|
I was just thinking a few things over, and on most maps, the high ground advantage very quickly becomes a disatvantage the second your opponenet gets sight up there, which with overlords, observers and scans is very easy to do.
The way it becomes a disadvantage is that most maps have a tight choke around the top of the ramp to your main, which naturally allows anyone on the lower level to be able to form an arc around your units. The only way to really counter a push like this when you have less units is to let them all the way up your ramp and catch them in the choke, but ofcourse if you have an expansion, or any other type of buildings near your ramp your going to lose.
Why does this matter exactly? Well, i only played SC:BW for a short time, but from what i understand there was a 33% hit (or 33% miss?) chance when attacking things on high ground. Now this made it viable for players to tech and sacrifice army size as long as they kept the high ground advantage. To me, this gave games a chance to have much more creativity. However, currently in SC2, if you try to tech and your opponent can see that, he will simply do a timing push on you and over run you without any high ground advantage.
In my opinion, i think it would benefit the game so much more if blizzard were to revert back to the old system of high ground advantage, as we wouldn't see as many games where its simply massing up the same old army and moving out.
This is just my opinion, whats yours?
|
Lots of Terrans have already noticed this and will seige outside your ramp using air units to get vision and it is very hard to get down your ramp if they get tanks seiged up, I see this most commnly on Stepes of War but im sure it could be done on other maps
|
Just like everything similar to this (like Towers and Sensor Towers) every advantage can be a disadvantage.
Now, you miss the main point of high ground advantage. The main point is that you get the first shot off, even if you get sighting, GL getting into position without losing half your army.
NOT a disadvantage, you're doing it wrong and thinking too much about it.
Don't mean to sound like a dick, its quite late for me :/
|
On May 11 2010 22:22 Mecha_cl wrote:
Just like everything similar to this (like Towers and Sensor Towers) every advantage can be a disadvantage.
Now, you miss the main point of high ground advantage. The main point is that you get the first shot off, even if you get sighting, GL getting into position without losing half your army.
NOT a disadvantage, you're doing it wrong and thinking too much about it.
Don't mean to sound like a dick, its quite late for me :/
Think you misunderstand the point. What im stating is that because the chokes on the high ground are narrow, as long as you stay on the low ground you will always have the advantage if you have sight (And of course a big enough army to create a arc).
I will probably take some screenshots if i get time to explain what i mean better.
|
overlords, observers and scans are 3 sacrifices that a player must make just to see the units at high-ground, this doesn't seem like much of an advantage. Although i do see your point, and i think the way it is at the moment is ok and too many people still have that 'if its not like bw then it must be bad' fever.
|
On May 11 2010 22:27 Westy wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2010 22:22 Mecha_cl wrote:
Just like everything similar to this (like Towers and Sensor Towers) every advantage can be a disadvantage.
Now, you miss the main point of high ground advantage. The main point is that you get the first shot off, even if you get sighting, GL getting into position without losing half your army.
NOT a disadvantage, you're doing it wrong and thinking too much about it.
Don't mean to sound like a dick, its quite late for me :/ Think you misunderstand the point. What im stating is that because the chokes on the high ground are narrow, as long as you stay on the low ground you will always have the advantage if you have sight (And of course a big enough army to create a arc). I will probably take some screenshots if i get time to explain what i mean better.
It seems though that at the stages of the game where there is enough units to actually form a huge arc that cannot be "outarced" by unit standing on the high ground then you should not be on one base turtling on high ground anyway but having taken a forward position.
|
On May 11 2010 22:33 Shades wrote:
too many people still have that 'if its not like bw then it must be bad' fever.
Don't fix it if it ain't broke.
|
On May 11 2010 22:27 Westy wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2010 22:22 Mecha_cl wrote:
Just like everything similar to this (like Towers and Sensor Towers) every advantage can be a disadvantage.
Now, you miss the main point of high ground advantage. The main point is that you get the first shot off, even if you get sighting, GL getting into position without losing half your army.
NOT a disadvantage, you're doing it wrong and thinking too much about it.
Don't mean to sound like a dick, its quite late for me :/ Think you misunderstand the point. What im stating is that because the chokes on the high ground are narrow, as long as you stay on the low ground you will always have the advantage if you have sight (And of course a big enough army to create a arc). I will probably take some screenshots if i get time to explain what i mean better.
Take LT for example, the ramp is a short choke, easily covered by a block and it has a wide overlooking berth of everything under it.
