EPTWhat is your biggest SC2 worry at the moment?
| Forum Index > Polls & Liquibet |
|
Guilty
Canada812 Posts
| ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17230 Posts
| ||
|
im a roc
United States745 Posts
| ||
|
ejac
United States1195 Posts
| ||
|
YunhOLee
Canada2470 Posts
| ||
|
wassbix
Canada499 Posts
 Need more things like vulture/reaver/lurker/defiler/muta micro | ||
|
Angryhorse
Sweden387 Posts
| ||
|
im a roc
United States745 Posts
| ||
|
ComradeDover
Bulgaria758 Posts
| ||
|
Sadistx
Zimbabwe5568 Posts
My biggest problem right now is how quick buildings die, everything else can be taken care of with good map design and by letting the good gamers develop strategies. Actually even the case of buildings dying too fast can be negated with better map design. | ||
|
jgju
United States454 Posts
On April 12 2010 09:20 wassbix wrote: Units aren't fun to watch/play compared to BW Need more things like vulture/reaver/lurker/defiler/muta micro I second this. Not all the units have as distinct of a feel, and as such you don't get these little specific micro quirks required for each unit. For example, part of the reason TvP is so challenging and interesting (depending on who you ask) in BW is because of the mechanics required to set up vultures, tanks, and goliaths, and the different micro roles each play. | ||
|
checo
Mexico1364 Posts
| ||
|
da_head
Canada3350 Posts
| ||
|
Mastermind
Canada7096 Posts
| ||
|
Wings
United States999 Posts
but i really think that SC2 needs to bring back the FUN elements of BW. Right now, it's just big army vs big army, bigger army with better unit composition (& better storms) win. There's not enough of the crucial units that make or break a game, like those flying nexuses (shuttle + reaver), or muta micro, insane dropship plays, etc... this game is too macro-orientated for its own good. units are so weak, so numerous, and so insignificant now. Imagine all those highlights of Boxer doing his insane dropship/tank micro. What use is that? Absolutely useless. In SC2, time spent not macroing is generally = time wasted, unless you need to fight some big battle. That's all SC2 is... big battles. two vultures in your main could have been a turning point in SC1, but 2 helions in your main and you're roflcoptering because they're going to get so few kills, especially because worker production is so ez now. that said, units I DO like: baneling, reaper, colossus. these kinds of special units are key in harassment and make the game much more fun to watch and play. Big battles are boring as hell now in SC2, I don't know why, but it's just boorrringgg. Strangely, in SC1, those battles were epic as hell... hmm. | ||
|
Rkie
United States1278 Posts
On April 12 2010 10:41 Mastermind wrote: bnet yes. this. | ||
|
ShadowDrgn
United States2497 Posts
| ||
|
Volkov
United States71 Posts
| ||
|
meegrean
Thailand7699 Posts
| ||
|
yong_zerg
Canada3 Posts
but still awesome game!! ^_^ | ||
|
Musoeun
United States4324 Posts
Macro, again, will probably come with experience: not a huge worry at the moment. I thought the new high ground mechanic (no sight) would be sufficient for advantage, but after watching a bunch it's just too easy to get vision. | ||
|
Deleted User 39582
317 Posts
On April 12 2010 09:10 im a roc wrote: Miss chance makes the game too random and it'll just end up being like WC3. Was sc1 like that? | ||
|
Ideas
United States8073 Posts
ZERG IS BORING AS HELL | ||
|
us.insurgency
United States330 Posts
yes sc1 had a miss percentage | ||
|
johnlee
United States242 Posts
| ||
|
syedofDAeast
Afghanistan8 Posts
| ||
|
Flakes
United States3125 Posts
| ||
mikeymoo
Canada7170 Posts
| ||
|
guoguo
United States121 Posts
| ||
|
TheAntZ
Israel6248 Posts
I thought 'What the fuck...how is that possible...' with my jaw dropped In sc2, if you see 20+ storm cast, what do you think? lol smartcast In sc1, when someone was harassing his opponent nonstop, attacking another expo, and when you go back to his base and see another huge army waiting, what did you think? I thought 'What the fuck...not only did he do all that but he managed to macro too?' with my jaw dropped in sc2, if you see the same thing, what do you think? lol MBS The problem is, the intricate details of SC2, such as build orders, timings, base management You cant SEE these things in effect Micro is no longer amazing because of smartcast and good AI So basically, when i watch an sc2 game, I go "oh, that was a smart play" when I watch a BW game, I go "HOOOLLLY SHIITT REEEBAA PLAAGGUUU" and THAT is my biggest sc2 worry atm | ||
|
Kenpachi
United States9908 Posts
| ||
|
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
On April 12 2010 13:18 Kenpachi wrote: other: i want my beta key. even with the additional invites, "i don't have a key yet" would rape all other poll options | ||
|
boesthius
United States11637 Posts
| ||
|
Umbrella
Taiwan936 Posts
| ||
|
Polar_Nada
United States1548 Posts
| ||
|
aimaimaim
Philippines2167 Posts
If they remove that feature where the units can pass other units by pushing it. it would also be better to remove the auto-formation feature, the game-play is so restricted because of this. too many clustered units being easily pwnd by AoE + Show Spoiler + (storms are being nerf'd so bad its unfair) dumben/remove auto-surround from the game (decreasing SCV hp isn't the solution, they have 60hp in BW for a reason) add the high ground advantage. make marco harder .. + Show Spoiler + 40+ gateways FTW remove the SMARTCAST .. Jangbi is only human yet he made it possible .. and for the finale + Show Spoiler + not enough playguu, mines debak, and reba per second bring LURKER back!! | ||
|
Raelcun
United States3747 Posts
| ||
|
Angra
United States2652 Posts
| ||
|
vvvVec
Norway85 Posts
| ||
|
slowmanrunning
Canada285 Posts
i.e. when a lurker burrows, seige mode, vulture mines, stims, while units like this are in Starcraft 2, only terran really has them in abundance, in the form of stims, and seige tanks. Protoss has zealot charge, blink (which i think needs longer cool down, too easy to pursue fleeing enemys) but zerg don't have much. If you look at roaches, zerglings, hydralisks, mutalisks, and banelings. Zerg units are very boring right now, and the fact that they only have one spell caster, because the queen isn't used in combat. While toss have sentries and high Templar, and terran have ghosts, and ravens. Mostly I think zerg units need more abilities, to make them more interesting in battle. If not bring back how they were in broodwar, weaker, but more plentiful. Because of hydras being stronger, and roaches being an early armored units, you don't see those massive swarms of zerg like you did in broodwar, you tend to actually see almost even numbers of toss and terran units compared to zerg units. | ||
|
ComradeDover
Bulgaria758 Posts
On April 12 2010 14:16 aimaimaim wrote: If they remove that feature where the units can pass other units by pushing it. it would also be better to remove the auto-formation feature, the game-play is so restricted because of this. too many clustered units being easily pwnd by AoE + Show Spoiler + (storms are being nerf'd so bad its unfair) dumben/remove auto-surround from the game (decreasing SCV hp isn't the solution, they have 60hp in BW for a reason) add the high ground advantage. make marco harder .. + Show Spoiler + 40+ gateways FTW remove the SMARTCAST .. Jangbi is only human yet he made it possible .. and for the finale + Show Spoiler + not enough playguu, mines debak, and reba per second bring LURKER back!! When I read garbage like this, I wonder why the people who believe this would ever crawl out from under their Brood War rocks to give their opinions anyway. You already have a game released with all those features. Why are you trying to turn SC2 into a cheap SC1 imitation with better graphics, rather than a new gaming experience? | ||
|
xiaofan
United States513 Posts
| ||
|
[AcE]Kenny
Cuba12 Posts
| ||
|
raga4ka
Bulgaria5679 Posts
On April 12 2010 12:08 Ideas wrote: other: ZERG IS BORING AS HELL This ... Either bring back the lurker or an interesting spell caster . Infestors alone aren't enough of a interesting unit , and units moving underground isn't either . | ||
|
Klive5ive
United Kingdom6056 Posts
