|
Sweden33719 Posts
Previous Editions + Show Spoiler +
Q: What is this thread?
A: General purpose, SC2 discussion thread.
Q: What should I be posting about? A: Basically, anything you want to talk about but aren't sure if it warrants a topic of its own. Heard a rumour you want to share? A new video? A question you are sure is super common but can't find the answer to via searching? A brilliant new idea that you want to vet, to make sure it's really as brilliant as you think it is?
This is the place.
Note: Posting standards will not be as high as if you were to make a new thread, but pointless spam will still not be tolerated. I have seen threads like these work out alright on other sites (for other games) so I figured, why not give it a shot? It's possible there's not really enough content for something like this to exist at this point in time, but no harm then, it will just die on its own.
|
I've been busy with the end of the quarter so I haven't had time to follow all various tournaments, showmatches etc. What are some of the best/most entertaining SC2 games played recently? Link to reps or VODs please
|
On June 03 2010 19:18 space_yes wrote:I've been busy with the end of the quarter so I haven't had time to follow all various tournaments, showmatches etc. What are some of the best/most entertaining SC2 games played recently? Link to reps or VODs please
One of very good games I saw was that Nazgul vs Check match.. I don't know were's the VOD of that.
With regards to me this time, What you think of the little roach buff? the one were you burrow and regenerate 10 hp per sec? Would that be enough to overthrow the mighty mech?
|
|
On June 03 2010 20:15 Licmyobelisk wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2010 19:18 space_yes wrote:I've been busy with the end of the quarter so I haven't had time to follow all various tournaments, showmatches etc. What are some of the best/most entertaining SC2 games played recently? Link to reps or VODs please One of very good games I saw was that Nazgul vs Check match.. I don't know were's the VOD of that. With regards to me this time, What you think of the little roach buff? the one were you burrow and regenerate 10 hp per sec? Would that be enough to overthrow the mighty mech?
Forcing scans in the mid-game is great for the zerg but I don't think it'll have a significant impact on TvZ mech.
|
What balance arguments would you bring up against giving the mothership itself a permanent cloak?
|
Do two motherships cloak themselves?
|
On June 03 2010 20:39 Spidinko wrote: Do two motherships cloak themselves?
You may only build one.
|
On June 03 2010 20:42 Molde wrote:You may only build one. So? It doesn't stop your ally(ies) having another mothership. The answer is no. Cloak has no affect on any mothership (validator checks mothership unit type).
|
On June 03 2010 20:36 Badjas wrote: What balance arguments would you bring up against giving the mothership itself a permanent cloak?
You might be giving the protoss an answer to terran mech!
You see, in order for zerg or terran to have a cute detector terran has to sacrifice 300 minerals (scan) and raven's are a bitch when it comes to gas 100 minerals and 200 gas. So if a mothership comes in to play with perma cloak all that the protoss needs to do is focus fire on the detectors of the terran army.
on the other hand zerg only has to use up around 50 minerals and 100 gas just for the sake of detection.
Also, this would make Motherships Viable in Lategame. It now look like a real super unit!
|
In regards to Roach vs Mech, I see most terrans are just pushing across the map building turrets at little intervals, or alternatively getting a Raven. The roach burrow is pretty useless with any decent detection.
|
Would Chuck Norris be a massive unit if he was in SC2?
User was warned for this post
|
I've been looking for, but can't find. some replays of Sen's zerg. i'd like to compile a big group of them and watch them. anyone have links?
|
I feel like the problem with the terran bio army being as strong as it is now is that while the firebat got weaker and weaker versus higher and higher tech, the marauder actually excels at it. My first thought was making the marauder do bonus damage versus light rather than armored would solve it, as it would be less useful against late game units, but the slow effect would make it interesting to keep a handful around. On the other hand, reapers are already heavily underused outside of all out cheese, and hellions also fill that niche quite well. I'm now just confused and wondering if a solution to the problem is that simple.
Thoughts?
|
On June 03 2010 21:13 Licmyobelisk wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2010 20:36 Badjas wrote: What balance arguments would you bring up against giving the mothership itself a permanent cloak? You might be giving the protoss an answer to terran mech! You see, in order for zerg or terran to have a cute detector terran has to sacrifice 300 minerals (scan) and raven's are a bitch when it comes to gas 100 minerals and 200 gas. So if a mothership comes in to play with perma cloak all that the protoss needs to do is focus fire on the detectors of the terran army. on the other hand zerg only has to use up around 50 minerals and 100 gas just for the sake of detection. Also, this would make Motherships Viable in Lategame. It now look like a real super unit! to do that they'd really have to increase mothership speed. otherwise the mothership wouldnt be able to get out of the scan fast enough, and waiting for the cloak range to get close enough to engage the mech army is a real bitch.
|
quick question:
What mini maps can I load to practice microing protoss units?
|
I think roaches would need some love - they are too strong as a 1 food unit and somewhat weak when bumped up to 2 food.
- Roaches are dirt cheap (7/25) but their production, especially early game, puts great stress to the zerg economy (really eats into drone production). - Roaches out of creep before speed upgrade is somewhat slow. - Terrans have marauder which roast roaches. - Properly micro'ed stalkers can take good advantage of their great range and speed to take care of roaches. A good mix of zealots+stalkers+1 sentry should be able to handle a large number roach+ling without much of a problem, without a huge impact on worker production.
I suggest giving them +10 health (would take 3 shots from 0/0 siege tanks to kill!) to begin with.
|
On June 03 2010 19:18 space_yes wrote:I've been busy with the end of the quarter so I haven't had time to follow all various tournaments, showmatches etc. What are some of the best/most entertaining SC2 games played recently? Link to reps or VODs please
One of the most entertaining matches I've seen in a while is TLO and Nony's 3rd place bo7 in the HDH Invitational. The vods are on either HD or Husky's channel.
|
On June 17 2010 09:07 Hikari wrote: I think roaches would need some love - they are too strong as a 1 food unit and somewhat weak when bumped up to 2 food.
I suggest giving them +10 health (would take 3 shots from 0/0 siege tanks to kill!) to begin with.
They've always been in such an icky situation, it's hard to address the Roach problem when it's always changing. Although I like the idea of an extra 10 health, it feels more like a bandaid than a solution.
|
On June 17 2010 10:20 reprise wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 09:07 Hikari wrote: I think roaches would need some love - they are too strong as a 1 food unit and somewhat weak when bumped up to 2 food.
I suggest giving them +10 health (would take 3 shots from 0/0 siege tanks to kill!) to begin with. They've always been in such an icky situation, it's hard to address the Roach problem when it's always changing. Although I like the idea of an extra 10 health, it feels more like a bandaid than a solution.
id vote for a nerf and back to 1 supply, zerg needs to be brought back to the swarm
|
I mentioned this before, but I still think allowing your cursor be visible during the load screen is needed... Sometimes when game starts, my screen keeps going down because my cursor was apparently pointing bottom of my screen.
|
Has there been a match up (recorded or not) of Sen vs Tester yet? I couldn't locate anything. but thought there may have been some Asian tournament where they were paired.
Thanks,
|
On June 17 2010 10:34 stalife wrote: I mentioned this before, but I still think allowing your cursor be visible during the load screen is needed... Sometimes when game starts, my screen keeps going down because my cursor was apparently pointing bottom of my screen.
Yes yes! Personally i would also like to have a 2 second countdown after the game is completly loaded because sometimes is can be slow and sitting their staring at the load screen not knowing when its starting i think is annoying for the eyes and i lose focus.
|
Glad this is stickied now! Ty FA!
Anyways I was listening to Day9 talk about how he likes to open up with DT's in PvT.
