EPT
On October 24 2012 05:00 Anarion55 wrote:
I'm going to be a little bit difficult here, but it's with the intention of helping clarify your ideas because I think you're onto something here.
So, I would take issue with the siege tank example. It's not just that the siege tank was a better unit in brood war, it's also that the goliath was produced from the same building in PvT and that marines were a core part of the composition in TvZ. The goliath was such a powerful anti-air unit that any attempt by protoss to tech switch to air short of carriers was pointless and the terran could anticipate carriers in various ways (notably hax scans by a lot of top pros) and begin preparing goliaths in mass numbers because they had so many factories. On top of that, zealots, especially with speed and a shuttle helping, could wreck tanks, and it was only with vultures and mines helping that the terran death push in Brood War worked so well. It's an example of a highly synergistic composition where every unit being produced in the factory worked together for victory when they would have failed alone (as dragoons run over goliaths and vultures without tank support).
Similarly, the only difference between the corsair and the corrupter is timing and unit synergy. The corsair is able to prepare the way for DTs with its anti-air and scout the zerg whereas corrupters don't directly support any other units (though they do support broodlords) and come late enough that zerg has already committed to a tech. But neither of those is related to the unit itself, they're issues of synergy and placement in the tech tree. If I made the corrupter an identical unit but let you get it earlier, you could easily use it to scout and force the enemy off of air in preparation for broodlords and ultras.
I would also point out that the zealot and the zergling are not and have never been able to be used alone. They have specific functions such as backstabs and rushes, but a ton of zealots or zerglings gets destroyed by aoe in both Brood War and SC2. The marine in Brood War is even worse since it was the marine+medic combo that made them into a powerful unit in TvZ and the dropship that makes them mobile.
I actually think that what you're trying to reach is something related to the ability to use units in small numbers and move them around the map. In that regard the corsair was notably different than the corrupter because its high speed meant that you could go around harassing with just a few corsairs and not worry about losing them, whereas corrupters out alone are highly vulnerable. And protoss in Brood War spent their time with their dragoons out on the map vs. terran sparring with vultures because harass and map control were critical, especially in the early parts of that matchup.
If that's what you're after, I actually think that better static defense for all races would be the best way to lead to more independent units moving around. If protoss could hold a push even if it messed up and lost a few zealots and stalkers, or if zerg could avoid getting run over after losing a group of roaches it would become much safer to take the existing units and maneuver on the map.
I'm going to be a little bit difficult here, but it's with the intention of helping clarify your ideas because I think you're onto something here.
So, I would take issue with the siege tank example. It's not just that the siege tank was a better unit in brood war, it's also that the goliath was produced from the same building in PvT and that marines were a core part of the composition in TvZ. The goliath was such a powerful anti-air unit that any attempt by protoss to tech switch to air short of carriers was pointless and the terran could anticipate carriers in various ways (notably hax scans by a lot of top pros) and begin preparing goliaths in mass numbers because they had so many factories. On top of that, zealots, especially with speed and a shuttle helping, could wreck tanks, and it was only with vultures and mines helping that the terran death push in Brood War worked so well. It's an example of a highly synergistic composition where every unit being produced in the factory worked together for victory when they would have failed alone (as dragoons run over goliaths and vultures without tank support).
Similarly, the only difference between the corsair and the corrupter is timing and unit synergy. The corsair is able to prepare the way for DTs with its anti-air and scout the zerg whereas corrupters don't directly support any other units (though they do support broodlords) and come late enough that zerg has already committed to a tech. But neither of those is related to the unit itself, they're issues of synergy and placement in the tech tree. If I made the corrupter an identical unit but let you get it earlier, you could easily use it to scout and force the enemy off of air in preparation for broodlords and ultras.
I would also point out that the zealot and the zergling are not and have never been able to be used alone. They have specific functions such as backstabs and rushes, but a ton of zealots or zerglings gets destroyed by aoe in both Brood War and SC2. The marine in Brood War is even worse since it was the marine+medic combo that made them into a powerful unit in TvZ and the dropship that makes them mobile.
I actually think that what you're trying to reach is something related to the ability to use units in small numbers and move them around the map. In that regard the corsair was notably different than the corrupter because its high speed meant that you could go around harassing with just a few corsairs and not worry about losing them, whereas corrupters out alone are highly vulnerable. And protoss in Brood War spent their time with their dragoons out on the map vs. terran sparring with vultures because harass and map control were critical, especially in the early parts of that matchup.
If that's what you're after, I actually think that better static defense for all races would be the best way to lead to more independent units moving around. If protoss could hold a push even if it messed up and lost a few zealots and stalkers, or if zerg could avoid getting run over after losing a group of roaches it would become much safer to take the existing units and maneuver on the map.
:/....this is really NOT what I'm trying to get across. I would say that corruptors are an uninteresting unit because they are literally the zerg counter to anything flying (or colossus), and they counter it in a lackluster way. Even vikings are more interesting given the fact that they have the ability to kite and also have a really interesting transform ability. I think you're skimming over the facets of the units themselves in a lot of cases. Marines are and will always be interesting units due to stim pack, even without medic support. Zerglings are dynamic purely because of speed; zealots in BW are the same way. I would say that at a certain point certain units are ineffective against certain sets of circumstances or other units, but that doesn't make them less dynamic or interesting. This whole idea is not really about dissecting a problem, but explaining the way players FEEL when they play a game and play with a certain unit.
BTW, I definitely agree that we need better space control. I think the whole deathball issue would fix itself with the introduction of stronger tanks, useful swarm hosts, ...and some kind of way for protoss to hold an area. Space control is a huge issue that I think Blizzard left out of SC2, and this has forced a lot of work to be put into making sure certain groups of units didn't utterly annihilate other groups of units in big engagements (i.e. Ghosts vs. BLord/infestor!!).