No higher ground advantage is the only thing reasonable in the list so of course it's going to win. It's even the first option in the poll, just to make sure. It makes TL sound pathetic when we keep banging on about a non-existent problem that Blizzard is never going to change. At the end of the day the goal is to get exciting, balanced games that often reach mid-late game. Even in early Beta we are already seeing that Blizzard is achieveing that goal. | ||
|
cartoon]x
United States606 Posts
On April 12 2010 17:15 raga4ka wrote: This ... Either bring back the lurker or an interesting spell caster . Infestors alone aren't enough of a interesting unit , and units moving underground isn't either . ya definitely. This is by far the biggest concern I have. On April 12 2010 09:23 im a roc wrote: Another thing that I am very concerned about is the rampant spread of maphacks. If the entire ladder is dominated by the people who use hacks then the entire game will be dead. Without a fair ladder, there is really no reason for me to want to play the game. Tons of people hacked broodwar and blizzard wasn't very strict on hacking for the game. Now all those unskilled, maphack reliant noobs are pouring into the beta. But the prospect of having your account banned and having to rebuy a game as expensive as this one should be a strong deterrent. | ||
|
Silentness
United States2821 Posts
On April 12 2010 17:34 cartoon]x wrote: ya definitely. This is by far the biggest concern I have. Tons of people hacked broodwar and blizzard wasn't very strict on hacking for the game. Now all those unskilled, maphack reliant noobs are pouring into the beta. But the prospect of having your account banned and having to rebuy a game as expensive as this one should be a strong deterrent. so SC2 will be Battlenet 2.0 with all the hackers again? | ||
|
locopuyo
United States143 Posts
The game is pretty damn balanced already and I know blizzard will never stop improving it until it's perfect. High ground advantage isn't as big as in BW, but the new high ground vision does make a big difference. And I think that is plenty of high ground advantage. | ||
|
selboN
United States2523 Posts
| ||
|
aimaimaim
Philippines2167 Posts
On April 12 2010 15:14 ComradeDover wrote: When I read garbage like this, I wonder why the people who believe this would ever crawl out from under their Brood War rocks to give their opinions anyway. You already have a game released with all those features. Why are you trying to turn SC2 into a cheap SC1 imitation with better graphics, rather than a new gaming experience? i dont have problems with new gaming experience. but there is no harm in putting it back, it has been working for 10+ years, then why change it? these are the stuff that made BW a great spectator sport. you watch PROS that display great skills. and you try to imitate it. what blizzard is making is that making the aspect easier for casual gamers to compete in higher levels. and nowadays, its safe to say that nothing is new .. only improved version of it now where is the fun in that??? | ||
|
Naib
Hungary4843 Posts
This needs to be changed asap. | ||
|
ZergZergling
United States29 Posts
On April 12 2010 09:20 wassbix wrote: Units aren't fun to watch/play compared to BW Need more things like vulture/reaver/lurker/defiler/muta micro I agree. No matter how much blizzard nerfs roaches and marauders, they're still boring units. | ||
|
Belano
Sweden657 Posts
On April 12 2010 09:10 im a roc wrote: I think that the lack of a high ground advantage is a game-breaking flaw. I don't, however, think that a miss chance firing uphill is the answer either. Miss chance makes the game too random and it'll just end up being like WC3. Randomness is great in a single player RPG, but in a controlled and hopefully balanced game like Starcraft in which all numbers are set you need to have damage reduction in order to keep the game consistent and interesting. I agree that a high ground advantage is a game-breaking flaw. I do, however, think that a miss chance firing uphill is the right answer. SC1 had it, and it worked perfectly. It is also easier to balance and it is not as random as people think as shown by Daigomi's article on t he matter. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=116142 | ||
|
GinNtoniC
Sweden2945 Posts
That's my biggest concern. | ||
FakeSteve[TPR]
Valhalla18444 Posts
On April 12 2010 09:10 im a roc wrote: I think that the lack of a high ground advantage is a game-breaking flaw. I don't, however, think that a miss chance firing uphill is the answer either. Miss chance makes the game too random and it'll just end up being like WC3. Randomness is great in a single player RPG, but in a controlled and hopefully balanced game like Starcraft in which all numbers are set you need to have damage reduction in order to keep the game consistent and interesting. starcraft has a miss chance, this post doesnt make any sense | ||
|
FlamingTurd
United States1059 Posts
| ||
|
Jayme
United States5866 Posts
On April 12 2010 09:10 im a roc wrote: I think that the lack of a high ground advantage is a game-breaking flaw. I don't, however, think that a miss chance firing uphill is the answer either. Miss chance makes the game too random and it'll just end up being like WC3. Randomness is great in a single player RPG, but in a controlled and hopefully balanced game like Starcraft in which all numbers are set you need to have damage reduction in order to keep the game consistent and interesting. I think you have absolutely no idea what the hell you are talking about. BW had the miss chance and it's widely considered the most balanced RTS ever made. What does that do to your comment now? Yea...it makes it wrong. There was a huge thread made on why damage reduction wasn't a great idea. | ||
|
behindert
19 Posts
In SC2 even silver league noobs can lay down blankets of storms over everything on the battlefield. For Spells like Forcefield or neural parasite i dont mind Smartcasting, because they are not as game deciding as Storm, EMP or fungal growth. For those Blizzard should remove Smartcasting. | ||
|
Ghardo
Germany1685 Posts
 : "sc1 and sc2 is like the difference between guitar and guitar hero" - Morrow but who cares, game ist still fun and spawns a lot of ESPORTS. may not be the artful masterpiece that sc:bw was but it's still the no1 rts title to be played in the next 4-5 years i guess. if i had to make a real statement i would say the game doesn't feel like sc:bw did in a slightly negative way. but what does that mean? possible relations: -A.I. that takes too much off the player -boring unit design (roach, marauder, missing lurker) -hard counters? still unsure whether theory or reality but the sweeping and counter sweeping of whole armies is sometimes astonishing. it shouldn't be rock-paper-scissors without execution. -cute micro tricks not working anymore (and are there enough replacements in sc2? time will tell) fun game though and i like watching streams / playing it. only unsure whether it can be taken to the masterful level of sc1 (if it has enough potential). | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
| ||
|
nate_river
40 Posts
| ||
|
heynes
Germany201 Posts
On April 12 2010 12:57 TheAntZ wrote: In broodwar, when jangbi cast 6 storms over 12+ tanks, what did you think? I thought 'What the fuck...how is that possible...' with my jaw dropped In sc2, if you see 20+ storm cast, what do you think? lol smartcast In sc1, when someone was harassing his opponent nonstop, attacking another expo, and when you go back to his base and see another huge army waiting, what did you think? I thought 'What the fuck...not only did he do all that but he managed to macro too?' with my jaw dropped in sc2, if you see the same thing, what do you think? lol MBS The problem is, the intricate details of SC2, such as build orders, timings, base management You cant SEE these things in effect Micro is no longer amazing because of smartcast and good AI So basically, when i watch an sc2 game, I go "oh, that was a smart play" when I watch a BW game, I go "HOOOLLLY SHIITT REEEBAA PLAAGGUUU" and THAT is my biggest sc2 worry atm yeah man thats so true ! i am really missing the epicness. I just played sc1 with a friend after the 6 games we were both said how awesome it was and how epic the battles were. I didn´t get that feeling after playing over 200 games sc2 once. | ||