Now I never wanted to say it in public in fear of being called a newbcakes but it seems like DT FE is a pretty viable build like in BW. Basically you use the same build (replacing stalkers with goons and obvious food adjustments) but use the initial DT's to do a contain on the Terran. I've used this build quite a few times and had great success with it.
I normally get about 3 DT's in their natural than I spread them out. The idea is to delay the expansion for the Terran, force them to either tech to Ravens and waste scans, and get a free expansion off. I did it in Rd 1 of the custom map tourney and won with it on Chupung. I kept sniping SCV's with my DT's, and but he time he could expand I already had my natural up and partially saturated, and was adding gates+a robo so by the time he could push I already had like 5 Immortals+Lots/Stalkers/Sentries.
Anyone have alot of experience with going this route? I don't think this deserves it's own topic just curious what everyone thinks. This was one of my favorite strats in BW. Mind you if there is an opening for the DT"s to pull the mass/all-kill take it but this is good I think if the opponent is prepared (ie: turret right behind wall).
|
Is there a game between Sen and Machine out there?
|
They should implement what race to play against! that way I can practice zvz, zvt, ..etc whatever match up i'm weak with.
|
On June 25 2010 13:25 Neosta2 wrote: They should implement what race to play against! that way I can practice zvz, zvt, ..etc whatever match up i'm weak with.
You know what before I got int he beta I would have agreed with you. Right before I got in I had played over 150+ games straight of PvT in BW.
But once I got used to the random element I actually like it. It forces you to be a solid player and learn all the matches. I would however LOVE to have a "no vR matches" button!
|
On June 25 2010 13:14 iCCup.Diamond wrote: Glad this is stickied now! Ty FA!
Anyways I was listening to Day9 talk about how he likes to open up with DT's in PvT.
Now I never wanted to say it in public in fear of being called a newbcakes but it seems like DT FE is a pretty viable build like in BW. Basically you use the same build (replacing stalkers with goons and obvious food adjustments) but use the initial DT's to do a contain on the Terran. I've used this build quite a few times and had great success with it.
I normally get about 3 DT's in their natural than I spread them out. The idea is to delay the expansion for the Terran, force them to either tech to Ravens and waste scans, and get a free expansion off. I did it in Rd 1 of the custom map tourney and won with it on Chupung. I kept sniping SCV's with my DT's, and but he time he could expand I already had my natural up and partially saturated, and was adding gates+a robo so by the time he could push I already had like 5 Immortals+Lots/Stalkers/Sentries.
Anyone have alot of experience with going this route? I don't think this deserves it's own topic just curious what everyone thinks. This was one of my favorite strats in BW. Mind you if there is an opening for the DT"s to pull the mass/all-kill take it but this is good I think if the opponent is prepared (ie: turret right behind wall).
I think with the current popular strategies in TvP dt sounds like a bad choice. First build is the 1/1/1 that opens up starport play fast. You can go for hellion drop since protoss is rather low on gas for stalkers. The gas that didn't go into teching and DTs will be in sentries that are needed to defend possible allins. The bulk of the protoss army will then be zealots which can't keep up with kiting hellions. CLoaked banshee instant wins as long as he defends the dts and ravens allow for a quick push to punish greedy expands.
Second build is the marine ghost attack which can reveal your dts with emp and even kill you before DT tech gets online. Actually Brat_ok's marine ghost opens up port pretty fast as well for marine drops that are quite difficult to defend. He can delay the expo quite handily with his mobility. If however you can get the expo online here you are in a good position because HT isn't too far a branch.
So the actual reason I came here was to share a cute drop tactic that I think may be useful with HT based compositions in PvT. So in BW when you hotkeyed units and loaded them in the shuttle you would lose your original hotkey if you press it will loaded. Ex: Hotkey 3 HT to #4. Load them in shuttle then click #4. Your hotkey is erased now.
In SC2 though your hotkey changes as you unload units from the shuttle. Ex: Hotkey 3 ht to #4 and load into shuttle. Unload one of them and click #4 and you have 1 ht in your group. Unload another, click #4 and you will have 2 HT in your group.
So what you can do is load hotkeyed high templar into a shuttle to prevent them from being emped. Then unload while flipping between T and your hotkey. Ex: High templars on hotkey #3. Do a moving drop and click 3t storm. 3 t storm. 3t storm
|
On June 03 2010 20:42 Molde wrote:You may only build one.
with a with razer gear and high enough APM you can clearly build two: + Show Spoiler +
also i think zerg advisor voice should be discussed more, its sooo annoying, but you still need to have it so you can't turn it off? meeneralzzzzzzz!
|
Is ghostmech in TvP a more viable option than bio once the supply starts to hit around 150? It seems that near maxed bio armies are easily destroyed by large Protoss armies with colossus or templar because of bio's lack of area of effect and long range (like storm or range upgraded colossi). If so, when should a Terran switch to mech or is there a safe window to do it right off the bat like with TvZ? If there is a safe window, can Terran be aggressive enough with tanks and hellions early on to stop Protoss from expanding all over the map?
|
|
|
On June 17 2010 10:26 jamesr12 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 10:20 reprise wrote:On June 17 2010 09:07 Hikari wrote: I think roaches would need some love - they are too strong as a 1 food unit and somewhat weak when bumped up to 2 food.
I suggest giving them +10 health (would take 3 shots from 0/0 siege tanks to kill!) to begin with. They've always been in such an icky situation, it's hard to address the Roach problem when it's always changing. Although I like the idea of an extra 10 health, it feels more like a bandaid than a solution. id vote for a nerf and back to 1 supply, zerg needs to be brought back to the swarm
It's not that simple since the zerg balance has their base in the larva which sets a limit to how many units can be produced earlygame without disturbing the economy
Also I'd just like to remind you that blizzard told us that they were gonna try out new things in the beta and I'm pretty sure that when phase 2 starts there is gonna be some significant changes to the balance aswell as to bnet
|
When I interviewed Day[9] he thought of a cool idea for the roach.
Half their health and cost, then make them 2/larva but still 2 supply. Same amount of power but more roaches. Maybe make them a little smaller.
|
On June 25 2010 21:09 TheElitists wrote: When I interviewed Day[9] he thought of a cool idea for the roach.
Half their health and cost, then make them 2/larva but still 2 supply. Same amount of power but more roaches. Maybe make them a little smaller.
All my honor to Prof Nine but don't you think that half of it's health would totally destroy the "cheap tank" purpose the roach has?
|
On June 25 2010 21:27 GoDannY wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2010 21:09 TheElitists wrote: When I interviewed Day[9] he thought of a cool idea for the roach.
Half their health and cost, then make them 2/larva but still 2 supply. Same amount of power but more roaches. Maybe make them a little smaller. All my honor to Prof Nine but don't you think that half of it's health would totally destroy the "cheap tank" purpose the roach has? well the idea works where you have 2 half roaches instead of one roach for the same cost, int eh end the only way they would be less of a cheap tank is if you're dealing with splash damage.
|
why halve the hp? thats a giant nerf for a buff to its supply cost. the hole point of the roach is that it doesnt die as fast as the hydralisk, if it dies at the same rate with its current dps and 3 range we would never make them past mid game.
zerg needs a massable unit that fares decent, roach can be that unit yes. But at that cost it would never be made in zvz or zvt. even massing baneling would be better
|
Anyone have any sources for release date of SC2 Beta phase 2? All i keep finding is rumors and speculation...
|
On June 17 2010 10:34 stalife wrote: I mentioned this before, but I still think allowing your cursor be visible during the load screen is needed... Sometimes when game starts, my screen keeps going down because my cursor was apparently pointing bottom of my screen.
