EPTCarrier Micro - Page 14
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 HotS |
|
Finalmastery
United States58 Posts
| ||
|
Kal_rA
United States2925 Posts
On September 17 2012 05:28 AxiR wrote: I think Blizzard is hesitating to implement the "old" carrier because it would overlap a little bit with role of the tempest. WOL came out 2 years ago.. | ||
|
Sylverin
United States480 Posts
| ||
|
uh-oh
Hong Kong135 Posts
| ||
|
Guilty
Canada812 Posts
| ||
Falling
Canada11349 Posts
On September 18 2012 01:57 czylu wrote: I don't think blizzard's bringing back Carrier micro because it was more bugging out the game and poor design that lead to its effectiveness. I'm sure rob pardo never intended the carrier to be used this way, and i'm sure if they tried to re-implement these mechanics into SC2, they would do it in a more obvious way that would make the carrier feel more natural and organic. Does it matter if it was accidental the first time? If it made the game awesome, it should be intentionally incorporated into the next game's design imo. | ||
|
stupidhydro
United States216 Posts
| ||
|
Zariel
Australia1285 Posts
| ||
|
lim1017
Canada1278 Posts
On September 17 2012 19:09 dafnay wrote: nony should post this in the "pro only" battle net forum section to get blizz attention like Grubby did. Is the pro only fourm something thats open to the public to read? If so link?? Thanks | ||
|
crms
United States11933 Posts
love it, great video. | ||
|
Belha
Italy2850 Posts
I hope this could give the carrier micro issue some more weight  <3 Tyler | ||
|
kingsbd
Belgium5 Posts
| ||
|
Donger
United States147 Posts
On September 18 2012 03:05 Falling wrote: Does it matter if it was accidental the first time? If it made the game awesome, it should be intentionally incorporated into the next game's design imo. To add an example to your point: muta-stacking. It was a bug in BW that they programmed into SC2. | ||
|
Basileus
United States103 Posts
| ||
|
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
In theory this is a fine alternative to the BW micro that functions similarly but has a slightly different tactical and strategic flavor. It's less buzz saw and more cruise missile. However the enemy units in SC2 make it a really weak maneuver. Against zerg you'll just get fungal'd and lose interceptors as well as be unable to move your carriers around. Against terran their vikings can STACK unlike goliaths, which means it's impossible to abuse distance at the edge of an engagement. You will always take a ton of shots from vikings trying to go in and out. Even against corrupters they will get a lot of shots off while you wait for your 8 interceptors to fly out, and then your interceptors will take additional damage while they waste time returning to carriers and flying out again each time you swoop and burst. So, adding BW micro won't give carriers quite the same strategic element they had in BW, but it will definitely make them stronger in general with correct micro. Fungal growth is still a stupid problem for carriers to have in SC2, but at least with floating interceptors they'd be able to engage vikings without taking an avalanche of missiles first. edit: Regarding Lalush's post and the Bizarro creator's carrier micro attempt (nice!) -- it is easily within Blizzard's power to alter whatever they need to to implement BW carrier micro. Are you kidding? You could do it right now within the editor; it might not be pretty but it would work. The correct functionality could be patched in, just like doodad bridges (a completely new functionality that didn't exist at release). | ||
|
Limniscate
United States84 Posts
| ||
|
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
On September 17 2012 16:19 The_Frozen_Inferno wrote: Greetings TL. As you can plainly see from my post count, this is the first time I've felt compelled to post in here, though I've been coming here for a long while now for the epic SC2 coverage. As a map maker who works on an expanded melee map called SC2+: Bizarro World, I'm reasonably familiar with the data editor. I had no idea what BW carrier micro really was - and subsequently was just buffing the numbers on the carrier to make it actually fun to play with (though I can't guarantee anything about real balance) After seeing this thread, I think I finally know what people mean when they talk about BW carrier micro. And I believe I have successfully created a decent work-around solution for target switching in the leash zone completely within the data editor (meaning that in principle, Blizzard could do this without any hardcoding changes). -> search for the map named "Bizarro Carrier" on NA. I set it up with two planetary fortresses and 2 carriers for P1 to play around with (you can ignore all the other game changes - this is just about the carrier micro right now) If anyone is wondering about how the standard carrier's weapon actually works - it's actually a relatively complex affair. It also uses utilizes a few opaque, hard-coded ability/effect types with relatively limited customization options. A lot of its particular behaviours can't be directly controlled. (for anyone else interested, the brood lord weapon is even more complicated than the carriers) For example, if you've ever played Star Battles, you'll notice that you can't launch your interceptors while your ship is moving. As cool as it would be to launch on the move, you simply can't do it. As far as I can tell, this is a limitation of the game engine itself. A unit cannot use two 'active' abilities at the same time.(eg. the medivac cannot Move and use Heal simultaneously) I speculate that an incredibly elaborate trigger could handle it, but that's neither here nor there since Blizzard won't put triggers in their maps. At this moment in the middle of the night, I haven't any solid idea how to mimic the continuous deployment. Hey, nice work! I tried it out and the leash range targeting works perfectly. There was a weird glitch where if you move out of range and the interceptors return, an attack command causes the carriers to move toward the target until they reach the extent of leash range (12?) and then just sit there. Spamming attack or move commands doesn't fix it, you have to issue a stop command and then try attacking again, at which point the carriers will move to 8 range and launch interceptors. | ||
|
Falling
Canada11349 Posts
On September 18 2012 03:50 Donger wrote: To add an example to your point: muta-stacking. It was a bug in BW that they programmed into SC2. Exactly. The only problem is they didn't go the full step and implement proper moving shot so we only half of what it is needed to make muta micro work. Another one of those things that don't effect newbs, but would allow pro's to demonstrate awesome skill. | ||
|
Random()
Kyrgyz Republic1462 Posts
| ||
|
Rojam
Germany234 Posts
What I don't get sometimes is that blizzard introduces units without any interesting features, be it a skill,cast etc. or a specific micro trick (muta micro, vulture micro, etc.). Of course, a unit could seem very (too) strong if you just look at it without context. But while heavily microing something you won't be able to do other stuff (at least there are limits to multitasking), so your enemy can exploit your "focus on micro". I hope blizzard listens and implements those little features, because the viewers LOVE seeing pro micro. At least I'm enjoying it for the last decade. | ||
| ||