|
Qwertify
United States2531 Posts
It's just Broodwar in 3D, combined with elements drawn from eclectic range of sci-fi movies, television shows, non-Blizzard video games, and a lot of WC3. Additionally, to make the game more fun for regular players, the difficulty of the game has been reduced, narrowing the gap between newbies and professional players. After following SC2's development for sometime, playing some of the Beta, and after much though, I would recommend Blizzard spend at least another year on its development, if not more. I'd rather wait a year or two than have to deal with this piece of garbage for the next decade. If you think the game is already good, then I think you are settling for too little. I really thought that SC2 could redefine gaming even further, making BW look like a feeble precursor to something much greater. Specifically I would point out features like competitive gameplay, unique micro/macro features, strategic play and theorycrafting, race behavior and setup, and many others. | ||
|
SaetZero
United States855 Posts
Though Roaches in general are a close second, lol. ....says the Zerg player. Played a stupid ZvZ last night, seriously... so ridiculous. -_- | ||
|
Zerum
Sweden348 Posts
| ||
|
Musoeun
United States4324 Posts
On April 12 2010 22:01 behindert wrote: Smartcasting/ Autocast for Psistorms, EMP etc. This really destroys the beatuy of StarCraft. In Broodwar seeing 5 storms being casted during a big battle was so awesome, because everybody knew how difficult it is to cast spells. Only the really good players could do this and this seperated them form the averade players. In SC2 even silver league noobs can lay down blankets of storms over everything on the battlefield. For Spells like Forcefield or neural parasite i dont mind Smartcasting, because they are not as game deciding as Storm, EMP or fungal growth. For those Blizzard should remove Smartcasting. IDK, with the current state of swarm the forcefield probably does more to change the outcome of some battles... | ||
|
sLiniss
United States849 Posts
screws me over on ladders | ||
|
MuffinDude
United States3837 Posts
| ||
|
Ghardo
Germany1685 Posts
the best example of what force fields are in my eyes is found in the following excerpt of a wiki article on "tag". Base Players may be "safe" from being tagged within a pre-determined area, when off the ground, or when touching a particular structure; [...], a player is safe when touching the named material. This safe zone has long been called a "gool", [...] as a tactical element i really like force field but it shouldn't be so easily accessible / only work in spaces where there are no units (which would reduce its usability in combat a bit), otherwise it's just "lame" in my eyes and makes punishing the protoss player + decently microing while in battle near impossible. | ||
|
PanzerDragoon
United States822 Posts
On April 12 2010 09:10 im a roc wrote: I think that the lack of a high ground advantage is a game-breaking flaw. I don't, however, think that a miss chance firing uphill is the answer either. Miss chance makes the game too random and it'll just end up being like WC3. Randomness is great in a single player RPG, but in a controlled and hopefully balanced game like Starcraft in which all numbers are set you need to have damage reduction in order to keep the game consistent and interesting. Wait, so why would adding a miss chance not make it like Brood War... since thats exactly how it worked there? Add the miss chance, make a ramp worth more than a flat choke. | ||
|
Nightmarjoo
United States3360 Posts
On April 12 2010 10:41 Mastermind wrote: bnet | ||
|
Mykill
Canada3402 Posts
with my vote it makes 666 votes  | ||
|
RotterdaM
Netherlands684 Posts
| ||
|
Sansucal
Germany259 Posts
| ||
|
-orb-
United States5770 Posts
| ||
|
Mirhi
United States389 Posts
| ||
|
beetlelisk
Poland2276 Posts
also On April 12 2010 09:41 ComradeDover wrote: The biggest problem is that it isn't released yet. Everything else that's listed is just people jumping aboard their favorite complaining bandwagon. lol I agree I think I can add viability of HTs and power of Storm Another thing is firing on the move like Vultures or Mutas could but I saw a Banshee doing that yesterday so I guess Blizz didn't remove it. Patrol not working and units, especially flyers, slowing down every time they want to shot would be retarded. | ||
|
Mios
United States686 Posts
On April 12 2010 23:11 Zerum wrote: voted balance but just remembered that we still don't got any chat lobes or x-continental gaming T_T Can't believe this hasnt been talked about more. Easy access to low-lag matches between players in other continents is crucial for ANY international league or competition. Segregating USA, Europe, and Asia, especially on BNET 2.0's shitty built in latency, destroys overall competition. BNET 2.0 has built in latency just like BNET 1.0 with wc3 and sc1 (while this is the case on US servers, Euro servers may have latency similar to ICCUP/Garena which is should be a given for any modern online game). This is the biggest reason why no competitive players use BNET for those games anymore. I'm really hoping that Blizzard resolves these issues before release, but based on their responses to these inquiries I'm not optimistic. More people need to bitch about this because for whatever reason, Blizzard has always had a hardon for built in latency in BNET (aka when your ping says 32ms but unit response delay in game is 300-400ms), which kills the fun compared to LAN latency competition (ICCUP/Garena). This is the 21st century, people have online friends from all around the world, not being able to play this fucking game against your friends is laughable. Not to mention not even having a LAN option, which would at least allow the community to take care of the BNET lag/server segregation issues ourselves with a virtual LAN program (again, ICCUP/Garena/Hamachi/Listchecker). As far as the poll, I voted unit control because there are simply too few units with active abilities, ESPECIALLY with zerg, which reduces the overall depth of the game. I also agree with another poster who expressed concern about a lack of points of conflict on the map, which forces players to simply sit in their base or expo massing their army, while maybe doing a little scouting or harassing in the meantime. I was a competitive wc3 player and, despite its flaws, it had a very interesting metagame involving risk-variable creep camps, item shops, and mercenary camps which provide economic and army synergy advantages to the player who locks down the area. This made the early and mid game interesting because it forced a lot of confontation as players had to fight over valuable creep kills, items, etc. The xel'naga towers are nice to have but are too insignificant and not worth the risk of fighting to gain control over it, rich mineral fields have the same problem (not to mention there are always multiple gold mineral spots, usually 2, having one next to each base). I'm not sure how to fix this, but to me this is a large part of why watching games is so boring because theres simply not as much action as in wc3 or sc1. There are a few exceptionally good games, but even these have less depth which makes for a boring a simple metagame. Simply put, there needs to be another aspect added to sc2 to give it more depth and help define itself. Whether it's another resource, upkeep, more unique unit abilities, mercenaries.. areas on the map that are worth fighting for like health/mana regen fountains, etc. I'm sure once pros play a lot and figure out the game it will gain more depth, and this is still beta so I'm not too worried, but I do know that changes need to be made before SC2 will become a fun e-sport, let alone becoming a form of art requiring immense skill, focus, and ingenuity we're all hoping for. | ||
|
MeSaber
Sweden1235 Posts
On April 12 2010 09:10 Manit0u wrote: 2 geysers. 2 Gays. | ||
|
DreaM)XeRO
Korea (South)4667 Posts
but imo i hate the lack of unit control. its legit just army composition now a days | ||
|
Goshawk.