Agreed. It's really annoying when you start the match and you're preparing by spamming mouse1 when suddenly the cursor moves you to the corner of the map and you lose a few seconds to get back to your base and start mining..
|
On June 25 2010 22:59 moon` wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 10:34 stalife wrote: I mentioned this before, but I still think allowing your cursor be visible during the load screen is needed... Sometimes when game starts, my screen keeps going down because my cursor was apparently pointing bottom of my screen. Agreed. It's really annoying when you start the match and you're preparing by spamming mouse1 when suddenly the cursor moves you to the corner of the map and you lose a few seconds to get back to your base and start mining..
This is very true, I cant keep my hand cool when the loading takes like forever.
|
So I've been testing these two variations out and I just can't seem to decide which is better: 11 rax or 12 rax for the standard 10 depo, rax, refinery, OC opening. Does anyone have any real reason to why they use either or is it just something you chose to do?
|
Prediction: The beta will be back July 6th
Reasoning: This join the dominion thing has unlocked 1 new thing a day recently, if it continutes the last one will be released July 6th. Blizzard has said the best thing will be last. Blizzard has also said beta will back early July and last 2 weeks. July 6th is clearly early July and if it were to start on July 6th and last 2 weeks that would leave 1 week before release which seems like good timing. Therefore I think unlockable 20 is the beta is back, and it will be released on July 6th.
Thoughts?
|
On June 26 2010 00:43 jamesr12 wrote: Prediction: The beta will be back July 6th
Reasoning: This join the dominion thing has unlocked 1 new thing a day recently, if it continutes the last one will be released July 6th. Blizzard has said the best thing will be last. Blizzard has also said beta will back early July and last 2 weeks. July 6th is clearly early July and if it were to start on July 6th and last 2 weeks that would leave 1 week before release which seems like good timing. Therefore I think unlockable 20 is the beta is back, and it will be released on July 6th.
Thoughts?
Seems reasonable- but im praying its july 5th they bring it back (I have off from work and class!)...
|
On June 26 2010 00:43 jamesr12 wrote: Prediction: The beta will be back July 6th
Reasoning: This join the dominion thing has unlocked 1 new thing a day recently, if it continutes the last one will be released July 6th. Blizzard has said the best thing will be last. Blizzard has also said beta will back early July and last 2 weeks. July 6th is clearly early July and if it were to start on July 6th and last 2 weeks that would leave 1 week before release which seems like good timing. Therefore I think unlockable 20 is the beta is back, and it will be released on July 6th.
Thoughts?
I hope not, I can't wait another week let alone almost two
|
On June 25 2010 18:46 godlfishs wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 10:26 jamesr12 wrote:On June 17 2010 10:20 reprise wrote:On June 17 2010 09:07 Hikari wrote: I think roaches would need some love - they are too strong as a 1 food unit and somewhat weak when bumped up to 2 food.
I suggest giving them +10 health (would take 3 shots from 0/0 siege tanks to kill!) to begin with. They've always been in such an icky situation, it's hard to address the Roach problem when it's always changing. Although I like the idea of an extra 10 health, it feels more like a bandaid than a solution. id vote for a nerf and back to 1 supply, zerg needs to be brought back to the swarm It's not that simple since the zerg balance has their base in the larva which sets a limit to how many units can be produced earlygame without disturbing the economy Also I'd just like to remind you that blizzard told us that they were gonna try out new things in the beta and I'm pretty sure that when phase 2 starts there is gonna be some significant changes to the balance aswell as to bnet Right now there is zero 1-food unit for Zerg and that is bad. For a race which is dependant upon larvae getting higher food units out of one of them means more power. IMO the Zerg can get powerful armies too fast and thus a 1-food unit would be nice.
Maybe make the Roach have 65-75(-85) life and 1 food but 3 armor for 50 minerals and 25 gas. It would be awesome against Marines and even survive a shot from a siege tank. Maybe it could have a few more hit points, but definetely below 100 and below the Hydra. The "key" would be the rather high starting armor, which makes it almost immune to "small hitters" like Marines, Zerglings and Sentries.
|
On June 25 2010 13:14 iCCup.Diamond wrote: Glad this is stickied now! Ty FA!
Anyways I was listening to Day9 talk about how he likes to open up with DT's in PvT.
Now I never wanted to say it in public in fear of being called a newbcakes but it seems like DT FE is a pretty viable build like in BW. Basically you use the same build (replacing stalkers with goons and obvious food adjustments) but use the initial DT's to do a contain on the Terran. I've used this build quite a few times and had great success with it.
I normally get about 3 DT's in their natural than I spread them out. The idea is to delay the expansion for the Terran, force them to either tech to Ravens and waste scans, and get a free expansion off. I did it in Rd 1 of the custom map tourney and won with it on Chupung. I kept sniping SCV's with my DT's, and but he time he could expand I already had my natural up and partially saturated, and was adding gates+a robo so by the time he could push I already had like 5 Immortals+Lots/Stalkers/Sentries.
Anyone have alot of experience with going this route? I don't think this deserves it's own topic just curious what everyone thinks. This was one of my favorite strats in BW. Mind you if there is an opening for the DT"s to pull the mass/all-kill take it but this is good I think if the opponent is prepared (ie: turret right behind wall).
I actually just started a thread asking about how to execute this opening against early bio aggression. It definitely seems like a stable opening if you can work out how to respond to the early T tech branches. I'd love to see more replays of this style of play if anyone has good ones.
|
A french site says beta starts worldwide July 1st for ~2 weeks.
But in Korea it's different, beta will start in two days and last until July 24.
Site says they announce this in PC BANGS in Korea. Can anyone confirm this ?
|
On June 26 2010 02:56 SeR3NiTy wrote: A french site says beta starts worldwide July 1st for ~2 weeks.
But in Korea it's different, beta will start in two days and last until July 24.
Site says they announce this in PC BANGS in Korea. Can anyone confirm this ?
seems wrong since they announced in korea (june 24th event) that phase two would start early july and last 2 weeks
|
I've asked this before but I don't think I've gotten an answer. I don't think it warrants its own thread though.
Is there a way to turn off those annoying control group shortcut buttons at the bottom of the screen? I always accidentally click on them and it ends up overriding my control groups. And then I don't know which control is overridden, so I have to manually search though each one and then correct it. It's by far the most annoying UI problem I have.
|
On June 26 2010 03:21 Saracen wrote: I've asked this before but I don't think I've gotten an answer. I don't think it warrants its own thread though.
Is there a way to turn off those annoying control group shortcut buttons at the bottom of the screen? I always accidentally click on them and it ends up overriding my control groups. And then I don't know which control is overridden, so I have to manually search though each one and then correct it. It's by far the most annoying UI problem I have.
Sadly I dont think so, you can only turn the menu bar at the top off
|
Starcraft 2 Tournament Section:
Can this page be cleaned up a bit? (Alot)
I like the format for teamliquid forums in general. They have red folder for "hot" topics and yellow folder for "less-active" topics and "old post" for .. old posts... However, for the tournament section, we really need a different approach. Like, I go onto the tournament section to check which tournaments are upcoming every 2 or 3 days. Lo-and-behold, I arrive there every 2 or 3 days and find the same "hot topics" re-arranged in a different order every time. I think the tournament section really needs to be organized in a "Date Created" order, or at least the option for it. (MY APOLOGIES ON THIS ONE, I WAS TOO RETARDED TO FIND THE DATE CREATED BUTTON ON THE VERY BOTTOM LEFT CORNER)
Also, if its possible, can Team Liquid just develop or add some software to the website so we can just create tournaments easily or by request (to prevent spam tournaments) ? Like, say Day9 wants to organize a tournament, he PMs the "tournament organizer person" at TL, then gets it approved, the TL person allows access to create this tournament, Day9 goes in and starts creating the tournament, with a sign-up page and everything. (No, not liquipedia, it feels like an entirely different website and is kind of alienated, it needs to be in the SC2 tournament forum section specifically).
