|
On May 03 2010 09:27 Zeke50100 wrote:
Why don't you guys make a mod to make every unit have a moving shot and see how it goes? It sounds perfectly reasonable to me, especially since you can actually just replace your cache/assets to play with other people during custom matches.
Although, to be honest, you guys can have fun with your 1 Phoenix v 10 Muta Toss wins battles, because I don't exactly agree with adding something in just to give a superior player a good chance to win with an unreasonably inferior army.
The degree to which micro will influence the outcome is up to balance. The obvious answer is to bring down the range of all of these units, or nerf any other of their stats to compensate.
|
On May 03 2010 09:27 Zeke50100 wrote:
Why don't you guys make a mod to make every unit have a moving shot and see how it goes? It sounds perfectly reasonable to me, especially since you can actually just replace your cache/assets to play with other people during custom matches.
Although, to be honest, you guys can have fun with your 1 Phoenix v 10 Muta Toss wins battles, because I don't exactly agree with adding something in just to give a superior player a good chance to win with an unreasonably inferior army.
Why shouldn't a superior player utterly crush a worse player?
|
On May 03 2010 09:38 buhhy wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2010 09:27 Zeke50100 wrote:
Why don't you guys make a mod to make every unit have a moving shot and see how it goes? It sounds perfectly reasonable to me, especially since you can actually just replace your cache/assets to play with other people during custom matches.
Although, to be honest, you guys can have fun with your 1 Phoenix v 10 Muta Toss wins battles, because I don't exactly agree with adding something in just to give a superior player a good chance to win with an unreasonably inferior army. Why shouldn't a superior player utterly crush a worse player?
Does being a superior player give them the right to double expo, build a couple of units and kill the opponent's 2 base mass muta to defend and win?
(exaggerated example, but the same general idea)
|
Does being a superior player give them the right to double expo, build a couple of units and kill the opponent's 2 base mass muta to defend and win?
It definitively should (considering this exemple as quite exagerated). This is what make broddwar so amazing : you can almost indefinitively progress. This feeling isn't present in SC2.
|
On May 03 2010 09:49 deadalnix wrote:Show nested quote +Does being a superior player give them the right to double expo, build a couple of units and kill the opponent's 2 base mass muta to defend and win? It definitively should (considering this exemple as quite exagerated). This is what make broddwar so amazing : you can almost indefinitively progress. This feeling isn't present in SC2.
You've been playing for two months and feel that your skill level is capped?
If you can prove to me that having 500 APM is effectively exactly the same as having 200 APM, I'll concede your argument.
|
Anyone remember the Cobra? That could move and attack at the same time.
I think Blizzard wants moving and attacking to be a unique ability, not something that's present in every air unit.
It's premature to say removing this from every air unit is bad. Maybe we'll see a move-attacker in one of the expansions.
|
You've got to be kidding me.
Really, Blizzard used to do more balancing in the early days? REALLY?
Did the stroke you apparently got when you realized SC2 is not SCBW also make you forget how fucking broken pre-broodwar was?
Your credibility dropped like a stone right there.
Oh and about there being no attackmoving unit in SC2... HELLO VOID RAYS!
|
After reading thsi article and playing for about a week I can see where the OP is coming from. I was playing 2v2 with a mate and the enemies had his army setup with a few tanks in there with marines and stalkers. My team was TZ, in broodwar, we could have swooped in with a few mutalisks and sniped the tanks but it's impossible in sc2. We tried it and what happened was the mutas swooped in, paused, then die before a few got shots off. Fast forward later when my tanks are being chased by zealots. Instead of move, shoot, move, shoot;
they move, stop, spin their cannons toward the zealots, get hit, then shoot.
btw void rays attackmove is different than what the op is concerned with. Then still come to a stop before they start attacking. Plus they're slow as snail so it doesn't matter.
SC2 is still fun as hell but I feel that there's a cap to micro mechanics. Most battles ultimately come down to unit positioning and spell casting. No crazyass dragoon hold micro.
Deadalnix said it best in that in sc1 there is "almost indefinitely progress" that's lackin in sc2.
Anyway I just woke up. This is a very interesting thing to discuss and we should keep our minds opened.
|
On May 04 2010 00:21 ktffang wrote:
SC2 is still fun as hell but I feel that there's a cap to micro mechanics. Most battles ultimately come down to unit positioning and spell casting. No crazyass dragoon hold micro.
I agree on the unit positioning comment. Most battles now come down to who can spread their collossus to avoid splash from the opponents own, keeping immortals away from lings, spreading units to not get emp'd, keeping infestors/casters alive, sammich attacks, getting roaches close enough so they all can attack, etc...
In other words, putting units to full usage and not letting your opponent do the same.
But what is important to realize is that all of this didn't exist at the start of the beta. These tactics have developed over the course and continue to.
|
On May 03 2010 15:02 Janxer wrote:
You've got to be kidding me.
Really, Blizzard used to do more balancing in the early days? REALLY?
