EPT[D] High Ground & Positional Advantages - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
Acritter
Syria7637 Posts
| ||
|
Hachrt
United States5 Posts
| ||
|
RFDaemoniac
United States544 Posts
 banelings will be worse. | ||
|
Gfire
United States1699 Posts
Maybe part of the problem is that back in beta Zerg was weak, and it was fixed a lot by making better maps for Zerg, but these more open maps tend to have less positional value. I saw a bit of the YOMT by IPL and the games were actually great, with a ton of positioning. Zerg always lost to Terran on maps like Stepped of War, but there was a lot of positional play. As was mentioned by someone before, having stronger Hydras and things like that would let us make maps with tighter chokes without making it too bad for Zerg. It's possible Hydras are already strong enough, though, and making more chokes would encourage Zerg players to use them instead of Roaches and then it would all turn out alright in the end. | ||
|
DYEAlabaster
Canada1009 Posts
With regards to highground/chocks- I feel that peppering in aspects of it here in many maps would be better than making a map revolve around the concept. Cloud Kingdom is amazingly well designed, but I would like to see aspects of it present in most maps, rather than have 10 more maps that use the same ideas. Also something, I feel that mastering the art of the defensive chock/highground is more important at present than mastering the art of the offensive highground (like in Korhal Compound). Not necessarily to mappers, but to players themselves. As an area right now, I don't feel that players know how to react properly to it (see any discussion about how hard it is to take a fourth on Cloud Kingdom/third on Korhal). So good ideas, would like to see them implanted slow and steady, giving players a chance to learn and play on them. | ||
|
KazaDooM
Austria32 Posts
I think you could try to simulate some kind of highground advantage by for instance using neutral sentries that cast Guardian shield. Drawback is that it also effects all units negatively even if they all stand on the highground. | ||
|
Trotim
Germany95 Posts
Also you really need to implement bigger unit collision circles. That alone would alleviate a lot of the deathball concerns. | ||
|
Gfire
United States1699 Posts
On May 02 2012 23:11 Trotim wrote: You'll have to embrace FRB needs data changes, not just terrain changes. The SC2 editor more than likely can do high ground advantage, you'll just have to change the gameplay and unit stats to be different on 6m maps compared to 8m maps to make it work. And why not? And if you don't want the chance element maybe there's a way for a flat 33-40% damage penalty? I don't know, I just know you should experiment more. Also you really need to implement bigger unit collision circles. That alone would alleviate a lot of the deathball concerns. If you increase the collision circles you still limit micro. Visually they will look spread out, and it will take longer to get in range, but they won't allow you to pull units through between each other very easily. In BW the collision circles were pretty small, units just spread out more on their own. I've made a mod which adds passive unit spreading. A group of units will spread out while moving naturally. It's a concept I've been pondering since shortly after release, actually, and several months ago I started to figure out the ways of doing it in a mod technically. Still working on it, it requires a lot of mindless busywork now that I've refined the process, but I'm nearly to the point of some type of release. Of course it may also need a slight increase in collision circles as well to be completely optimal (units are still pretty good at getting through chokes and such.) As far as high ground advantage goes, I'm not %100 sure it's needed, but it's something worth looking into. Is there a way that it can be applied by data and not triggers? You can probably check height with a validator somewhere in the weapon effect, right? | ||
|
Gyro_SC2
Canada540 Posts
First of wall: We need good map with a lot of hightground. The problem with the protoss: 1. The protoss can ignore your defence because he can blink in your base with collosus. Remove the ability to go in the hightground and the collosus to climb. 2. With the collosus or templar the protoss is enought strong to engage in the ramp. Make a upgrade that make defense static more strong in the midgame. For exemple hightlife bunker/spine should be enought to stop storm and big lategame protoss army, and hightrange turret/spore should be the perfect anti-collosus building. 3. The protoss use the archon toilette. infestor should have more range for neuroparasite again ``mothership unit``. The problem with zerg: 1. Broodlord nullify the hight ground avantage because they are flying. Make static defence anti-air(turret/canon) more strong and more range. Make the phenix/thors more strong again Broodlord, it should be a kind of viking. The problem with the terran: 1.midgame terran timing attack are very good again any defensif position. Make static defence structure canon/spine better and Increase the duration of defensif spell like fungal/forcefield in a rampe. 2. They can drop in your base. Give back Khaydarin Amulet. Make zerg static defense more strong and more cheap. Because bunker rush and canon rush are very good in the early game, bunker and canon should have a Buff upgrade and that way they become stronger again mid and lategame situation and not too strong in the early game. | ||
|
Gfire
United States1699 Posts