United Kingdom5338 Posts
On April 12 2010 14:16 aimaimaim wrote: Balancing is hard, and when it comes to balancing, look at the latest released RTS by blizzard .. thats right its WC3:TFT, the reason why i am losing faith in blizzard to balance the game .. specially without feedbacks from über-gosu progamers If they remove that feature where the units can pass other units by pushing it. it would also be better to remove the auto-formation feature, the game-play is so restricted because of this. too many clustered units being easily pwnd by AoE + Show Spoiler + (storms are being nerf'd so bad its unfair) dumben/remove auto-surround from the game (decreasing SCV hp isn't the solution, they have 60hp in BW for a reason) add the high ground advantage. make marco harder .. + Show Spoiler + 40+ gateways FTW remove the SMARTCAST .. Jangbi is only human yet he made it possible .. and for the finale + Show Spoiler + not enough playguu, mines debak, and reba per second bring LURKER back!! Balance comparision with WC3 is dumb, cos WC3's heroes make the game sooo much harder to balance. | ||
|
Kyuukyuu
Canada6263 Posts
| ||
|
Mios
United States686 Posts
On April 13 2010 04:10 Goshawk. wrote: Balance comparision with WC3 is dumb, cos WC3's heroes make the game sooo much harder to balance. after playing wc3 competitively for 4 years i learned that there's always a way to win with any of the 4 races, considering the many aspects to wc3 i think blizzard did a decent job balancing it early, they just stopped putting any work into the game for the last few years and orcs, specifically the blademaster, got out of control. it stayed fun for a while though, because it was a lot different than any other RTS, and even though it wasnt perfectly balanced, there was a lot of depth. micro in big fights was HUGE, and there was ALWAYS a lot more you could do to win, and that high skill treshhold is what kept wc3 viable as an esport. starcraft 2 just isnt that different, which atm makes it kinda boring to watch, and will make it not last too long as an esport. sc:bw had a high skill threshold and a lot of depth in the details, which sc2 lacks currently. sc2 needs more depth and a higher skill threshold. Right now you dont notice a big difference between the best players and the amateurs who play a lot. Sure the best players have the macro down and are faster and more experienced, but i think they will plateau soon and be caught up to unless some changes are made. | ||
|
Lovin
Denmark812 Posts
| ||
|
Zato-1
Chile4253 Posts
Heart of the Swarm and Legacy of the Void. The SC2 devs promised new multiplayer units with each expansion, but I'm not sure the design space is there for more units to fit in seamlessly with the rest of the unit roster. SC2's unit roster is already at least comparable in breadth to that of Brood Wars, but adding a new unit to each race for each expansion pack (2 new units for every race) sounds like in some cases they'll just have to compromise on game quality to deliver the new units promises. I'd much rather have a situation in which new units are NOT introduced unless a race has a pretty serious hole to plug which said new unit could fill in nicely; instead, just give us the single-player experience of the Zerg and Protoss (I would seriously buy the expansions just for that), added tools for the map editor for more options for UMS maps, and maybe give us some microtransaction credit for Battle.net? My bigger concern, however, is that Blizzard doesn't introduce new units in the expansions just to force players to buy them, if those new units ended up being a net detriment to the game. | ||
|
teekesselchen
Germany886 Posts
On April 12 2010 09:10 im a roc wrote: I think that the lack of a high ground advantage is a game-breaking flaw. I don't, however, think that a miss chance firing uphill is the answer either. Miss chance makes the game too random and it'll just end up being like WC3. Randomness is great in a single player RPG, but in a controlled and hopefully balanced game like Starcraft in which all numbers are set you need to have damage reduction in order to keep the game consistent and interesting. Agreed to you with first sentence until you started the second one. It's not so very very bad random as it sounds (see: "Missing the Point" Article here) Why I chose other: I think the overall balance between defense and offense makes it a too aggressive game that does now allow enough variation as you can see it in BW. Thats the huge bad thing to me that will be a gigantic flaw with time. High Ground Advantage is just a part of it. It would require very different maps also. | ||
|
blueblimp
Canada297 Posts
On April 12 2010 14:14 Polar_Nada wrote: strategic positioning should be crucial in an rts. not just choke points Yes. I voted "Other" for this reason. I don't think high ground advantage matters since SC1 had good maps like Tau Cross and Neo Medusa where high ground advantage wasn't much of a factor at all. | ||
|
TwilightStar
United States649 Posts
Other than that, I think they need to re-implement high ground advantage (it's a part of SC, it HAS to be there...) And the game has barely any micro (except for units designed for micro, like reaper...) The game relies solely on unit composition and macro that it makes games less fun to watch. | ||
|
ggrrg
Bulgaria2716 Posts
And as far as "not enough macro" is concerned: Really!? With the extremely fast mining and production times sc2 has, it becomes really hard to spend all your money when having 1-2 expansions while fighting. And the new macro mechanics demand an awful lot later in the game: chrono boosting from 3-4 nexus, larva inject with several queens, warping units right after cooldown is finished, calling mule. All of those would be nearly impossible without mbs and automine... The problems I have with sc2 is the lack of high ground advantage and the not yet perfect unit balance. As far as unit control is concerned, I believe that people will learn how to properly micro after they get used to sc2, which might last a while though. | ||
|
Chuiu
3470 Posts
| ||
|
Iaaan
Canada578 Posts
| ||
|
bakedace
United States672 Posts
| ||
|
Zhou
United States832 Posts
| ||
|
im a roc
United States745 Posts
On April 12 2010 21:44 Jayme wrote: I think you have absolutely no idea what the hell you are talking about. BW had the miss chance and it's widely considered the most balanced RTS ever made. What does that do to your comment now? Yea...it makes it wrong. There was a huge thread made on why damage reduction wasn't a great idea. I realize that BW had a miss chance percentage, and I am not arguing the balance of the original game. I realize that going into this much further will result in a huge amount of people posting the link to the "Missing the Point" article and telling me that I am, in fact, "Missing the Point", but I have read it through on multiple occasions already, so it won't do you much good. I know that it was a successful mechanic in BW and most progammers support the miss chance over damage reduction. I don't just want to turn this into a flame war and pull this thread completely off topic, so I won't say any more, but I do still think that a damage reduction would be the best mechanic to work with. I just wanted to assure everyone that I'm not completely stupid. (Again, I realize that this post will convince more people that I am actually stupid, however.) | ||
