EPTbut seriously , after seeing how they made the phoenix controls I totally gave up on the game , I wont even buy it for the custom games now.
Project Micro - Page 14
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
DorF
Sweden961 Posts
but seriously , after seeing how they made the phoenix controls I totally gave up on the game , I wont even buy it for the custom games now. | ||
|
blahman3344
United States2015 Posts
i loved the videos (especially the phoenix one, that was fun to watch)! | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7032 Posts
I have a question about the viking: is it possible to give it a bit of a spaceship feel for moving and attacking? I'm not sure how the engine deals with acceleration and directions of moving and such, but maybe if the viking has very low deceleration and very low acceleration it would lead to micro where you had to plan your movement beforehand.(example) | ||
|
mmp
United States2130 Posts
| ||
|
xOchievax
United States69 Posts
The Blizzard phoenix fix was to make it pwn almost any number of mutalisks with extreamly simple and built in micro. Your way is far superior because it forces the user to use skill in order to turn a counter into a hard counter. Mutalisk change is equally great, and to anyone saying that mass stacked air is overpowered, I disagree. If i see someone going mass stacked air I will smile and get really pumped as my high templar warp on to the field ready to do "terrible terrible damage" to 30 stacked mutalisks. | ||
|
HaruHaru
United States988 Posts
| ||
|
frogmelter
United States971 Posts
| ||
|
ramen247
United States1256 Posts
in fact, blizzard isnt a dumb organization. they probably know about these things and have known about them since the beginning of starcraft 2. if they thought this was desirable they would do it. i for one do not think this is necessary or wanted. | ||
|
vesicular
United States1310 Posts
| ||
|
HDstarcraft
United States577 Posts
| ||
|
GeMicles
Canada307 Posts
| ||
|
deo1
United States199 Posts
On May 14 2010 21:12 LaLuSh wrote: I think they'd probably have to nerf the viking's range if these changes were to be implemented. In my opinion, the only reason that the viking and the banshee have their ridiculous range in the first place is because they're such unresponsive units. With no moving shot they need massive range to compensate. I definitely think vikings would be a much better counter to void rays (even when unsupported by marines). But to make it balanced I'd lower their range and boost their speed (so they're slightly faster than void rays). It would be good for balance if vikings would have to get in range of the void rays (even if only for a short period of time), so void rays actually stood a chance against mismicroed vikings. The only reason vikings are a "counter" to broodlords right now is because they have such ridiculous range. It's not like you put much effort into microing them vs broodlords, other than just keeping them out of range of the opponent's army. That's basically your only concern. Keep the vikings out of range for his anti air, and keep them in proximity of your main army (this is exactly how the valkyrie was used in BW, because it didn't have moving shot and because it behaved so stupidly). Wraiths, on the other hand, are a really common transition counter against fast guardians nowadays in BW. And I think it's beautiful to watch someone like Flash constantly look for openings, constantly putting pressure, without being restricted to keeping his air units close to his main army at all times. It's alot more entertaining to watch. Because the zerg player has to keep 100% focus the whole time, the wraiths can appear out of any angle at any time and instantly pick off 1 guardian with 2 kiting shots. It's alot more entertaining and alot more suspenseful to watch than SC2-micro, in my opinion. Constant action! As for banshees, I don't think they're fitting for a game like Starcraft. There shouldn't be any air unit that can 2-shot workers in a game like Starcraft. If my opponent rushes me with a lone air unit, I want micro to actually matter. You should be able to save your drones/probes with micro. And again: the reason I think they're designed the way they're designed (terrible terrible damage), is because of the game mechanics limiting them and limiting micro in general. Probably why they gave Brood Lords ridiculous hp as well (compare it to guardians hp). Because vikings had ridiculous range. It's a slippery slope once you start balancing a game with inherent restricted freedom. ^ Lalush is dead on the money. Also, + Show Spoiler + to those who think Blizzard barely understands their own game, of course blizzard knows about all of these options. He just edited parameters provided by Blizzard in their own editor. They didn't just make the single player with the editor, THEY MADE THE EDITOR. The parameters are determined by the game designers and coders as options that they would like to be able to tweek easily for each unit. I'm sure they played around with countless combinations and options, and I'm also sure they are well aware of the relationship between controllable parameters in the BW engine and SCII engine. Lalush has it right, it's not that Blizzard doesn't understand how to implement good micro, it's that their game balancing philosophy has lead to what Lalush described. | ||
|
Setz3R
United States455 Posts
| ||
|
ZenDeX
Philippines2916 Posts
On May 15 2010 12:35 ramen247 wrote: why do you guys want these changes so much? sc2 is a separate game not just starcraft 1 with new units. in fact, blizzard isnt a dumb organization. they probably know about these things and have known about them since the beginning of starcraft 2. if they thought this was desirable they would do it. i for one do not think this is necessary or wanted. We want these changes so much because they were very essential in SC1. Even though SC2 is a new game, it has to meet the expectations of the fans of the first game. In fact, Blizzard isn't a dumb organization. If they know that these things would cater the fans of the old game, they would think it would be desirable to put it back in. I, for one, think this is necessary AND wanted. | ||