Why the second request? I'm sick and tired of going to so many different websites and creating accounts for their forums to sign up for tournaments. While I do appreciate the people that run the tournaments, I really do not plan on posting on their forums regularly, therefore creating an account there is just spam for my inbox and a hassle.
Who chose TL? Well, nobody designated TL to be the go-to place for NA tournaments, it just happened. I just know that if I want to sign up for tournaments, get feedback, open to the community, post VODs, I know where to go. If TL doesn't implement this tournament thing, someone else has to centralize the tournament ways in the English speaking world, to prevent the mass tournaments on random forums and confusion.
Love you TL, please help with this.
|
On June 26 2010 05:17 Paramore wrote: Starcraft 2 Tournament Section:
Can this page be cleaned up a bit? (Alot)
I like the format for teamliquid forums in general. They have red folder for "hot" topics and yellow folder for "less-active" topics and "old post" for .. old posts... However, for the tournament section, we really need a different approach. Like, I go onto the tournament section to check which tournaments are upcoming every 2 or 3 days. Lo-and-behold, I arrive there every 2 or 3 days and find the same "hot topics" re-arranged in a different order every time. I think the tournament section really needs to be organized in a "Date Created" order, or at least the option for it.
Also, if its possible, can Team Liquid just develop or add some software to the website so we can just create tournaments easily or by request (to prevent spam tournaments) ? Like, say Day9 wants to organize a tournament, he PMs the "tournament organizer person" at TL, then gets it approved, the TL person allows access to create this tournament, Day9 goes in and starts creating the tournament, with a sign-up page and everything. (No, not liquipedia, it feels like an entirely different website and is kind of alienated, it needs to be in the SC2 tournament forum section specifically).
Why the second request? I'm sick and tired of going to so many different websites and creating accounts for their forums to sign up for tournaments. While I do appreciate the people that run the tournaments, I really do not plan on posting on their forums regularly, therefore creating an account there is just spam for my inbox and a hassle.
Who chose TL? Well, nobody designated TL to be the go-to place for NA tournaments, it just happened. I just know that if I want to sign up for tournaments, get feedback, open to the community, post VODs, I know where to go. If TL doesn't implement this tournament thing, someone else has to centralize the tournament ways in the English speaking world, to prevent the mass tournaments on random forums and confusion.
Love you TL, please help with this. Post this in website feedback. I agree with most of your complaints.
|
On June 26 2010 00:10 gillon wrote: So I've been testing these two variations out and I just can't seem to decide which is better: 11 rax or 12 rax for the standard 10 depo, rax, refinery, OC opening. Does anyone have any real reason to why they use either or is it just something you chose to do?
I 11 rax when I wall off because there is a small amount of dead time on the scv if you go 12 rax. Then I can orbital at 14 instead of 15 which should make up for the slightly cut scvs. I haven't done any testing but that's my reason
|
On June 26 2010 02:24 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2010 18:46 godlfishs wrote:On June 17 2010 10:26 jamesr12 wrote:On June 17 2010 10:20 reprise wrote:On June 17 2010 09:07 Hikari wrote: I think roaches would need some love - they are too strong as a 1 food unit and somewhat weak when bumped up to 2 food.
I suggest giving them +10 health (would take 3 shots from 0/0 siege tanks to kill!) to begin with. They've always been in such an icky situation, it's hard to address the Roach problem when it's always changing. Although I like the idea of an extra 10 health, it feels more like a bandaid than a solution. id vote for a nerf and back to 1 supply, zerg needs to be brought back to the swarm It's not that simple since the zerg balance has their base in the larva which sets a limit to how many units can be produced earlygame without disturbing the economy Also I'd just like to remind you that blizzard told us that they were gonna try out new things in the beta and I'm pretty sure that when phase 2 starts there is gonna be some significant changes to the balance aswell as to bnet Right now there is zero 1-food unit for Zerg and that is bad. For a race which is dependant upon larvae getting higher food units out of one of them means more power. IMO the Zerg can get powerful armies too fast and thus a 1-food unit would be nice. Maybe make the Roach have 65-75(-85) life and 1 food but 3 armor for 50 minerals and 25 gas. It would be awesome against Marines and even survive a shot from a siege tank. Maybe it could have a few more hit points, but definetely below 100 and below the Hydra. The "key" would be the rather high starting armor, which makes it almost immune to "small hitters" like Marines, Zerglings and Sentries.
Well, Zerglings do 5 dmg, so it would take ~35-40 hits (depending on regen/how many lings are hitting it) to kill it. Currently it takes about ~37-40 hits to kill a roach. You are most likely going to nerf it, even vs lings, especially since many Zerg ling users vs roaches go for a quick +1 upgrade, the armor will have even less of an effect. You're more than halving the unit hp and not reducing the dmg by more than half so... it would be a buff vs lings/marines/sentries.
Not to mention they wouldn't be very good at all vs anything else - marauders 5 shotting them would be terrible, and possibly 4 shotting if you take it all the way down to 65. At the same time I don't think the game needs any more hard counters than it already has .
Although don't get me wrong, I don't like the roach as it is at all and am welcome to new ideas and people trying^^
|
I mentioned earlier in this thread to increase roach hp by ~15. This allows roaches to withstand 1 more shot from a colossus and siege tank.
1 additional point of armor greatly increases the time to live of a roach vs quick firing units which changes a lot of game balances. Adding more health allows them to break certain "hits to kill" thresholds.
Fun fact: Roaches do ~8 dps, while zergling does ~7 and hydralisk does ~16.
Once again the koreans believe zerg neds to be nerfed.
|
On June 26 2010 06:11 Hikari wrote: I mentioned earlier in this thread to increase roach hp by ~15. This allows roaches to withstand 1 more shot from a colossus and siege tank.
1 additional point of armor greatly increases the time to live of a roach vs quick firing units which changes a lot of game balances. Adding more health allows them to break certain "hits to kill" thresholds.
Fun fact: Roaches do ~8 dps, while zergling does ~7 and hydralisk does ~16.
Once again the koreans believe zerg neds to be nerfed.
If anything Zerg does not need a stronger tank. They need weaker units cost LESS SUPPLY.
|
Would you rather have hydras spawn in pairs, come with 1/2 the dmg, hp, armor, etc?
|
i dont mind roaches so much at 1 supply. just give tanks their +10 damage back and give toss better carriers and make motherships faster.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On June 26 2010 06:41 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2010 06:11 Hikari wrote: I mentioned earlier in this thread to increase roach hp by ~15. This allows roaches to withstand 1 more shot from a colossus and siege tank.
1 additional point of armor greatly increases the time to live of a roach vs quick firing units which changes a lot of game balances. Adding more health allows them to break certain "hits to kill" thresholds.
Fun fact: Roaches do ~8 dps, while zergling does ~7 and hydralisk does ~16.
Once again the koreans believe zerg neds to be nerfed. If anything Zerg does not need a stronger tank. They need weaker units cost LESS SUPPLY.
Yeah, it's pretty underwhelming when my 200 max Zerg army (if I go hydra/roach) of a clump of roaches that take ridiculous amounts of OV to get to and a slightly larger force of hydras and a few infestors are the only thing standing around. Even if you (the Z) are in the lead, you can easily be wiped out by hard counters the T or P can set up such as collosi and tanks. This is not to say these units are imbalanced; rather, it is my example of how un-swarmy the Zerg has become when it has only the Zergling as a swarm-based unit.
|
How will having weaker units costing less supplies "help" zerg?