|
aimaimaim
Philippines2167 Posts
because of the new features of the game .. bring the old feature back and this game will become a great spectator sport .. | ||
|
sob3k
United States7572 Posts
| ||
|
MamiyaOtaru
United States1687 Posts
On April 12 2010 11:37 ShadowDrgn wrote: No defender advantage, which encompasses no higher ground advantage, weak buildings, weak static defense, and no mobile area denial (besides sentries). Things like mine fields and lurkers on ramps were a big part of how BW played, and the lack of these things is driving many SC2 games into single game-deciding fights where the bigger army invariably wins, assuming equal micro. banshees for me. I have nightmares about those. Wraiths were there before, but if they got there before you had hydras somehow they wouldn't destroy your hatchery in seconds flat. Now, 3 banshees destroy a spore walker and queen and tear down the hatch while the hydras are hatching. An early(ish) unit that ignores terrain (flying units) shouldn't be able to destroy a base so easily. I mean mutas were always a pita for non zerg I guess, but they wouldn't destroy a whole base like that | ||
|
chrisolo
Germany2606 Posts
| ||
|
speedphlux
Bulgaria962 Posts
I mean, I sort of agree that in SC BW it was a bit too much, I sometimes had 1 enemy dragoon killing 3 of my dragoons (one was damaged already), but not to have any at all is simply ... rude. 15% IMHO chance of missing should be correct. 20% or more is just silly and anything under 15% means way too much "luck" involved. | ||
|
ZooG
Sweden618 Posts
| ||
|
lazz
Australia3119 Posts
all this time i simply assumed that sc2 had up hill miss chance/damage reduction but i only recently found out that it doesnt. so silly the skt coach is right, sc2 is too simple. | ||
|
fams
Canada731 Posts
| ||
|
Monzterg
Sweden257 Posts
| ||
|
annYeong(o11)
Canada784 Posts
On April 12 2010 09:10 im a roc wrote: I think that the lack of a high ground advantage is a game-breaking flaw. I don't, however, think that a miss chance firing uphill is the answer either. Miss chance makes the game too random and it'll just end up being like WC3. Randomness is great in a single player RPG, but in a controlled and hopefully balanced game like Starcraft in which all numbers are set you need to have damage reduction in order to keep the game consistent and interesting. I know i'm quoting an incredibly early post that is now most likely off topic. I couldn't resist. The "randomness is a bad thing to have in a RTS" is a decent arguement, especially in a macro-based RTS like SC and SC2 (unlike for example, W3). What I think you're getting at is the variable damage output of units in W3 - like the footman doing X-Y damage - and I agree that this is too much randomness for a macro based RTS. Where you derailed yourself is suggesting that the miss chance on the cliffs is a random, crazy thing that the player has no control over what-so-ever. Lower ground units running into units on the higher ground is the natural end result of 1) too little scouting and blundering your army into a better situated opponent's forces 2) loss of map control that forces you onto the offensive and allows your enemy to take a fortified, raised position or, 3) the wrong units for the job. All of these can be better attributed to player error and then you get screwed for the mistakes you made, the sign of a good RTS. So if it all boils down to punishing the player for his mistakes, then why is miss chance better than damage reduction? More real-to-life, lobbing shells or firing rifles over a cliff is clearly not going to be 100% accurate, but when it does hit it's going to do similar damage. Still though, voted the same as you did - the high ground advantage is either way too big (low tier protoss getting raped by cliffs) or way too small (low tier zerg having a dozen overlords and hydras to take out the cliffing units) I don't feel a decent balance of punishing the player for his mistakes and abusable has been reached. Maybe a return to SC1 high ground system? TL;DR - Miss chance isn't a result of randomness; Miss Chance > damage reduction, more realistic; and the High Ground system needs a'changing Poptarts are done, Kenichi-out | ||
|
KinosJourney2
Sweden1811 Posts
| ||
|
iNviSible.yunO
Germany211 Posts
| ||
|
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
| ||
|
Synwave
United States2803 Posts
If there was an option for bnet I would say that. Its so cold and anti-social without chat rooms. I feel like a solitary nerd trapped in a cubicle farm even if I have friends online. | ||
|
guii
Brazil31 Posts
| ||
|
SkylineSC
United States564 Posts
| ||
|
MorroW
Sweden3522 Posts
the game isnt so fun to play atm because of all these reasons | ||
|
orcn00b
Spain27 Posts
| ||
|
gogogadgetflow
United States2583 Posts
| ||
|
WaZuP
Germany487 Posts
but i think its highground advantage... worked pretty well in sc1 | ||
|
4Servy
Netherlands1542 Posts
| ||
|
Lysis
United States147 Posts
One more thought: to everyone who says they should remove auto-mine/MBS/smart-casting/what-have-you - go back to Brood War. SC2 is going to be what it is. Also casual players are a much larger market than the hardcore players so it's a good business model to tailor a game more towards the largest potential demographic. | ||
|
SteffoDeffo
Germany48 Posts
| ||
|
Silan
Denmark198 Posts
I voted Other, my reason above  . | ||
|
CheAse
Canada919 Posts
| ||
|
moopie
12605 Posts
| ||
|
hefty
Denmark555 Posts
I really don't like this feature, it removes so much from microing aspects of the game. Not that there aren't enough skill differencing paramtres as it is, because there might be, but because watching good storms is very entertaining if they require skill to place well. | ||
|
sung_moon
United States10110 Posts
| ||
OneOther
United States10774 Posts
On April 12 2010 11:37 ShadowDrgn wrote: No defender advantage, which encompasses no higher ground advantage, weak buildings, weak static defense, and no mobile area denial (besides sentries). Things like mine fields and lurkers on ramps were a big part of how BW played, and the lack of these things is driving many SC2 games into single game-deciding fights where the bigger army invariably wins, assuming equal micro. This. The entire defensive play is very limited for all those reasons listed above, and that was a huge part of BW. The actual gameplay feels much more limited. It's just all about army vs army. It's not just higher ground, btw. Unit positioning and battle management are no longer important as they were in BW. | ||
|
Trap
United States395 Posts
| ||
|
intrudor
Canada446 Posts
sure...its too early since we're still in the beta phase....but are we gonna let the franchise die? + Show Spoiler + PRO MOD PLZ! | ||
|
supernova
Canada148 Posts
| ||
|
dangots0ul