I was thinking that if Brood Lords and Colossi only had 8 range, then range upgraded turrets could shoot them down. It would be kinda cool. I've always thought the Thor should do more damage to non-light air units so it could be decently effective against broods and such, and give mech a decent anti-air attack. The Archon Toilet is really a unit design thing and can be removed with the mothership in HotS, although I kind of like it as-is. If you just had less income or whatever and made it so it took longer to get a maxed army, you'd only get it occasionally and in that case it wouldn't be a problem. (I'm not of the mind that the game should be balanced around 200/200 armies, but rather designed so getting 200/200 armies is much more rare, and the 200/200 army engagements are more skill-based.) I've also thought that Medivacs should require a tech lab so that Terran can't get so many. That might be beneficial. Generally it's also annoying when there are so many medivacs you can't see the units under them, as well. I wouldn't mind better upgrades for Static Defenses. Right now Terran has some, and technically the shield upgrade helps cannons, but it isn't significant enough considering unit clumping and many units can be produced. Generally FRB, smaller chokes and unit spreading are all things which can help a lot with that. | ||
|
SarcasmMonster
3136 Posts
Is OP some pro I'm unaware of? | ||
|
DYEAlabaster
Canada1009 Posts
On May 03 2012 05:21 SarcasmMonster wrote: Without defender's advantage, it's too easy to overwhelm your opponent with a slightly bigger army. Very insightful read. Is OP some pro I'm unaware of? No, he's just a mapper that really gives alot of thought into the game proper. Read his "Fewer Reasources Per Base" for a really deep look into the nature of the game (if you haven't already). | ||
|
Gyro_SC2
Canada540 Posts
On May 03 2012 05:20 Gfire wrote: Well, even in BW there were a lot of drops and air units, and no one complained about those. In BW you can't drop all your army like the mmm in sc2 because nobody make more than 10 dropship. On May 03 2012 05:20 Gfire wrote: I've always thought the Thor should do more damage to non-light air units so it could be decently effective against broods and such, and give mech a decent anti-air attack. The Archon Toilet is really a unit design thing and can be removed with the mothership in HotS, although I kind of like it as-is. If you just had less income or whatever and made it so it took longer to get a maxed army, you'd only get it occasionally and in that case it wouldn't be a problem. Yea I think thors and phenix should be better anti-air. I hate the archon toilette. | ||
|
Gfire
United States1699 Posts
There'd be a bigger emphasis on positioning if you could only bypass the terrain with weaker and harrass-based units, or super slow, somewhat easily countered units like BCs and Carriers. I guess doom drops did get brought over from BW. There must be more to it, because they don't seem particularly broken. Reapers are a great example of a unit that sucks in a fight but can bypass terrain and be used to harass. Unfortunately, their rush potential is too great and they had to be nerfed a bunch. If you made them higher tech or required at upgrade to hop cliffs, then buffed them somehow, they'd make a great harass unit. | ||
|
Gyro_SC2
Canada540 Posts
On May 03 2012 05:20 Gfire wrote: I was thinking that if Brood Lords and Colossi only had 8 range, then range upgraded turrets could shoot them down. It would be kinda cool. I wouldn't mind better upgrades for Static Defenses. Right now Terran has some, and technically the shield upgrade helps cannons, but it isn't significant enough considering unit clumping and many units can be produced. Generally FRB, smaller chokes and unit spreading are all things which can help a lot with that. In my solution, I said that increase static defense is a way to control more space. But sincerely I would prefer to have a unit that can control space rather than a building. I like the shredder idea. | ||
|
Gfire
United States1699 Posts
The goal with space control would be that a unit could hold a position cost-effectively, which lets the player do more stuff with his other units without risking being caught out of position. You can still make it require some attention from the player, because attention won't mean that the player needs to keep his other units close by. A unit which can control space well, but still requires a little attention, or one that can be made even better with some micro, is imo even better than something that just sits there and controls the space without you doing anything. | ||
|
Gyro_SC2
Canada540 Posts
I like spellcaster controlspace. Blizzard should add bonus when a defensif spell is in a ramp or something. | ||
|
Gfire
United States1699 Posts
Generally, though, using more single-sized ramps in forward locations on maps will allow a ton more control when it comes to spells. Storm, Fungal and FF can all be a lot more effective on a single-sized ramp. Blizzard seems to want to add more abilities like that in the future. | ||
|
Syphon8
Canada298 Posts
On May 04 2012 05:26 Gfire wrote: Hmmm... What about slowing down units while they are walking up a ramp? Generally, though, using more single-sized ramps in forward locations on maps will allow a ton more control when it comes to spells. Storm, Fungal and FF can all be a lot more effective on a single-sized ramp. Blizzard seems to want to add more abilities like that in the future. That first suggestion is amazing. It makes sense, it would work, and it'd require very little alterations of what we know about maps already. Back on topic, other things I think is hurting positional gameplay are mapmakers EXTREME opposition to using cardinal ramps, when they enable different sizes, and the radius that Xel'Naga towers cover. If the radius on XNTs was reduced they could be used much more liberally for positional advantages. Also the game needs tiered static defenses. It's not going to happen, but it will always need it. | ||
|
Natespank
Canada449 Posts
| ||
| ||