Did the stroke you apparently got when you realized SC2 is not SCBW also make you forget how fucking broken pre-broodwar was?
Your credibility dropped like a stone right there.
Oh and about there being no attackmoving unit in SC2... HELLO VOID RAYS!
You didn't read the article, did you? And if you did, you clearly don't understand what Lalush is saying.
And btw, he did mention Void Rays as the only air combat unit with moving shot.
|
Well, first off, the tone of the article is just plain hostile. Even if the points he makes are correct he doesnt get a point across to anybody that disagrees because they will be very very much on the defensive. I think the TL staff did a good job not putting this article as a featured.
As for making this game an "e-sport" I think what most guys are ignoring is that the game needs to be popular before it can ever reach that status. Now in order to make a popular game the basics need to be possible for everyone.
Does that mean the game is really simpel? I think not, sure its more easy to spam storm out of 4 HT's now. The real pro will just have more time to position them more perfectly. Is this really bad? Perhaps its not pure apm but this surely counts as skill.
As for helions not being micro intensive, they dont have spells to cast, however because of the AoE the hellion does the position in what the helion is firing is so so so important saying that this requires no micro is just not very correct is it. Infact, i feel like making it fire while moving would make this unit alot more easy to bring out its full potential then the micro you have to put in to it now. (and 56 votes on a poll hardly is the TL community)
Overall, i really dislike the hate from both sides in this thread, and basicly is think you both have some valid points, but due to the hostility there is no middelground anymore.
|
Well, first off, the tone of the article is just plain hostile. Even if the points he makes are correct...
This says more about your loyalty towards a video game company than anything else. Also your centrist attitude on this topic won't lead to anything. Look at countries run by centrist politics, nothing gets done one way or another.
There's a REAL problem with Blizzard lying aboud their reason for not including LAN play. It's a REAL issue that Blizzard decided to sell a game in three parts, costing as much as a gaming console. Sure, they have the right to remove features from their products, but deceiving the consumers about the reasons for these cuts raises some moral questions. Companies do have moral obligations to their customers, honesty is very important there. Blizzard are deliberately lying to and deceiving their customers, many of whom pre-ordered the game based on previous products.
|
On May 05 2010 01:34 betaV1.25 wrote:
Well, first off, the tone of the article is just plain hostile. Even if the points he makes are correct he doesnt get a point across to anybody that disagrees because they will be very very much on the defensive. I think the TL staff did a good job not putting this article as a featured.
I guess many fans with high expactations and strong opinions will get mad about what Blizzard is doing to SC2...
On May 05 2010 01:34 betaV1.25 wrote:
As for making this game an "e-sport" I think what most guys are ignoring is that the game needs to be popular before it can ever reach that status. Now in order to make a popular game the basics need to be possible for everyone.
That's where you're just wrong:
1) SC2 is already HUUUUUUUUGE and it's only in the Beta
2) Games don't need to be simple to be appealing to newer players, for the following reasons:
- Newer players won't know about the restrictions and possibilities of the engine before they buy it, so there is no gain in dumbing down games for newbs other than it makes it possible to say: "It's easy for newbs", which is just a stupid statement in itself because it implies some sort of an advantage new players will have, which is essentially non-existing.
- Making games easier by not allowing proper control (which is the main topic here, not stuff like MBS, autocasting etc. which has been replaced by other good mechanics to compensate for the skill-demand lost in those aspects of the game) won't help anyone. This stuff doesn't concern noobs, because on lower levels of skill, there is much room for improvement and you have bigger things to worry about if you wanna be good at the game. This stuff just lowers the top of the skill-level, restricting what should actually be the driving force behind SC2 - eSport's! By making games easier in this way, you basically make a game less interesting and fun to play the higher the skillevel is you play it on, because mechanics will be good, strategies will be perfected and stuff like proper Unit-Control will matter most on those levels and will make games interesting.
- With eSports being basically Advertisement for SC2 and therefore bringing newer players to the table, you should be making games like this (at least the competetive part) with only regarding the best possible players and making it possible to improve on as many levels as possible. That will bring you new players, not by saying to newbs "here's sth even a stupid fuck like you can play". ^^'
Also, one major flaw in your logic about Skill and by many that aren't familiar with SC:BW is the false assumption that ppl should be able to reach a point of skill, where their macro, micro etc. is perfect. This should never happen, because it kills the evolution of different playstyles, which are a big part of why SC:BW is so popular as an eSport.
You can't make sth easier and justify it by saying: "then the player has more time do do this and that." It's actually the need to make decisions between macro and micro, between Unit-control, having a good economy, scouting around the map, harrassing, defending etc. that makes a game like SC:BW interesting even after being played for over 10 years.
Those playstyles are killed by lowering the highest possible skillevel and even if noone will ever be perfect at SC2, the room for diversity among playstyles will diminish by making the game easier to play.