|
MuffinDude
United States3837 Posts
| ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On May 15 2010 12:35 ramen247 wrote: why do you guys want these changes so much? sc2 is a separate game not just starcraft 1 with new units. in fact, blizzard isnt a dumb organization. they probably know about these things and have known about them since the beginning of starcraft 2. if they thought this was desirable they would do it. i for one do not think this is necessary or wanted. The "this is a whole new game" argument barely holds here. You can't say just because it's a new game that units should be less responsive to control. Basically the only reason you could possibly want for units to be less responsive to user commands is if you actively don't want SC2 to grow at a competitive level. Honestly, of all the changes that SC1 nostalgia has made people ask for, this is the least change-intensive one, and requires the least use of Brood War standards in SC2. It's not like a total revamp of the high ground mechanic or a redesign of half the zerg units--it's a simple numbers tweak, that can be evaluated for balance over the next month. It's not necessary for Blizzard to sell lots of copies, but it's very much wanted for me. | ||
|
BamBam
745 Posts
On May 15 2010 12:35 ramen247 wrote: why do you guys want these changes so much? sc2 is a separate game not just starcraft 1 with new units. in fact, blizzard isnt a dumb organization. they probably know about these things and have known about them since the beginning of starcraft 2. if they thought this was desirable they would do it. i for one do not think this is necessary or wanted. Well I, for one, do not think blizzard did an acceptable job in the creation of their game. No high ground advantage? Overlords losing their detection? gimmick units without a way to effectively use mid game? Lack of originality for zerg? Ontop of the poor choices leading to micro. I believe this is a step in the right direction for a community-wide accepted pro mod. | ||
|
Spawkuring
United States755 Posts
On May 15 2010 14:57 TheYango wrote: The "this is a whole new game" argument barely holds here. You can't say just because it's a new game that units should be less responsive to control. Basically the only reason you could possibly want for units to be less responsive to user commands is if you actively don't want SC2 to grow at a competitive level. Honestly, of all the changes that SC1 nostalgia has made people ask for, this is the least change-intensive one, and requires the least use of Brood War standards in SC2. It's not like a total revamp of the high ground mechanic or a redesign of half the zerg units--it's a simple numbers tweak, that can be evaluated for balance over the next month. It's not necessary for Blizzard to sell lots of copies, but it's very much wanted for me. Not only that, but it's important to keep in mind that even though SC2 is a different game, it's not THAT different from SC1. People keep acting like SC1 and SC2 are completely different games with absolutely no relation to each other, but the truth is that as far as sequels go Starcraft 2 is one of the lesser innovative games out there. This wasn't an accident either, as even Blizzard has admitted that it was a deliberate design decision to keep SC2 similar because SC1 had a solid core game that didn't need any big changes. So while SC2 may be different in some areas, it's still at its core very similar to the original, and thus anything that improved the gameplay in SC1 should be taken into heavy consideration for SC2. People want micro to improve because we've seen how much micro has improved SC1, and we've played SC2 only to find that micro is lacking. I see no reason why we should refuse to improve SC2 in any way just because SC1 had it. There's nothing wrong with sequels that keep features which make for a better game. | ||
|
ramen247
United States1256 Posts
why does ability to micro mean the game will be competitive? why does high ground advantage have to do with anything concerning competitive level of play? and when has any race's unit combo been "original"? in sc1 it was always those same units as well... regardless of matchup you would probably be using the siege tank mutalisk/ling or zealot goon. its a different game. in sc1 micro was important because otherwise. unit movement would be very ugly and unrefined, e.g. muta harass without stack. sc2 doesnt need this because it is not heading the same way as sc1. it wont play the same way. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On May 15 2010 15:36 ramen247 wrote: why does ability to micro mean the game will be competitive? It doesn't. But it puts control in the player's hands over what his units do, which is hard to say is a bad thing. It's funny that in the old arguments over MBS and automine, the supporters always went back to the phrase "you shouldn't have to struggle with the interface to play the game". Well guess what? Units that are unresponsive and control poorly is exactly that--struggling with the interface. Personally, I can't see any reasonable argument against this. It's not even a case of debatably useless clicks like automine and MBS could be portrayed as. It's flat out giving the player more ability to dictate what his units do. What could you POSSIBLY say is bad about that? On May 15 2010 15:36 ramen247 wrote: why does high ground advantage have to do with anything concerning competitive level of play? Not relevant to this discussion, though admittedly you didn't bring it up. On May 15 2010 15:36 ramen247 wrote: and when has anything been "original"? in sc1 it was always those same units as well... regardless of matchup you would probably be using the siege tank mutalisk/ling or zealot goon. its a different game. in sc1 micro was important because otherwise. unit movement would be very ugly and unrefined, e.g. muta harass without stack. sc2 doesnt need this because it is not heading the same way as sc1. it wont play the same way. Again, just because the game is different, it's ok for units to wait a second to do what I want them to? | ||
| ||