A terran can too say their 200/200 supply bio army gets roflstomped by storm+colossi/15 tanks. Ultralisks do pretty well against colossi and tanks. If you are in the lead anyway why not tech to hive...?
One of zerg's greatest strength is our ability to rebuild our army. After a full 200v200 battle you can be back up to food cap in less than a minute, while your opponent would prob still be sitting at 130/200... Wouldn't weaker units nerf this regeneration aspect of the zerg army?
Roaches are cheap, but are rather weak compared to their other 1.5 counterparts (stalkers and marauders).
Given smartcast and stronger AI I think weaker units that costs less supply will just make the entire army die to strong AoE.
Right now you can still run your hydras out of a storm. Make them any weaker hp wise will: - Allow colossi to 2 shot them without +3 weapon upgrade - Tank splash will hurt even more (@50dmg a full shot+a 50% dmg shot will do 75 dmg...) - 2 fungal growths would kill off a good portion of your "weak units"
|
Poland6130 Posts
People,right discussion is -> Buff Zerg and Protoss,Nerf Terran. Other ideas are just dumb,seriously. I think that Zerg could be more swarmy but swarm does not work in SC2 because of 90% maps being Terran favored (chokes,high grounds,small maps) Which destroys ANY advantage in doing the swarm. Anyway the only real swarm are Zerglings.. 100 roaches - drones and queens is a small amount. BTW: Nothing wrong in T1.5 and T2 Bio army getting roflstomped by T3. But T2/2.5 owning every tier is NOT okay. Marauders whose are T1.5 are ALWAYS good units. Though the best way would be changing races in a huge degree though it won't happen. (Zerg really swarmy,Protoss really micro intensive,Terran ? mix?)
|
I have a pretty newb question about map-making and I don't feel like making a thread about it..
I've been messing around trying to make a melee map (extremely unbalanced but I'm just getting used to it). The problem is that when I started I didn't know there was an area of the screen not incorporated in the "playable map area". The problem is simple, I can't add minerals to one of my expansions and a large portion of my map would be missing if I tried to play it...
+ Show Spoiler +.
Is there a way to add new borders to my map to have what I currently have as the playable area?. I know you can copy-paste the entire map on a new map but I'm not sure that would fix my playable area problem. I tried it before which is why you see a border around it but I couldn't tell what was the playable border and not... didn't work out so well. (Note : I know there's a ramp missing on my top-left expansion.. I fixed that.)
|
@Kurr: On the top-menu go Map > Map Bounds >Check the "Modify Map Bounds" check box and modify with the arrow buttons on the top/left/bottom/right sides of the preview.
|
On June 28 2010 04:47 Broxxi wrote: @Kurr: On the top-menu go Map > Map Bounds >Check the "Modify Map Bounds" check box and modify with the arrow buttons on the top/left/bottom/right sides of the preview. Thanks. So simple T_T
|
Ooooh Ooooh OOOH! How did you know this is what I want.
Ok here's what I'm after:
I'm thinking about creating a comprehensive guide/list/explanation of everything that makes a map imbalanced towards a certain race. My aim here is to not only help me make my own maps more balanced, but also to help others in understanding what a balanced map consists of. I have no intention of making the post sound as if this is what's imbalanced/balanced and there's nothing you can do about it, but I do plan to make it very clear what kinds of factors can lead to an imbalanced map and what kinds of features you can expect to see in a balanced map.
Although I think I know a fair deal about what makes a map imbalanced or balanced, I know I will not be able to take this project on by myself (if I could I wouldn't be posting here), I will attempt to gain insight from the community, and even high level players if possible.
Any thoughts?
edit: btw this is entirely about how each specific race can manipulate the terrain to their favor, as I believe that any mirror matchup on a perfectly symmetrical map is perfectly balanced (except maybe slightly terran vs terran cuz building addons are kinda weird and if the mapmaker skewed it in such a way on purpose, which isnt the focus).
I will probably break it down into a few different categories, like each feature and how each race can deal with it early, mid, and late game. Also how each unit can manipulate terrain.
|
@Kurr: Well, the editor is pretty extensive so. Hard to see everything
Changes like making roaches 1 supply again is probably not gonna happen until at least Heart of the Swarm. Doing extensive changes like that in a release version (doubt it'll happen with 2 weeks left of beta play) isn't something they should "test" around to check if it works.
Then again Heart of the Swarm might include a new tier 1 or 2 unit to Zerg if Blizzard feels Zerg isn't "swarmy" enough without making roach 1 food.
|
Something that bugs me but probably doesn't warrant any sort of actual discussion:
When I use the W key to select warpgates, I can't double-tap W to center on one of them. I realize that it would be a difficult mechanic to implement (multiple warp gates spread about the map: which to center!?) but I double tap W all the time and forget to hotkey pylons sometimes (usually I have 2-3 pylons hotkeyed at different strategic locations). I wish you could double tap W and center on the first gate way made or something D:
So obviously this doesn't warrant a new topic 'cos I am just bitching about insignificant stuff.
But still!
/complain
|
On June 28 2010 04:55 Barrin wrote:
I'm thinking about creating a comprehensive guide/list/explanation of everything that makes a map imbalanced towards a certain race.
Sounds like a very good idea although I think the list will be generally pretty short, simply because most races have units that allow them to adapt to the map features(somewhat).
Some features to get you started, based on my opinion.
Distance from main to ramp/choke. Makes any base harder to defend. Generally considered worst for zerg in early game due to creep mechanic (and queens so slow off creep). Likely best for zerg later game (highest mobility once creep is down).
Distance from main to natural. Generally considered worst for zerg in early game due to creep mechanic. Likely best for zerg later game (highest mobility once creep is down). Can be very bad for a mech Terran.
Cliffs around main or natural. Best favors Terran early game. Becomes more neutral later game.
Wide open entries to main or natural. Make them hard to defend on every race. Likely best for zerg later game. Earlier, likely neutral. (note that zerg often complain about these because they feel their race needs more bases on average than the other races. e.g., they can't just one-base for a long time. Thus its not the race units or defensive style per se but the macro-needs of the race).
Wide open areas: Generally considered good for any army requiring surrounds or arcs. Each race can go for mass cheap units or fewer expensive units. Overall, I suspect open spaces best for a larger subsection of zerg builds than toss or terran builds.
Strategic chokes between bases. Best for Terran due to siege tanks, I think.
Well placed watch towers. Not sure who this is best for. Maybe mech terrans or any army with a lot of ranged units that can camp the area using the site given.
|
|
On June 28 2010 18:20 Inori wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2010 07:29 Seltsam wrote: Something that bugs me but probably doesn't warrant any sort of actual discussion:
When I use the W key to select warpgates, I can't double-tap W to center on one of them. I realize that it would be a difficult mechanic to implement (multiple warp gates spread about the map: which to center!?) but I double tap W all the time and forget to hotkey pylons sometimes (usually I have 2-3 pylons hotkeyed at different strategic locations). I wish you could double tap W and center on the first gate way made or something D:
So obviously this doesn't warrant a new topic 'cos I am just bitching about insignificant stuff.
But still!
/complain hotkey warpgates?
This, I don't even see why there should be a dedicated warpgate key anyways.
I don't get an icon telling me when barracks aren't producing.
|
At this point, I'm more excited for the WoL single player than I am for B.net. It should be an epic Campaign like we've never experienced. I can't wait, less than a month away now!!
|
On June 17 2010 10:26 jamesr12 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 10:20 reprise wrote:On June 17 2010 09:07 Hikari wrote: I think roaches would need some love - they are too strong as a 1 food unit and somewhat weak when bumped up to 2 food.