United States919 Posts
| ||
|
Jonoman92
United States9102 Posts
Game Isn't Balanced: cuz i can't win TvP | ||
|
intrudor
Canada446 Posts
On April 14 2010 03:34 MorroW wrote: i wish u could vote on everything :x the game isnt so fun to play atm because of all these reasons Why are your SC2 impressions so favorable in your Fragster.de interview then? | ||
|
Brett
Australia3820 Posts
| ||
|
FyRe_DragOn
Canada2055 Posts
and i dont play beta either, i just found out about these horrendous flaws now. edit: agree with the person who said no defensive advantage too | ||
|
CandleJack
United States104 Posts
| ||
|
CharlieMurphy
United States22895 Posts
| ||
|
billyX333
United States1360 Posts
Am i that big of a minority that I just want to macro my opponents to death and let them kill themselves with awful control group mechanics? | ||
|
nitdkim
1264 Posts
| ||
|
bEsT[Alive]
606 Posts
Another concern I have is the unit composition of Terran and Zerg. Some units don't serve a good enough purpose, i.e. the Ultralisk and some units overlap one another. It wasn't well thought out at all. Here's an analogy, If you go to the Theatre and a gun prop is onstage, then they better USE the fucking GUN. We don't need another shitty unit like the Scout. The only time its used is to embarrass the other player for being terrible and when you are way out front. There is no excuse. Either find a purpose for the unit in question, or scratch the idea and come up with a new one that would benefit the player. Every unit in a RTS should serve a purpose. | ||
|
abrasion
Australia722 Posts
I love the game and I don't want it drastically changed or anything but I'd like to see some more functionality for subgroup modifiers, perhaps being able to hold ALT and perform some alternate functions etc. http://abrasion.shackspace.com/example02.gif http://abrasion.shackspace.com/example02fast.gif http://abrasion.shackspace.com/example03.gif http://abrasion.shackspace.com/example03fast.gif Wouldn't mind being able to rally units to not only a spot but a group too, perhaps right click on the group icon created down the bottom, per hotgroup? What about alt 'disabling' smartcast and MBS? Hold ALT and press D with 7 larvae selected and it builds 7 drones in one press? When you highlight 37 units, it'd be nice if it said down the bottom in the black box the number 37 somewhere - it's not a big ask :/ I've been pushing these ideas on the beta forums but I've been abrasive in how I present my opinion and most people are QQ'ing for unit balance there so unfortunately few of my posts have had much luck :/ Pretty sure a lot of purists on this site would hate (some) of the ideas but hell I think they'd be handy. | ||
|
merz
Sweden2760 Posts
Rant: + Show Spoiler + Defenders advantage is as good as gone, which is annoying as hell. The way units automatically go into formations and clump up is retarded, smartcast is makes some units waaaaaaaay too powerful and easy to use. The situation with hard counters is ridiculous, positional or economical advantage matters little or not at all far too often. This is causes the most absurd situations in (from what i've experienced) mirror matchups. Where a Hidden switch to marauders in a TvT midgame, basically can turn the game around in the matter of seconds even though your opponent has the situational advantage (sieged all the keypoints/huge tank lines) + is up two or three bases. The ability to gain proper intel is severly limited (at least for the majority of the races) and forces the players to gamble or play overly safe which just increases the amount of "pure BO wins" that we sometimes saw in SC/BW. | ||
|
Caos2
United States1728 Posts
Since George Lucas had all the money in the world* and all the advanced tech he could do exactly what he wanted, but some of the magic is lost. Refer to the amazing 7-part review of the Phantom Menace (link). In SC2 all the small things (in the eye of the spectator) that got implemented like auto-mine, auto-surround, smart-cast took the magic of the game. No longer watching a white stream of Marines (as in that famous Flash vs Type-B match) is impressive, we've got multiple buildings selection and selection of over 12 untis now, same as Dark Swarm or Psyonic Storms over tanks was sometimes mind-blowing. In summary, BW was fun because it didn't allow the players to do much, everything was hard work. Who'd ever thought that selecting a far away Overlord with some Mutas could revolutionize the game? *for Top Gear fans, read it like Clarkson would. | ||
|
tedster
984 Posts
| ||
|
cmos543
220 Posts
| ||
|
Caos2
United States1728 Posts
From what I can gather the main gripe is about how the game works: smart-casting, MBS and higher-ground advantage (of lack of). We have to be very vocal about these changes because it's gonna be alot harder after the game has shipped. | ||
|
link18
Croatia65 Posts
On April 14 2010 21:13 abrasion wrote: I strongly feel the controls in this game could be significantly updated to make the UI more powerful. I love the game and I don't want it drastically changed or anything but I'd like to see some more functionality for subgroup modifiers, perhaps being able to hold ALT and perform some alternate functions etc. http://abrasion.shackspace.com/example02.gif http://abrasion.shackspace.com/example02fast.gif http://abrasion.shackspace.com/example03.gif http://abrasion.shackspace.com/example03fast.gif Wouldn't mind being able to rally units to not only a spot but a group too, perhaps right click on the group icon created down the bottom, per hotgroup? What about alt 'disabling' smartcast and MBS? Hold ALT and press D with 7 larvae selected and it builds 7 drones in one press? When you highlight 37 units, it'd be nice if it said down the bottom in the black box the number 37 somewhere - it's not a big ask :/ I've been pushing these ideas on the beta forums but I've been abrasive in how I present my opinion and most people are QQ'ing for unit balance there so unfortunately few of my posts have had much luck :/ Pretty sure a lot of purists on this site would hate (some) of the ideas but hell I think they'd be handy. Ok, so lets give some thought as why i think that sc2 will never be that good as Bw. 1.Army positioning and unit control-Pretty much retarded and nonexistant.Units all clump together and hold formation all the time.This sucks big time.Now everyone can make their units go together on one hotkey and not having to worry too much about macro back at home.Also the units on one hotkey means that he doesent need any order of battle which to engage, but unit AI do this for him. 2.Smartcast and auto mine-Again noob friendly options.Now every noob can have great macro because his probes just automine.Stupid and not challenging.I would maybe even support this option if the amount of micro in the game is biggest factor in sc2.Which is not the case. 3.Game design-Units are hard to choose from the blob of units that you have.Cant recognise them from each other very well.An example of this is the sentry, which is very small.When i have immortals, collosi and other stuff, i have great trouble selecting the sentry fast enough.Also things are waaay too shiny and flashy. 4.No high ground advantage-Just ridiculous.Blizzard took a shit on the most basic priciple in warfare:the defender has advantage.Period. What is Blizzard trying to do here is attract casual players and broader masses to Sc2.But remember that noobs didnt made brood war what it is today... There are some things that i DO like...but just not nearly enough.. These are mine views on the game as it is now(i played only vs comp as i dont have a beta key). I dont wanna argue with anyone, but if they dont change a lot of things, this game will never ever become an e-sport.But fine, if someone is more suited to this than bw, im ok with that. Single and editor should be great though. So yeah, voted Other. | ||
