blizzard has chosen these mechanics with certain predictions and possibilities. Talking about the lack of viable strategies already? Analysis and feedback is one thing, but it's premature to have that kind of tone.
Hasn't Browder said several times that there are strategies he's waiting for people to use, but hasn't seen yet? Things he was worried people would say are "broken"? This means there's more that people aren't using, which they should be.
I think some day we'll look back at this and say we were all overreacting and missing the point of the changes. Being closed-minded and pessimistic is more of a problem than balance. Still, it's good to have it recorded because it accurately reflects how people feel.
|
awesome article. i fully agree with buffing static defence and awarding a high ground advantage. though i swear turrets do more now.
|
Wolfpox your point is valid but you gotta admit static defense doesnt help you much where it sometimes should
|
On March 30 2010 07:48 Wolfpox wrote:
Somehow I can't help feeling that something is missing from this article. Yes it's all valid, but Blizzard already said they know about Zerg diversity issues, and I'm sure they know about defense complaints as well. I don't know, maybe I'm just tired of Brood War veterans making prophecies rather than keeping an open mind and trusting that Blizzard has chosen these mechanics with certain predictions and possibilities. Talking about the lack of viable strategies already? Analysis and feedback is one thing, but it's premature to have that kind of tone.
Hasn't Browder said several times that there are strategies he's waiting for people to use, but hasn't seen yet? Things he was worried people would say are "broken"? This means there's more that people aren't using, which they should be.
I think some day we'll look back at this and say we were all overreacting and missing the point of the changes. Being closed-minded and pessimistic is more of a problem than balance. Still, it's good to have it recorded because it accurately reflects how people feel.
Yeah I was thinking this exact thing while reading the article. Great article but I still think it's too early to tell - I remember hearing an interview with David Kim just as the beta was released saying he thought hallucination was possibly overpowered and they'd look closely at it but no one seems to even be trying to exploit this skill from what I can tell.
The trouble with public beta tests is that most of the people playing are trying to win rather than experimenting and trying different things. Since most experimental strategies are doomed to failure people are going to try what has worked for others rather than try to find the small percentage of new strategies that might actually work if they're properly practised and refined. This means that the few strats which are known to be powerful end up getting even better as people use them and develop them, and most newer strats that could potentially be good get dismissed before being refined.
Regarding the defence in SC2 I think it can be good but it requires a lot more skill to properly utilise, we'll probably see it get stronger as people learn how to defensively exploit things like creep tumors, the creep speed advantage and the protoss force field ability.
|
On March 30 2010 07:15 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2010 06:38 beetlelisk wrote:On March 30 2010 06:23 Chill wrote:On March 30 2010 04:27 beetlelisk wrote:
Metagame is the real thing on which people should focus IMO. Yes, I also agree people shouldn't focus on strategy and should focus on things outside the game. (I'm being sarcastic) No, I just can't recall any examples where it's so crucial. In early game enemy units walk up ramps anyways, later it's more important how wide they are than just who's standing on a higher ground. Units that abuse [edit] higher ground the most are Siege Tanks but they outrange anything that would like to shoot back anyways. Maybe using terrain obstacles like cliffs is big enough without any sort of damage reduction, just avoiding flanking, especially done by melee units (with their new pathing) is big. I have no idea if there is going to be any tension around sniping spotters. In this regard there better be some. Maybe being a BW noob I'm not as attached to some things as others but I like your articles too. I'm not being rude, but I've read your comment three times and I: a) Can't see how it related to anything we were talking about; b) Don't understand your point at all; c) Are confident you don't understand what metagame means. The solution to c) is to read my signature down there. I, however, don't have a solution for a) and b).
OK.
I've always understood metagame as overall builds, strategies and units you make more (or at all like Corsairs) in a mu.
Article says
The lack of a real high ground advantage is far from the only example of defense being weakened though... Units in Sc2 generally deal more damage faster than they did in BW.
Instead of damage reduction, units on a higher ground (or ramps) can't be shot at all if there is no spotter around and they aren't standing too close to the edges. I'm not sure about those on ramps, I think I read they are flashing when they shoot but without a vision nothing can shoot back?
This makes it harder to abuse for units with lower range and nearly impossible if there is anything to give a vision on the higher ground.
My point is does it matter as much as in BW with all these new units giving new possibilities, with more stress on micro than macro? Aren't openings and unit mixes more important now?
I'm asking that partly because to be honest, I'm not going to miss games where not much but threats happens for longer periods of time. I like fast paced games and I don't mean just rushes and all ins by that.
Making "proper" counters (for example adding Banelings) to deflect attacks instead of relying on higher ground or few Sunkens is something I'm going to like more and I don't mean not making any defenses at all. Maybe there is just no need as big as in BW.
I hope it makes sense this time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