I suggest giving them +10 health (would take 3 shots from 0/0 siege tanks to kill!) to begin with. They've always been in such an icky situation, it's hard to address the Roach problem when it's always changing. Although I like the idea of an extra 10 health, it feels more like a bandaid than a solution. id vote for a nerf and back to 1 supply, zerg needs to be brought back to the swarm
I play zerg so I'm bias, but I feel that zerglings alone don't make the swarm, roaches or sumthin else needs to be 1 supply. In the expansion I hope that zerg gets more 1 supply units, but I don't want to wait that long.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On June 28 2010 09:23 Peekaboo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2010 04:55 Barrin wrote:
I'm thinking about creating a comprehensive guide/list/explanation of everything that makes a map imbalanced towards a certain race. Sounds like a very good idea although I think the list will be generally pretty short, simply because most races have units that allow them to adapt to the map features(somewhat). Some features to get you started, based on my opinion. Distance from main to ramp/choke. Makes any base harder to defend. Generally considered worst for zerg in early game due to creep mechanic (and queens so slow off creep). Likely best for zerg later game (highest mobility once creep is down). Distance from main to natural. Generally considered worst for zerg in early game due to creep mechanic. Likely best for zerg later game (highest mobility once creep is down). Can be very bad for a mech Terran. Cliffs around main or natural. Best favors Terran early game. Becomes more neutral later game. Wide open entries to main or natural. Make them hard to defend on every race. Likely best for zerg later game. Earlier, likely neutral. (note that zerg often complain about these because they feel their race needs more bases on average than the other races. e.g., they can't just one-base for a long time. Thus its not the race units or defensive style per se but the macro-needs of the race). Wide open areas: Generally considered good for any army requiring surrounds or arcs. Each race can go for mass cheap units or fewer expensive units. Overall, I suspect open spaces best for a larger subsection of zerg builds than toss or terran builds. Strategic chokes between bases. Best for Terran due to siege tanks, I think. Well placed watch towers. Not sure who this is best for. Maybe mech terrans or any army with a lot of ranged units that can camp the area using the site given.
Zerg can deal well with a wide open natural if the natural's creep extends to the ramp (see metalopolis) and the openness is restricted to one side.
It's hard to provide a comprehensive list because there are many factors that go into it. Scrap station, for example, is generally considered alright for zerg and it's the least 'open' of any Blizzard map.
|
On June 28 2010 00:16 Kurumi wrote: People,right discussion is -> Buff Zerg and Protoss,Nerf Terran. Other ideas are just dumb,seriously.
Here is a handy 3-step guide to help you out, Kurumi:
Step 1 - Realize that people still haven't figured out ideal builds and strategies for this game yet
Step 2 - Realize that if you are getting owned by T players who suck doesn't mean T is imba, it means you suck
Step 3 - Play when beta re-opens and learn how to win, not cry imba.
You're welcome.
|
Zerg players complain all the time about how they want zerg to get more buff and how they want roaches to go back to 1 supply just deal white it and stfu!
|
Considering the ZvsT(mech) discussion here's my view
I am a zerg player and have more or less 0 experience of the other races. My rank is somewhere around mid plat ( I think) perhaps a bit higher/lower. Furthermore I am new to SC even though i played some 50BW games scattered over 10years I did in no way know things about that in the way I credit myself knowing about SC2 now.
To the point.
I do not feel terran mech is OP against zerg and that is not playing mech at all after the tank (among other things) nerf to 50dmg. What I do feel is that mech is the only strat where I find myself loosing to what I generally would call a lesser player. With that I mean that it feels like its more or less up to the zerg player to win the game more then it is to the terran.
To break a turtling terran mech the zerg must be the one doing the fancy stuff while the terran more or less just slowly pushes the zerg to his death. I know that people talk alot about terran mechs downside (mobility) but that really dont strike the point, atleast not when we talk about 200vs200 armies. Harassing etc just doesnt feel so viable when the terran is closing in on the zergs main. Sure I can just kill of all the buildings he has with nydus, mutas or w/e but the big battle is still coming and thats the hard part.
What im trying to say (whilst rambling noncense) is that it simply looks alot easier to win as the mech then as the zerg, please correct me if I am wrong since I as I stated before have 0 experience as a terran (expect my 2 first novice games where I somehow actually won as terran ^^, I ought to post those replays, you would have a laugh).
How to fix this I do not know? Against a lesser player its quite easy to just go for mass roach, hydra with infestors and just NP the closest tanks/thors but if the terran is not terrible he will easily focus down the weak infestors and that is annuled. The obvious counters ultras, broodlords whilst working decently still doesnt really do it for me. Ultras are great but a bit to big and clumbsy and broodlords are just so slow to get up. Perhaps thats the main issue with zerg. Whilst terran can get his tier 3 (thors count as that no?) pretty damn fast. (rax+tech, fact, armory done) zerg needs loads of time (SP, lair, infestor, spire, hive, gspire then corruptors --> BL)
At work, its late, rambling probably nonsence and I cba to look through what ive written. Just curious about all the terrans views on the mech vs zerg. It just feels like ive lost to some terrans that if they would have played any other way, race I would have crushed them (watching the replays) but with the less(?) requiring mech they stand a chance. I probably will go for more early pressure strats against terran due to this just to avoid getting to face those huge mech armies late game and thats just so booring. Baneling busts ftl, works fine but just feels so lame :p
|
Where would i find a pro team to practice with? I am not at the pro level but im looking to get better, like ALOT better. I have no problem getting rolled over hundreds of times if it can improve my game. I am a mid level Diamond player.
|
I would love to have the ability to customize the in-game interface.
Coming from an RPG background, I like being able to adjust where on the screen my mini-map, spells, chat box, etc. go. I would love to have similar customization options in SC2:
1. Move the resources away from the top right of the screen. While it is not difficult to continuously glance at it, I would much rather be able to look at the resources and mini-map simultaneously by moving the resourcing count to the bottom left, directly above the mini map.
2. The control group positioning is slightly annoying. At times, I accidentally click on the icons and have shuffled my control groups around mid-battle by accident.
3. I'd love a bigger mini-map. I feel like I spend too high of a percentage of the game peering into the bottom left corner of my screen. Yeah, I'm used to it by now, but I'd much rather have the option to make it larger or move it.
4. I would love a better listing of recently completed tasks, moving it from the top left to be next to... something. I often miss what has happened recently and find that I rarely read what is going on over there after the early game. If it were lower down or by the resource count, I think I would check it more often.
Although these are not major points, and it may be difficult to implement much customization with how the interface is already designed, I feel like interface customization is the norm nowadays. Users know what fits their own style best - let them adjust it how they see fit.
|
On June 29 2010 09:15 Oniobn wrote: I would love to have the ability to customize the in-game interface.
Coming from an RPG background, I like being able to adjust where on the screen my mini-map, spells, chat box, etc. go. I would love to have similar customization options in SC2:
1. Move the resources away from the top right of the screen. While it is not difficult to continuously glance at it, I would much rather be able to look at the resources and mini-map simultaneously by moving the resourcing count to the bottom left, directly above the mini map.
2. The control group positioning is slightly annoying. At times, I accidentally click on the icons and have shuffled my control groups around mid-battle by accident.
3. I'd love a bigger mini-map. I feel like I spend too high of a percentage of the game peering into the bottom left corner of my screen. Yeah, I'm used to it by now, but I'd much rather have the option to make it larger or move it.
4. I would love a better listing of recently completed tasks, moving it from the top left to be next to... something. I often miss what has happened recently and find that I rarely read what is going on over there after the early game. If it were lower down or by the resource count, I think I would check it more often.