|
bconSaberRider
Germany47 Posts
It's no fun TT TT | ||
|
CursOr
United States6335 Posts
Mainly Stork vs. Ruby... and without spoiling the game... they did a lot of early dancing with units- either faking rushes or preventing scouting or trying to hide an expo... and I don't see that happening with SC2. Maybe the game just hasn't developed to that point and we don't quite have the skills yet... but I just don't see it happening. It seems so far to just be "i make a big mass, you make a big mass, someone wins, then we talk about what was good/bad about the composition of our mass." Sure there is some limited harass with Banshee and some minimal early game conflict (maybe between banelings/terran)... but to me I don't see it possible for the sort of early game dialogue we saw in SC1. My favorite part of SC:BW... at least in the last few years... is in TvP when T tries to siege expand, and float out a CC. Mostly you'd see P with 2 dragoons and 2 zealots trying to harass and delay the expansion, and the wall off, before tanks got out, siege got done, and even later than that if possible. I sincerely hope some more of this starts happening in SC:2. But for right now, I picked HighGround advantage.. because this could lead to some much more interesting defenses. | ||
|
SaftKalasEmil
Sweden213 Posts
i also think that the high ground thing is just stupid, ofc there should be like it is in sc1. | ||
|
WarChimp
Australia943 Posts
StarCraft II just hasn't had a chance to shine, you know why? Because you guys are criticizing the game instead of playing it to find new strategies... Not only that, but do you guys remember StarCraft alpha build? and I quote "It was like Orcs in space" and overlords could attack, I'm just saying. The game has yet to go through lots of changes, so what if half of these things aren't implemented yet, it will only take time before Blizzard realizes the mistakes they have made, because although they take ages to create games, at least there good when they are finished. Seriously check out the OSL 2001 Garimto v BoxeR http://www.teamliquid.net/vods/?event=114&game=4340 Although there were some exciting parts, the plays were basic and hardly any macro was done, and only some micro, laying spider mines ect... ect... | ||
|
Zhul
Czech Republic430 Posts
I don`t understand the guys who says: High ground miss chance will make game random. Lol is then tactic random? Is then even SCBW random? I really don`t understand. | ||
|
ColorsOfRainbow
Germany354 Posts
On April 12 2010 09:10 Manit0u wrote: 2 geysers. tehy are godlike perfekt much more strategy ! | ||
|
holybad
United States9 Posts
| ||
|
DrivE
United States2554 Posts
| ||
|
THE_DOMINATOR
United States309 Posts
| ||
|
starclaws
United States12 Posts
| ||
|
bro_fenix
United States132 Posts
| ||
|
stolensheep
United Kingdom306 Posts
| ||
|
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
| ||
|
MMmmmmmmmm
United States36 Posts
| ||
|
intrudor
Canada446 Posts
On April 15 2010 13:10 MMmmmmmmmm wrote: the game is WAY too much blob vs blob atm but thats probly just cause people dont understand the timing windows yet SC:BW was an instantaneous hit. Even though it wasnt balanced at all and everyone was a n00b in the beginning, the superior quality of the gameplay was evident. i got hooked right after i produced my 4th marine. So the problem with StarCraft2 is not that people dont understand the timing windows yet. the problem is deeper than that. | ||
|
Butigroove
Seychelles2061 Posts
| ||
|
zomgzergrush
United States923 Posts
| ||
|
Gapato
France43 Posts
| ||
|
shalafi
394 Posts
Maybe because every unit is so agile now, the clash of big armies look very lame. It's two blobs advancing and shooting each other. Nothing as cool as dozens of hydras fighting dozens of zealots, goons and some HT support in Sc1. Battles so big that they didn't fit in a screen. | ||
BisuDagger
Bisutopia19202 Posts
| ||
|
MutaDoom
Canada1163 Posts
On April 12 2010 15:14 ComradeDover wrote: When I read garbage like this, I wonder why the people who believe this would ever crawl out from under their Brood War rocks to give their opinions anyway. You already have a game released with all those features. Why are you trying to turn SC2 into a cheap SC1 imitation with better graphics, rather than a new gaming experience? THANK YOU! I read a few pages of this garbage, so many people whining about the same things. I'm starting to get really pissed off at all the complaining. Lots of these people haven't even played the god damn game. | ||
|
MutaDoom
Canada1163 Posts
On April 15 2010 22:44 BisuDagger wrote: What's mbs? sorry if someone asked I didn't have time to read through the forum. Multiple Building Selection. It's highlighting all your rax/gateways/hatches or whatever you want, at once. | ||
|
TurboDreams
United States427 Posts
| ||
|
Terranist
United States2496 Posts
| ||
|
azndsh
United States4447 Posts
| ||
|
Mios
United States686 Posts
there needs to be something to force players to fight early, things on the map that require risk early on but are worth it if you're the more skilled player. yea, fast expo is an example of this, but most of the time it seems like the opponent either lets it go up and attack before they lose the tech/econ advantage, or simply counter expo. there needs to be more ACTION. maybe give 1 geyser and/or make mineral patches run out a lot sooner, forcing players to expo multiple times risking a timed rush.. etc. the xelnaga towers are nice to have control of, and it creates a point of conflict SOMETIMES, but they are too insignificant. there need to be more things like the xelnaga tower that are crucial to have control of mid-late game, creating a point of conflict. it needs to be so that if you simply wait in ur base and mass an army (boring as shit when both players do this, it needs to change), your risking giving your opponent some kind of advantage. for example in wc3 there are neutral monsters all around the map which are necessary to kill, but at the same time also risky because if you're attacked while trying to kill these neutrals you're at a significant disadvantage. i dont want to make this game like wc3, but that is something that kept pro wc3 games exciting from the very beginning. early/mid game constant conflict is key, and is created by creating the urgent need to have forces somewhere besides turtled in next to photon cannons. someone has to agree with me | ||