I can think of no way you could successfully use the lower ground to you're favour.
If you're talking about the position you get in by going DOWN to ramp to them then i still stick by my words, you're doing it wrong. If you're turtling at least let them come to you first, you don't create a good choke point to then spring you're own trap.
|
On May 11 2010 22:36 kangur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2010 22:33 Shades wrote:
too many people still have that 'if its not like bw then it must be bad' fever. Don't fix it if it ain't broke.
BW and sc2 are two different games, sc2 isn't just a remake of sc1 in an attempt to 'fix' it. New game, new units, new mechanics, don't know how so many people don't realize that yet.
|
On May 11 2010 22:45 Shades wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2010 22:36 kangur wrote:On May 11 2010 22:33 Shades wrote:
too many people still have that 'if its not like bw then it must be bad' fever. Don't fix it if it ain't broke. BW and sc2 are two different games, sc2 isn't just a remake of sc1 in an attempt to 'fix' it. New game, new units, new mechanics, don't know how so many people don't realize that yet.
I tell people that everyday when they mourn the loss of things such as Lurkers. I just tell them to fuck off back to BW if its that important to them. SC2 isnt BW 2.0, its a new engine, same universe, similar units and races.
Seriously, if i got a buck for everytime i tell people this i'd be fucking Bill Gates.
|
i don't feel the whole 'new game, new mechanics' concept works for the high ground mechanic. think the game would be alot less aggressive with more pitched battles around the map at strategic locations if it was the BW mechanic, rather than army vs army, gg.
i still think they should at least try it and get feedback in beta, seems like the perfect time
|
On May 11 2010 22:59 FeeL_ThE_RusH wrote:
i don't feel the whole 'new game, new mechanics' concept works for the high ground mechanic. think the game would be alot less aggressive with more pitched battles around the map at strategic locations if it was the BW mechanic, rather than army vs army, gg.
i still think they should at least try it and get feedback in beta, seems like the perfect time
Well go play fucking BW then dude, if the mechanics that great and you prefer it, we don't want you hear to complain about new things because you don't fully understand them. The old style to maps in BW wouldn't cut it today, Blizzard know this. People want more than just wide open spaces with occasional mineral patches/obsticles. They believe the terrain should be less static and i completely agree with them.
Think about it this way, Siege tanks would be WAY less useful without HG advantage, Reapers
Wouldn't exist because they wouldn't be much point. Those are just Terran advantage's. Dont underestimate Photon Cannon Turtles using HG advantage.
|
On May 11 2010 22:59 FeeL_ThE_RusH wrote:
i don't feel the whole 'new game, new mechanics' concept works for the high ground mechanic. think the game would be alot less aggressive with more pitched battles around the map at strategic locations if it was the BW mechanic, rather than army vs army, gg.
i still think they should at least try it and get feedback in beta, seems like the perfect time
Also, more aggression is good in SC2, thats the one thing i love. The harassing options is more evident thus making a more diverse gaming experience
|
If you are holding ground for fighting that is behind an expansion you are fighting in the wrong place and you deserve to lose. I don't think that the high ground advantage in sc:bw encouraged creativity what it did was encourage gimmicky play. You can just play to a few strengths and win with a trick. SCII is much more methodical.
|
On May 11 2010 23:05 jabberwokie wrote:
If you are holding ground for fighting that is behind an expansion you are fighting in the wrong place and you deserve to lose. I don't think that the high ground advantage in sc:bw encouraged creativity what it did was encourage gimmicky play. You can just play to a few strengths and win with a trick. SCII is much more methodical.
Holy shit, somebody in here besides me who isn't wearing rose tinted glasses otherwise known as Nostalgia.
|
United States1719 Posts
On May 11 2010 22:52 Mecha_cl wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2010 22:45 Shades wrote:On May 11 2010 22:36 kangur wrote:On May 11 2010 22:33 Shades wrote:
too many people still have that 'if its not like bw then it must be bad' fever. Don't fix it if it ain't broke. BW and sc2 are two different games, sc2 isn't just a remake of sc1 in an attempt to 'fix' it. New game, new units, new mechanics, don't know how so many people don't realize that yet. I tell people that everyday when they mourn the loss of things such as Lurkers. I just tell them to fuck off back to BW if its that important to them. SC2 isnt BW 2.0, its a new engine, same universe, similar units and races. Seriously, if i got a buck for everytime i tell people this i'd be fucking Bill Gates.