Again, stuff like MBS has been replaced quite well I guess with the Macro-abilities, but stuff like proper Unit-control is just so important that it makes absolutely no sense to not make it perfect! And the Unit-Control in SC:BW was perfect! Yes, there were some AI-flaws, but I'm not talking about how well the computer can control the Units, but how well you were able to control them and moving-shot was a big factor in that department.
|
On May 05 2010 03:20 Perfect Balance wrote:Show nested quote +Well, first off, the tone of the article is just plain hostile. Even if the points he makes are correct... This says more about your loyalty towards a video game company than anything else. Also your centrist attitude on this topic won't lead to anything. Look at countries run by centrist politics, nothing gets done one way or another. There's a REAL problem with Blizzard lying aboud their reason for not including LAN play. It's a REAL issue that Blizzard decided to sell a game in three parts, costing as much as a gaming console. Sure, they have the right to remove features from their products, but deceiving the consumers about the reasons for these cuts raises some moral questions. Companies do have moral obligations to their customers, honesty is very important there. Blizzard are deliberately lying to and deceiving their customers, many of whom pre-ordered the game based on previous products.
So by your logic it was wrong for Blizzard to sell Starcraft 1 in two parts then?
|
On May 05 2010 04:31 PanzerDragoon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2010 03:20 Perfect Balance wrote:Well, first off, the tone of the article is just plain hostile. Even if the points he makes are correct... This says more about your loyalty towards a video game company than anything else. Also your centrist attitude on this topic won't lead to anything. Look at countries run by centrist politics, nothing gets done one way or another. There's a REAL problem with Blizzard lying aboud their reason for not including LAN play. It's a REAL issue that Blizzard decided to sell a game in three parts, costing as much as a gaming console. Sure, they have the right to remove features from their products, but deceiving the consumers about the reasons for these cuts raises some moral questions. Companies do have moral obligations to their customers, honesty is very important there. Blizzard are deliberately lying to and deceiving their customers, many of whom pre-ordered the game based on previous products. So by your logic it was wrong for Blizzard to sell Starcraft 1 in two parts then?
u cant compare 1998 with 2010 simply because the comunity is much bigger and people actually know whats possible and if there is something we had in the year 1998 why isnt it possible in 2010?...if releasing the game in 3 parts means for blizzard not to have chat channels,lan mode,switching between realms and so on... then yes it is wrong to sell a game in 3 parts
|
Oh wow. I didnt realize there were still people out there who didnt understand that its a game and two expansions.
On May 05 2010 01:34 betaV1.25 wrote:
(and 56 votes on a poll hardly is the TL community)
Id love to get more votes.
Poll: Should Hellion be able to "move and fire"?Yes (59) 68% No (28) 32% 87 total votes Your vote: Should Hellion be able to "move and fire"? (Vote): Yes
(Vote): No
Regardless I think a majority of the competive community would perfer at least one unit with a reasonable move and shoot. Even if its not on the hellion.
|
On May 03 2010 09:38 buhhy wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2010 09:27 Zeke50100 wrote:
Why don't you guys make a mod to make every unit have a moving shot and see how it goes? It sounds perfectly reasonable to me, especially since you can actually just replace your cache/assets to play with other people during custom matches.
Although, to be honest, you guys can have fun with your 1 Phoenix v 10 Muta Toss wins battles, because I don't exactly agree with adding something in just to give a superior player a good chance to win with an unreasonably inferior army. Why shouldn't a superior player utterly crush a worse player?
How do you define "superior player"? Just by a higher APM? Maybe Blizzard wants those with the better decisions to win in Starcraft 2 instead of those who click faster? Also:
On May 01 2010 03:42 Cheebah wrote:
4- And finally, and more importantly, you actually complain over the fact that an RTS (fyi, the S stands for Strategy) game requires more strategic skills than micro? o_0 You remind me of those people who preferred DotA over War3... the ones who judge a player's skill only on his APM -.-
If we get moving shot back into the game why not get the BW unit movement AI as well? But nobody is complaining about that, because the improved AI in SC2 allows for those powerful balls of infantry which demolish everything in seconds.
|
On May 05 2010 04:46 Archerofaiur wrote:
Oh wow. I didnt realize there were still people out there who didnt understand that its a game and two expansions.
where is the sense to release a game +2 expansions if the core game doesnt even have the most normal things in the world...actually i thought that blizzard wont do such mistakes like a lot of other companies do (hi @ ea)
that was all i wanted to say before 
|
On May 05 2010 04:49 Gont wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2010 04:46 Archerofaiur wrote:
Oh wow. I didnt realize there were still people out there who didnt understand that its a game and two expansions.
where is the sense to release a game +2 expansions if the core game doesnt even have the most normal things in the world...actually i thought that blizzard wont do such mistakes like a lot of other companies do (hi @ ea) that was all i wanted to say before
critising blizzard for not including certain features and accusing them of milking the franchise and decieving the consumer base are two very different things.
|
I do miss moving shot, however i think that the game is becomming alot easier to play, which is actually very good, as it can boost the popularity of the community.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