|
MMmmmmmmmm
United States36 Posts
| ||
|
AmstAff
Germany949 Posts
if i had 2 votes + [x] not balanced | ||
|
Roblin
Sweden948 Posts
what do people mean with no high ground advantage? there are lots of high ground advantages! game-wise, I would say high ground advantage is changed/buffed rather than removed 1. You can see downwards but not upwards, i.e. if you have a unit on high ground and they have a unit on lowground, you will see their unit but they wont see yours, ideal for scouting overlords and other units. 2. You can, if you are lucky, get free shots off on "passersbys" 3. Terrans can (I play zerg fyi) fire down on expansions from high ground without being shot by low ground static defense unless they have an air-unit close by. (I have lost a number of expansions to this strat) 4. Not really an advantage but... its much easier to wall off nowadays, there is no need to have additional advantage other than your own wall, also, isn't it a good thing they removed a factor that made turtling easier? who wants to play (or see) a turtling game anyway? | ||
|
brocoli
Brazil264 Posts
When some semi-obvious strat like 2 thor push generates a lot of discussion because of its innovation, it gets my attention. Also, I have seen a lot of creative stuff in this forum, but most haven't ever been tested. | ||
|
Orpheos
United States1663 Posts
I was wondering, does anyone else think the unit sizes being really small/lots of clumping is something that needs to be fixed? I think making bigger units would add more positioning ie less blob vs blob leading to more interesting big army battles where more creative shapes and battle lines are drawn because of terrain etc. Also it seems like that would add abit more micro into the game too. | ||
|
CursOr
United States6335 Posts
I miss Vultures scurrying around in a battle laying mines, trying to surround dragoons. Lurkers burrowing and un-burrowing. Plague, Dark Swarm and scourge. There just were a lot more little things going on in the battle that made such a huge difference. Now, its almost like you put the 2 armies on a scale to weigh their Mass, and see who won. The exceptions to this, IMO are EMP, Storms and Fungal Growth... but still not nearly as good. | ||
|
enzym
Germany1034 Posts
but i do think that what also made scbw so great was the feeling of how the units move while microed. it sucked in wc3 and it doesnt feel on par with bw in sc2 either. thats my "biggest" concern. | ||
|
iheartpurplez
Canada54 Posts
| ||
|
Orpheos
United States1663 Posts
On April 17 2010 03:00 enzym wrote: i think highround advantage and mbs is nothing but a habit that carried over from scbw... something that needs getting used to (and i got used to it). but i do think that what also made scbw so great was the feeling of how the units move while microed. it sucked in wc3 and it doesnt feel on par with bw in sc2 either. thats my "biggest" concern. I think MBS and automine are "nothing but a habit" since they are obvious UI improvements that really dont have downsides. high ground on the other hand adds alot of depth to the game. it allows the map to make a much bigger difference on the gameplay. maps like HBR just wouldnt be as cool to watch and to play. and if it makes the game too complicated for newbies they can just play on relatively flat maps like they always have(me included) like python and luna. | ||
|
Whiplash
United States2928 Posts
| ||
|
die.meistersinger
United States8 Posts
| ||
|
LunarDestiny
United States4177 Posts
On April 17 2010 02:58 cursor wrote: The "big blob" army problem bothers me every time I think about it. I miss Vultures scurrying around in a battle laying mines, trying to surround dragoons. Lurkers burrowing and un-burrowing. Plague, Dark Swarm and scourge. There just were a lot more little things going on in the battle that made such a huge difference. Now, its almost like you put the 2 armies on a scale to weigh their Mass, and see who won. The exceptions to this, IMO are EMP, Storms and Fungal Growth... but still not nearly as good. I think this problem will go away when the overall skill of players increase. But it might take a while for people to stop being lazy and actually use the hotkeys. | ||
|
Craixs
Denmark170 Posts
| ||
|
MAX.Void
Cuba8 Posts
SC2=shit no micro, no macro... u can play with the fucking mouse | ||
|
Fruit_Salad
United States8 Posts
| ||
|
FragKrag
United States11548 Posts
| ||
|
StorrZerg
United States13917 Posts
love some higher ground stuff to be added | ||
|
sCuMBaG
United Kingdom1144 Posts
- the game is not balance SURE IT ISN'T it'S A BETA GUYS... so this one is now a legit answer in my eyes either the high ground thing, which really sucks. or the no unit control thing. which is pretty lame too | ||
|
FOX-skY
Germany42 Posts
| ||
|
rexob
Sweden202 Posts
| ||
|
SoMuchBetter
Australia10606 Posts
defenders advantage is a big one as well | ||
|
gruntrush
Canada134 Posts
| ||
|
Glythrin
Sweden15 Posts
| ||
|
Chronocide
United States126 Posts
| ||
|
obesechicken13
United States10467 Posts
| ||
|
Persev
United States127 Posts
1. Replayability- Unlike Brood war, theres a "fun factor " missing for me that just makes me stop playing after a few games. On Brood war you never really got "tired" of the game itself. You got physically or mentally tired and that is the factor that made me stop usually. I've probably logg'd about 30k brood war games and 300 sc2 beta games now and i can say I'm more excited about playing brood war than sc2beta right now. 2. Races dont' quite make sense -. Terran has reaper and marauder. To me the hitpoints and power of the marauder really make me feel like its a protoss unit. Conversely the reaper is so fast and nimble and has extreme jump mobility . To me this should be a trait of the zerg. As a whole terran armies in the past were not extremelyl mobile but what they lacked in mobility they made up with in teamwork. A ball of mnm/tanks was a Terran army. Also Zerg has units tht dont' quite fit in as well. A slow,tank (aka roach) seems more of a Toss or Terran unit. It looks biological but its characteristics are more toss (high hitpoints) or terran (low mobility). 3. As of right now the time windows for beginning , mid, late game dont' seem to make sense. Basically the early game time window is so short that for the most part its not existant. IMO there is pretty much only macro mode game style. The benefits of having awesome control over a few units to win the game isn't there anymore. I do understand they want you to have combinations of units, but the macro and control of a big mob of mixed units isnt' nearly as challenging as being able to reaver micro, muta micro, or mnm micro well. | ||
|
Saturnize
United States2473 Posts
On April 12 2010 09:41 ComradeDover wrote: The biggest problem is that it isn't released yet. Everything else that's listed is just people jumping aboard their favorite complaining bandwagon. You're right people have no right to complain about the high ground advantage being non existent. | ||
| ||
