EPTOh Micro, Where Art Thou? - Page 56
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
biology]major
United States2253 Posts
| ||
|
Snowfield
1289 Posts
 | ||
|
PanzerDragoon
United States822 Posts
AOE harass is still possible with colossi drops, baneling drops, and tank drops (especially on cliffable positions). And Thor drops have been wildly successful. All you need to do is kill the queen and its already worth it. Any drone/army kills you get is just gravy. The lurker was excluded because they just didn't have the time to rework it. IT was a tier 3 unit at the time, and completely worthless (just like the ultralisk right now) because of the Broodlord. My guess? Lurker aspect on Roach Warren, Roaches now morph into lurkers, since their models are so similar. | ||
|
Ocedic
United States1808 Posts
On April 29 2010 04:07 [DUF]MethodMan wrote: He wasn't. You pobably think of the remakes, but this guy was talking about the original C&C:RA released in 1996 or shit. The best C&C game there ever was, especially the newer ones are just worse remakes of bad predecessors. World of Warcraft: The Burning Crusade (2007), Blizzard Entertainment Inc. The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle Earth II (2006), Electronic Arts, Inc. The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-Earth (2004), Electronic Arts, Inc. Command & Conquer: Generals (2003), Electronic Arts, Inc. Command & Conquer: Generals - Zero Hour (2003), Electronic Arts Ltda. Command & Conquer: Yuri's Revenge (2001), Electronic Arts, Inc. Emperor: Battle for Dune (2001), Electronic Arts, Inc. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine - Dominion Wars (2001), Simon & Schuster Interactive Command & Conquer: Red Alert 2 (2000), Electronic Arts, Inc. Command & Conquer: Red Alert 2 (Collector's Edition) (2000), Electronic Arts, Inc. Dark Reign 2 (2000), Activision Publishing, Inc. Battlezone (1998), Activision, Inc. Vigilante 8 (1998), Activision, Inc. Heavy Gear (1997), Activision, Inc. MechWarrior 2: Mercenaries (1996), Activision, Inc. MechWarrior 2: Ghost Bear's Legacy (1995), Activision, Inc. This is what Browder has worked on and what I can see is, since he went from Activision to EA he just worked on pretty lame games of which none showed any longevity. This isn't too unlikely to happen to SC2 in its current state as well. So it's impossible to create an awesome game unless you've already made an awesome game? What came first then, Brood War or the Chicken? | ||
|
PanzerDragoon
United States822 Posts
On April 29 2010 05:13 Ocedic wrote: So it's impossible to create an awesome game unless you've already made an awesome game? What came first then, Brood War or the Chicken? Don't even bother arguing with them, they've already convinced themselves Dustin Browder will be the death of Starcraft. | ||
micronesia
United States24782 Posts
| ||
|
KungKras
Sweden484 Posts
On April 29 2010 04:45 Qikz wrote: I'm not saying it was, you know what generals was? It was a game, you could play for fun. You didn't go on a forum where everyone was moaning about how something small was left out of it compared to RA2 and just had fun playing it and worked with what they had. It was never built to be as long lasting as Brood War and if anything, Brood War lasting so long was an absaloute fluke and I'm a big BW fan. Oh, people were moaning about Generals alright. It lost so many aspects that were characteristic to the C&C franchise that it's not even funny. No story like the previous games, no sidebar for building, etc etc. It was a fun game, but calling it Command & Conquer was a slap in the face for many C&C fans. | ||
|
sKAKUTALO
Croatia6 Posts
| ||
|
DiTH
Greece116 Posts
Personally i was devastated by not having chats?Then after they got flamed enough by the people they said they will do something called Groups where people with same interests can chat but that wont come on release but at a later date.I mean come on.Blizzard cant have a chat system with custom channels support on Bnet v2? for release date ready? OFC they can but they just want to have stuff to add later. | ||
|
Perfect Balance
Norway131 Posts
It's because ALL I EVER DO IN SC2 IS OPTIMIZE MY BUILDS! This really says it all: "I am a bit worried that everyone suddenly stopped questioning Dustin Browder and Blizzard after the Starcraft II Beta was released. How come we all settled for less, when what we should have been doing – if anything – was asking for at least as much as we had before? No chat rooms, no ability to switch in between servers, no LAN support, no whisper functionality, no DND, unlimited unit selection, rally point to minerals, MBS, no moving shot; the list goes on and on. One compromise after the other." Dustin Browder had worked on C&C3 before SC2, and I played that game actively while waiting for SC2. The gameplay mechanics in that game are nearly identical to those seen in SC2, and the gimmicky units and lack of RTS experience among the designers is blatantly obvious. Why do we accept the devolution of RTS-gaming? Because we want SC2 to be good. I can tell you right now, I'm very close to considering not buying SC2 at all, and I've been waiting ten years for this game. I'm depressed that I don't want to play a game with so much potential, because it's so very, very boring.. It all seems clear to me now. Dustin Browders personality is intense and overriding, and at some stage the development team stopped caring about Starcraft 2. You can tell that Protoss was the first race they completed working on. In the end, the executive decision was to finish this game up and devise a plan to earn as much money as possible, splitting it into three parts and making players pay for "premium" maps. Blizzard has become so big that the marketing and executive divisions overrun the developers, who eventually stopped caring and just patched the game together. That's why there's no soul in this game. And that's why, after 200 games logged on my beta account, I'm most likely not buying it.. | ||
|
PanzerDragoon
United States822 Posts
They aren't. The game interface needed to be updated to this decades standards. Deal with it or go play Brood War. Legit complaints like chat and server intergration need to be answered however. | ||
|
encryptedamf
Sweden64 Posts
| ||
|
encryptedamf
Sweden64 Posts
| ||
|
deucebag
Sweden6 Posts
| ||
|
Scapalexis
United States18 Posts