I'd be happy too if i got a buck for no reason, but i dunno if id be happy enough to do that old man...
|
I don't view a high ground advantage as "being like it was in bw." Personally I view it as a more realistic advantage that has always been present throughout time. In military battles being on the high ground provides an advantage that people are arguing should be present. It isn't a case of sc2 vs BW.
|
On May 11 2010 22:22 Mecha_cl wrote:
Just like everything similar to this (like Towers and Sensor Towers) every advantage can be a disadvantage.
Now, you miss the main point of high ground advantage. The main point is that you get the first shot off, even if you get sighting, GL getting into position without losing half your army.
NOT a disadvantage, you're doing it wrong and thinking too much about it.
Don't mean to sound like a dick, its quite late for me :/
yea ummm you are still missing the point. his point actually has little to do with the old high ground mechanic.
his point is the following.
- The new high ground mechanic is an advantage if your opponent does not have sight.
- This advantage is negated when your opponent has sight, which is arguably easier with obs, ovies, scan(i see this as more of a midgame thing).
so at this point, if you agree that getting vision is easy(without running your units up and letting your opponent "get the first shot", then the high ground mechanic is equal between the attacker and the defender.
the OP goes on to say that this equality is broken by the fact that in the current map pool, many of the maps have a larger area for the units to spread out and form an effective "arc" on the low ground below the ramp than the high ground above the ramp. Now im sure you will agree with the power/advantage of an effective arc.
So if we accept that with easy vision, the high ground advantage is made equal, then map construction around certain ramps can lead to a disadvantage, NOT because of the high ground mechanic itself, but rather the way the map is constructed.
There were similar problems in BW as well. the case im most familiar with is in PvP, alot of times an opponent can get a relaly good arc of goons around your ramp and contain you so its imppossible to get down your ramp without reavers and maybe some zealots etc. This was mitigated by the fact that while it was easy to contain you at your ramp, they could not rush up it as effectively with the high ground mechanic.
In the end, I think that the problem the OP brings up could be solved by some new map making architecture. Im not sure how exactly to do it, but if you could design a ramp that has more space atop it, this would not happen.
as a disclaimer, this is more theorycrafting and translating the OPs opinions rather than my own. I have not played enough SC2 to have a very informed opinion.
|
On May 11 2010 22:37 Mecha_cl wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2010 22:27 Westy wrote:On May 11 2010 22:22 Mecha_cl wrote:
Just like everything similar to this (like Towers and Sensor Towers) every advantage can be a disadvantage.
Now, you miss the main point of high ground advantage. The main point is that you get the first shot off, even if you get sighting, GL getting into position without losing half your army.
NOT a disadvantage, you're doing it wrong and thinking too much about it.
Don't mean to sound like a dick, its quite late for me :/ Think you misunderstand the point. What im stating is that because the chokes on the high ground are narrow, as long as you stay on the low ground you will always have the advantage if you have sight (And of course a big enough army to create a arc). I will probably take some screenshots if i get time to explain what i mean better. Take LT for example, the ramp is a short choke, easily covered by a block and it has a wide overlooking berth of everything under it. I can think of no way you could successfully use the lower ground to you're favour. If you're talking about the position you get in by going DOWN to ramp to them then i still stick by my words, you're doing it wrong. If you're turtling at least let them come to you first, you don't create a good choke point to then spring you're own trap.
You can't think of any way that the lower ground below a ramp can be used to keep someone in their base? Good luck winning TvP or PvT when you get stuck in your base, unable to move down your ramp without taking huge losses. OTOH, I totally disagree with the OP, and this exact same situation occured in BW. Any time you had a choke that was helpful for defense early game could also turn into a disaster later on if you don't move out early enough.
|
Canada9720 Posts
On May 11 2010 23:06 Mecha_cl wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2010 23:05 jabberwokie wrote:
If you are holding ground for fighting that is behind an expansion you are fighting in the wrong place and you deserve to lose. I don't think that the high ground advantage in sc:bw encouraged creativity what it did was encourage gimmicky play. You can just play to a few strengths and win with a trick. SCII is much more methodical. Holy shit, somebody in here besides me who isn't wearing rose tinted glasses otherwise known as Nostalgia.
quit being such a dink. there have been some pretty good arguments
( http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=116142 , http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=114644) for bringing back the high ground advantage, and and posts like yours and jabberwokie's that're filled with assertions and no evidence does nothing to help the argument against high ground.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