Although these are not major points, and it may be difficult to implement much customization with how the interface is already designed, I feel like interface customization is the norm nowadays. Users know what fits their own style best - let them adjust it how they see fit. I totally agree. I come from a WoW background where my interface looks like no one else's and fits my tastes. That's not to say Blizz doesn't design a good interface, it's just that this interface is from ten+ years ago.
|
On June 29 2010 09:15 Oniobn wrote:1. Move the resources away from the top right of the screen. While it is not difficult to continuously glance at it, I would much rather be able to look at the resources and mini-map simultaneously by moving the resourcing count to the bottom left, directly above the mini map.
Considering so much of SC2's changes has been to the easifying of RTS gaming I would actually welcome this as a change. Would be awesome.
Though I will answer to why customized UI is not going to happen (except from simple options) It because of: equal viewport (viewport in a game is where you see the actually game and not a UI element).
If you play on a 1024 resolution you're seeing the exact same things as on a 1920 resolution. Things just get scaled up in your GPU for just this reason: "equal playingfield".
Though aspect ratio (4:3 vs 16 etc.) gives you a wider view on the playfield though. Wonder if you loose top-bottom view or gain left-right.
|
In a competitive point of view, custom interface may give one side an unfair advantage.
WoW tournaments ban custom interface, only macros allowed.
|
about the roach thing, i think blizz should take away there ability to regain health quickly while burrowed, then give them an additional 5hp, and return them back to 1 supply, other wise roaches are OP at 1 supply and u can burrow 75+ of emmm when there dieng
wat you guys think????
or if no make their regenaration thing a tier 3 upgrade
|
On June 29 2010 17:59 freshiie22 wrote: about the roach thing, i think blizz should take away there ability to regain health quickly while burrowed, then give them an additional 5hp, and return them back to 1 supply, other wise roaches are OP at 1 supply and u can burrow 75+ of emmm when there dieng
wat you guys think????
or if no make their regenaration thing a tier 3 upgrade I don't think the burrow regen really makes much of a difference in this case. This change would open up a world of opportunities for early OP roach pushes like the beginning of beta.
|
So... Blizzard didn't confirm 1st July - is it probable for them to restart bnet suddenly without proper notice? I kinda doubt it..
About roaches - 2 armor goes my vote. Real tanks.
|
On June 30 2010 05:25 figq wrote: So... Blizzard didn't confirm 1st July - is it probable for them to restart bnet suddenly without proper notice? I kinda doubt it.. Never doubt Blizzard!!!
|
Does anyone know if there is going to be snow/ice tileset in StarCraft 2? I think that would look absolutely sick.
|
On June 26 2010 05:20 Saracen wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2010 05:17 Paramore wrote: Starcraft 2 Tournament Section:
Can this page be cleaned up a bit? (Alot)
I like the format for teamliquid forums in general. They have red folder for "hot" topics and yellow folder for "less-active" topics and "old post" for .. old posts... However, for the tournament section, we really need a different approach. Like, I go onto the tournament section to check which tournaments are upcoming every 2 or 3 days. Lo-and-behold, I arrive there every 2 or 3 days and find the same "hot topics" re-arranged in a different order every time. I think the tournament section really needs to be organized in a "Date Created" order, or at least the option for it.
Also, if its possible, can Team Liquid just develop or add some software to the website so we can just create tournaments easily or by request (to prevent spam tournaments) ? Like, say Day9 wants to organize a tournament, he PMs the "tournament organizer person" at TL, then gets it approved, the TL person allows access to create this tournament, Day9 goes in and starts creating the tournament, with a sign-up page and everything. (No, not liquipedia, it feels like an entirely different website and is kind of alienated, it needs to be in the SC2 tournament forum section specifically).
Why the second request? I'm sick and tired of going to so many different websites and creating accounts for their forums to sign up for tournaments. While I do appreciate the people that run the tournaments, I really do not plan on posting on their forums regularly, therefore creating an account there is just spam for my inbox and a hassle.
Who chose TL? Well, nobody designated TL to be the go-to place for NA tournaments, it just happened. I just know that if I want to sign up for tournaments, get feedback, open to the community, post VODs, I know where to go. If TL doesn't implement this tournament thing, someone else has to centralize the tournament ways in the English speaking world, to prevent the mass tournaments on random forums and confusion.
Love you TL, please help with this. Post this in website feedback. I agree with most of your complaints.
I posted.. but basically only 5 people read it and 2 people gave enough of a shit to post on it. Nobody sees shit there...
|
On June 28 2010 04:55 Barrin wrote: Ooooh Ooooh OOOH! How did you know this is what I want.
Ok here's what I'm after:
I'm thinking about creating a comprehensive guide/list/explanation of everything that makes a map imbalanced towards a certain race. My aim here is to not only help me make my own maps more balanced, but also to help others in understanding what a balanced map consists of. I have no intention of making the post sound as if this is what's imbalanced/balanced and there's nothing you can do about it, but I do plan to make it very clear what kinds of factors can lead to an imbalanced map and what kinds of features you can expect to see in a balanced map.
Although I think I know a fair deal about what makes a map imbalanced or balanced, I know I will not be able to take this project on by myself (if I could I wouldn't be posting here), I will attempt to gain insight from the community, and even high level players if possible.
Any thoughts?
edit: btw this is entirely about how each specific race can manipulate the terrain to their favor, as I believe that any mirror matchup on a perfectly symmetrical map is perfectly balanced (except maybe slightly terran vs terran cuz building addons are kinda weird and if the mapmaker skewed it in such a way on purpose, which isnt the focus).
I will probably break it down into a few different categories, like each feature and how each race can deal with it early, mid, and late game. Also how each unit can manipulate terrain.
I like this idea, and a thread about it with conclusions added back to the OP would be a very nice resource for map makers. I think to do it right you have to do two things:
1) Go through SC2 Strat forums and find all the good discussions of stuff like this that have already been hashed out
2) Figure out a reasonable way to poll the community on the accuracy of the list. I liked Logo's point that a wide open natural is all right for Zerg when the creep extends to the main choke, that makes sense to me. But does it make sense to the community at large and especially the top Zergs? I wouldn't want us to churn out maps with these features no one is sure we want/need.
|
On June 29 2010 12:16 Hikari wrote: In a competitive point of view, custom interface may give one side an unfair advantage.
WoW tournaments ban custom interface, only macros allowed. Exactly. For tournaments, no custom stuff would be allowed. But for us crappy home uses, we can have out pretty graphics. XD.
|
Being to swap minimap to the bottom right side would be pretty nice if it was a feature provided by the game.
|
Hey. I was wondering if there is any opinion out there about whether or not monitor size is a factor in game. Specifically I am wondering about any added difficulty in micro on a larger monitor. I have read some other threads and I am not asking about resolution or aspect ratio as that is what they discuss, I am just asking about inches. Right now I play on a 15 inch laptop, what will be the difference on a 23 inch screen? Thanks.
|
On June 30 2010 23:48 VRidiculous wrote:
Right now I play on a 15 inch laptop, what will be the difference on a 23 inch screen? Thanks.
For the screen size its all about the viewing distance. You will look at your 23 inch screen a bit farther then your 15 inch screen. You'll probably be more comfortable (I like having lots of space on my desktop between me and my 22inch monitor to put my arms on my desk)
On your 15 inch if you look at it too far you loose a bit of micro accuracy. If you look at it too close you lose comfort.
|
Why does build order is based on ''Supply count'' and not ''Time'' ?