On April 29 2010 05:07 PanzerDragoon wrote: Clearly the Reaper is inferior to the vulture because it has no use as an army component like the vulture did, but the micro is very similar. I mean, it could probably be argued that the Vulture was the most overpowered unit in the game, as it was the most dangerous harasser in the game, and its 3 mines for 75 minerals was absurd. AOE harass is still possible with colossi drops, baneling drops, and tank drops (especially on cliffable positions). And Thor drops have been wildly successful. All you need to do is kill the queen and its already worth it. Any drone/army kills you get is just gravy. The lurker was excluded because they just didn't have the time to rework it. IT was a tier 3 unit at the time, and completely worthless (just like the ultralisk right now) because of the Broodlord. My guess? Lurker aspect on Roach Warren, Roaches now morph into lurkers, since their models are so similar. The vulture, simply looking at it as a unit and its stats, is not incredibly strong. To a casual observer, it doesn't seem like it should have as much impact on the game as it does. But microed, the vulture obviously becomes powerful/overpowered in the right hands. That's the kind of interaction people are asking for regarding micro in sc2. A reaper has a niche in this game. Does it become vastly more powerful when it's microed? Disregarding 6 rax reaper type plays (since some feel it will be nerfed next patch), it really isn't. Maybe you'll kill 4 probes instead of 2. That's strong, yes. Can you do it later in the game? Probably not, with the current engine. The reaper doesn't have any sort of longevity because of its inherent flimsiness and lack of support. Basically, what people are hoping for is, "If I have the ability/apm to pay more attention to my units for maximum control, do I achieve a significant benefit?" The answer right now is "limited benefit". A colossus drop is much different from the reaver drop. Colossi require 2 shots to kill workers, which allow players to move workers away much easier, even if they react slowly. The AOE potential is much lower. There are more workers available at that stage of the game (partly due to macro mechanics, a separate issue, and the fact that the robo bay comes much later). The current game offers more defense in this specific scenario, since terran are usually pumping marines and marauders. Perhaps more importantly, you can only use one colossus per shuttle, whereas in bw, you could have 2 zeals + reaver, 1 goon + reaver, or 2 reavers, all of which play different roles. Against zerg, colossus drops come quite late, and are pretty ineffective since z's have queens to kill the warp prism, and/or hydras if they thought you were turtling for void ray rush. Baneling drops seem to be a pretty recent development, so I'll only make a handful of comments. I primarily doubt it is cost effective, just because of the cost of ventral sacs, which will likely open up a huge timing window for the terran. In addition, you're using probably 4-5 banelings, which might be crucial to attacking/defending the terran army. I may be wrong, but I am interested to see how it plays out. For thor drops, again, I've never seen them to be wildly successful. I mentioned before, that was personal experience. You claim that killing the queen is sufficient. How is that? By the time this happens, he should have 2 queens, so losing one is a blow, but he's not behind yet. The queen is 150 mineral, it's not a prohibitive cost, while the terran is almost certainly still on one base, ~30 scvs vs ~45 drones. It just doesn't seem like that's much damage. I watched the Lucifron - Haypro series last night. Despite all of Lucifron's efforts to really do a lot of damage to Haypro's economy (and he did, for example, on scrapyard), Haypro always was ~1.5x the number of workers, and just steamrolled in the macro games. IIRC, the lurker was removed because of the abundance of detection by the time the unit was available, and because of clumping issues. I still think it should have been in the game, and making it upgraded from roaches would be something I would have liked to at least test. Regardless, it seems there is no commentary on what we are saying, I think people want to just bash Dustin Browder some more, so it might be better to drop these issues from this thread. | ||
|
StarBrift
Sweden1761 Posts
| ||
|
PanzerDragoon
United States822 Posts
And Vultures main strong suit was the mines more than the harass. Harass was definitely potent, but the ability to just lock down the map and force detection from your opponent for the cost of 75 minerals was just absurd. I feel like Blizzard axed mines because they thought it promoted a type of gameplay that even BW veterans really don't like; slow, immobile pushes backed by tank/mine that prevent a lot of movement. Colossi take 2 shots to kill SCVs, but they will one shot probes and drones. And hes behind from losing queens because the thor drop basically cost you nothing if you keep the Thor/Medivac alive, because they both the Thor and Medivac will compliment your main army once the harass window is finished. It also forces their army to stay in their base, giving you the opportunity to take map control. Haypro defended it well, just like somone can defend a reaver drop well. | ||
|
Half
United States2554 Posts
On April 29 2010 01:45 encryptedamf wrote: i really think this thread has gotten out of hand, just go play sc1 and quit the QQ lol Meh, I agree that this thread has really taken a turn for the worse. With such an emotionally infused OP I don't see how it could have stayed objective. The point of this isn't to show some vocal minority on TL doesn't like the "direction" of SC2, whatever that means, it should have been just objectively showing why certain changes would have benefited the game :/. Blizzard doesn't balance based on emotions for some vocal minority. Regardless, it seems there is no commentary on what we are saying, I think people want to just bash Dustin Browder some more, so it might be better to drop these issues from this thread. ye. stoppit plz. | ||
|
TSL-Lore
United States412 Posts
1. your units perform better when you pay more (correct) attention to them. 2. if your army A-moves into an enemy army and the enemy is paying close attention to his army, you should lose. This was a very true set of rules that blizzard implemented in SCBW. take for example, if you pay attention to your lurker placement (good attention) and the terran enemy A-moves his MM into your lurkers (no attention), then the terran will lose his army. This kind of relationship is relatively non-existent in SC2B | ||
|
Shade692003
Canada702 Posts
| ||
| ||
