On May 15 2010 14:57 TheYango wrote:It's not like a total revamp of the high ground mechanic.
The funny thing is that even with the data editor there's a setting called snapshot, which works the same way as SC1, where the high-ground unit becomes visible when it shoots, and then invisible again. Looking into what you can do with effects or abilities I'm sure there's a very simple way to implement high-ground advantage, its also extremely simple to implement using a trigger. I won't be focusing on it though, but just a fun note to add.
Mutalisks should be play-tested before Blizzard even considers this.
I get the feeling that's why they dropped the idea after saying it would exist. With limitless control groups (only limited by food count), Muta stacking would be monstrous.
But, both sides of the field are only speculating unless actual testing is done.
^ Which is exactly why I've changed my direction on how to go about this now. Because we now know that micro is possible and it is simple to implement for the most part. What's holding some people back now is balance.
First post has been updated to explain what's going to happen from now on
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.
I am really getting sick and tired of this 'this is a new game' bullshit in every thread that suggests a change that could ONLY positively affect sc2 yes sc2 is a new game, sure its a good game, WHY NOT make it better? How will these changes hurt exactly? What the fuck is the point of it being difference just for the sake of being brand new? Injecting micro into the game can have absolutely no adverse effects, it will be more fun to play, and absolutely far and away more fun to watch. 'this is a new game' huh? Why does it have to lack aspects of its predecessor that made it so goddamn good just because its new? nonsensical garbage.
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.
I am really getting sick and tired of this 'this is a new game' bullshit in every thread that suggests a change that could ONLY positively affect sc2 yes sc2 is a new game, sure its a good game, WHY NOT make it better? How will these changes hurt exactly? What the fuck is the point of it being difference just for the sake of being brand new? Injecting micro into the game can have absolutely no adverse effects, it will be more fun to play, and absolutely far and away more fun to watch. 'this is a new game' huh? Why does it have to lack aspects of its predecessor that made it so goddamn good just because its new? nonsensical garbage.
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.
I am really getting sick and tired of this 'this is a new game' bullshit in every thread that suggests a change that could ONLY positively affect sc2 yes sc2 is a new game, sure its a good game, WHY NOT make it better? How will these changes hurt exactly? What the fuck is the point of it being difference just for the sake of being brand new? Injecting micro into the game can have absolutely no adverse effects, it will be more fun to play, and absolutely far and away more fun to watch. 'this is a new game' huh? Why does it have to lack aspects of its predecessor that made it so goddamn good just because its new? nonsensical garbage.
It would be funny if there was a thread stickied that said that anyone who uses "this isn't BW" solely in order to prove a point gets banned. It's a double edged sword anyway, "this is SC2" should prove the point that SC2 should improve on what made SC1 great.
I think I'm going to enjoy using the phrase "this isn't C&C, this is Starcraft >> 2".
We all want starcraft 2 to be a game where the smarter, faster player wins. Adding more micro intensive units will help this, but there has to be a proper balance between macro and micro. I agree that starcraft 1 was awesome because of the quirky maneuvers you could pull off with certain units, but if every unit can be "manipulated" to do more damage with micro then that takes away from proper macro and base management. Changes like these can both help and hurt. Time and testing will tell.
On May 15 2010 18:05 Paperscraps wrote: We all want starcraft 2 to be a game where the smarter, faster player wins. Adding more micro intensive units will help this, but there has to be a proper balance between macro and micro. I agree that starcraft 1 was awesome because of the quirky maneuvers you could pull off with certain units, but if every unit can be "manipulated" to do more damage with micro then that takes away from proper macro and base management. Changes like these can both help and hurt. Time and testing will tell.
you bring up an interesting point, but i gotta disagree with the bolded part. The reason good players in BW are good, is because they can multitask while carrying out their strategy, pulling off tactics (micro and such) and making decisions, all on the fly. Adding the micro in the game wont take away from macro because macro will still overcome micro if a player only focuses on either one of those. It will however raise the skill ceiling of the game, something I dont think anyone is against, while adding in fun stuff to do and awesome stuff to watch. Take for example, mnm micro vs lurkers in BW D-C level players couldnt do it properly without sacrificing some macro and quite a bit of attention, whereas the better players always managed to do it while macroing and doing whatever else they need to, and the spectators got an eyegasm to boot.
^ The funny thing is that in BW you need good micro in the early game in order to support strong early expansions, which allows you to gain more expansions earlier. Macro co-exists with micro.
Forgive me if this has already been said, but I think that one reason why Blizzard will never implement air unit stacking is aesthetic. Blizzard wants the player to see a huge swarm of mutalisks coming out of the fog of war at them. This obviously has a functional component too. Its difficult to impossible to judge whether your opponent's force is engageable if you cannot determine how many mutas you are looking at. For advanced players you may be able to guess based on how long the game has been going on for, how much ground force he has (and to some degree number of wings flapping) etc.
I'm all for the tank micro. Hard counters have removed a huge amount of depth from the game that this type of thing can return without damaging Mr(s) Copper-League's experience. But I don't think that air stacking has a shot at all.
I definitely agree with all that you are saying. My point wasn't made as clear as I want I guess. What I was trying to say is that if you can just get a few units and abuse certain micro behaviors, then the game is swayed to more tactics and less strategy. A good mix of both is needed, where one doesn't dominate the other. I believe blizzard is still trying the find that "sweet spot" between both. I'm all for raising the skill-cap and making the game look spectacular in a "good" players hands. Increased multi-tasking is always a good thing.
I think I know where you are coming from, I am all for depth of strategy too. One thing though is that micro can add to depth of strategy, because now you can have micro and macro oriented builds. For example could you imagine 2 Starport wraith if they behaved like vikings?
Man i still hope starcraft 2 will have all those nice micro features that make BW so fun and hard, im not in love with the current late game of starcraft 2, big battles translating into controling about 4 hotkeys... SC2 made me such a lazy starcaft player.. interesting stuff on that map.. but yeah i really dont see blizz changing theyr game plan...
Viking in about an hour (see, polls do matter ). I'm keeping the vids relatively short from now on. The upload rate is killing me.
Because of the concerns about aesthetics, I tried to see how it goes with slower rotation and acceleration. I received a lot of stick about instant acceleration and rotation (even though it was default lol), so I decided to take it on board and see how it goes. I've also stopped stacking units because of complaints, so I am looking at alternative methods.
Remember just because the micro looks a certain way in one version, doesn't mean I can't change it, its not stuck that way forever.
Please feel free to let me know how you feel about it.
I really think they should implement the Helion one in game at the least because it's a lot more "stiff" when playing it in the real game than in your video. Nice work.
Okay so heres the viking, you can still micro is phoenix v0.1 style, but with the low acceleration/turning I wanted to see how it fares when you rotate aswell. The ranges have been dropped for both units.
This is really awesome stuff. If this means the units become better in their use we shouldn't not want this, we should just want this plus a slight nerf on the unit in damage or something.
EPT
). I'm keeping the vids relatively short from now on. The upload rate is killing me.