Time is an universal value that is not fluctuating during a game like Supply and time is also more precise (it can passe 30sec between a supply count)
I think the main reason for that is that there is no time shown on the UI... I personaly use my Iphone stopwatch but its annoying to use it everygame.
What do you guys think about that ?
|
On June 30 2010 05:25 figq wrote: So... Blizzard didn't confirm 1st July - is it probable for them to restart bnet suddenly without proper notice? I kinda doubt it..
About roaches - 2 armor goes my vote. Real tanks. Internal testing is probably not on the same address/IP.
|
On July 01 2010 00:33 Vyssecker wrote: Why does build order is based on ''Supply count'' and not ''Time'' ?
Time is an universal value that is not fluctuating during a game like Supply and time is also more precise (it can passe 30sec between a supply count)
I think the main reason for that is that there is no time shown on the UI... I personaly use my Iphone stopwatch but its annoying to use it everygame.
What do you guys think about that ?
A clock is not perfect either because a professional gamer is going to reach the point he should make a certain building before a clumsy 40 apm new player is going to. Using a clock as timer has been widely considered cheating in Brood War's competitive side and thus the main ways of timing are supply count and the a bit more rare way of looking at how many minerals are left on your main/nat patches.
Unless Blizzard integrates a clock in to the game there's really no reason to prefer the exact time over supply count. Giving both would be the best I guess.
|
On July 01 2010 00:50 cocosoft wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2010 05:25 figq wrote: So... Blizzard didn't confirm 1st July - is it probable for them to restart bnet suddenly without proper notice? I kinda doubt it..
About roaches - 2 armor goes my vote. Real tanks. Internal testing is probably not on the same address/IP. Oh sure, it's possible technically. I just thought Blizzard would give some notice in advance.
Not just say: "Okay, beta is open again... now." (of course i'd be the happiest if they end up doing exactly that, but is it reasonable to hope for this?)
|
On July 01 2010 00:58 Puosu wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2010 00:33 Vyssecker wrote: Why does build order is based on ''Supply count'' and not ''Time'' ?
Time is an universal value that is not fluctuating during a game like Supply and time is also more precise (it can passe 30sec between a supply count)
I think the main reason for that is that there is no time shown on the UI... I personaly use my Iphone stopwatch but its annoying to use it everygame.
What do you guys think about that ?
A clock is not perfect either because a professional gamer is going to reach the point he should make a certain building before a clumsy 40 apm new player is going to. Using a clock as timer has been widely considered cheating in Brood War's competitive side and thus the main ways of timing are supply count and the a bit more rare way of looking at how many minerals are left on your main/nat patches. Unless Blizzard integrates a clock in to the game there's really no reason to prefer the exact time over supply count. Giving both would be the best I guess.
This is where a timer can show a clumsy 40 apm new player where he need to improve ?
I didn't know that it was considering cheating ! well no one can prevent player to do it at home... Supply can vary depending on unit lost... and mineral is depending on the harvester saturation... so both of them are not verry accurate to me while time can't lie. So this is the reason why I prefer time over fluctuating value like supply and mineral left.
|
Anyone has any idea what time the Beta will be up?
|
I dont have abeta key so i was wondering, Is there a way to play SC2 beta in single player mode with AI in a legal way. All i find are torrents and illegal methods to do so. All help appreciated.
|
Just use the torrent and some custom launcher with AIs. Nothing bad about downloading beta client through torrent as its free and anyone with key can download it.
|
@Build Orders
In your head, you shouldn't base a build order off of time or food supply. You're just trying to execute an idea as efficiently as possible - the food number in the top right only serves as a checkpoint to jog your memory.
14 Pool > 16 Hatch
Doesn't actually mean throw down my pool at 14 and my hatchery at 16. It's saying I want to do a macro build with a fast expand and relatively late pool and these supply numbers seem like the best time to do it.
Subtle, but important difference.
If you play by these rigid build order rules, you'll never really get anywhere. That's not how strategy works.
|
On July 01 2010 17:51 FC.Strike wrote: @Build Orders
In your head, you shouldn't base a build order off of time or food supply. You're just trying to execute an idea as efficiently as possible - the food number in the top right only serves as a checkpoint to jog your memory.
14 Pool > 16 Hatch
Doesn't actually mean throw down my pool at 14 and my hatchery at 16. It's saying I want to do a macro build with a fast expand and relatively late pool and these supply numbers seem like the best time to do it.
Subtle, but important difference.
If you play by these rigid build order rules, you'll never really get anywhere. That's not how strategy works.
But that doesn't mean that you shouldn't practice a build order to death. You absolutely should. Through this practice you will understand the build order and the exact absolute timings to drop your buildings.
|
How specific do you guys get with your build orders when you know a race/map matchup is coming up?
Do you plan contingancies into your build order?
Do you scout earlier with a set build order in mind?
|
On July 01 2010 22:23 Zoltan wrote: How specific do you guys get with your build orders when you know a race/map matchup is coming up?
Do you plan contingancies into your build order?
Do you scout earlier with a set build order in mind?
I start off with a solid build that I've been using a lot.
I know what beats this build, and I know how to modify this build to be effective against the unit that beats it.
If I scout that unit, then I modify my build accordingly.
|
Seeker
Where dat snitch at?36621 Posts
Well...... it's July 1st and I don't think Beta is back yet T-T I've tried logging onto b.net and it won't let me through No notice up either about Beta being back.... I am hoping it comes back AT THE VERY LEAST by this week.....
|
On July 02 2010 00:14 Seeker wrote: Well...... it's July 1st and I don't think Beta is back yet T-T I've tried logging onto b.net and it won't let me through No notice up either about Beta being back.... I am hoping it comes back AT THE VERY LEAST by this week.....
I am pretty sure they will be giving notice prior to it coming back up. Likely won't be this week.
|
Seeker
Where dat snitch at?36621 Posts
On July 02 2010 01:59 QueueQueue wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2010 00:14 Seeker wrote: Well...... it's July 1st and I don't think Beta is back yet T-T I've tried logging onto b.net and it won't let me through No notice up either about Beta being back.... I am hoping it comes back AT THE VERY LEAST by this week..... I am pretty sure they will be giving notice prior to it coming back up. Likely won't be this week.
So..... then the July 1st thing was just a rumor?
|
On July 02 2010 02:28 Seeker wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2010 01:59 QueueQueue wrote:On July 02 2010 00:14 Seeker wrote: Well...... it's July 1st and I don't think Beta is back yet T-T I've tried logging onto b.net and it won't let me through No notice up either about Beta being back.... I am hoping it comes back AT THE VERY LEAST by this week..... I am pretty sure they will be giving notice prior to it coming back up. Likely won't be this week. So..... then the July 1st thing was just a rumor? It has always been just a rumor.
|
How well does obs sniping work in TvP? I feel that if you had cloaked banshees and a few vikings it would be fairly easy to snipe their obs, cloak your banshees, and rape their army. Vikings have 9 range and obs have barely any hitpoints, so I don't think it would be very difficult.
|
On July 02 2010 05:28 Newguy wrote: How well does obs sniping work in TvP? I feel that if you had cloaked banshees and a few vikings it would be fairly easy to snipe their obs, cloak your banshees, and rape their army. Vikings have 9 range and obs have barely any hitpoints, so I don't think it would be very difficult. Especially if you mix in a raven. Don't forget turrets can be used for harass, or maybe even hunter seeker missile. If they have a heavy stalker composition, you can protect your harass with pdd. . .I like that a lot. >>.
|
Has anyone tried a Voidray + immortal build in PVP? Obviously supported by other gateway units.
I mean this as either an early build (fast-tech VR, switch to Robo when they counter with stalkers) or a combination once you've settled in to mid-game. Void rays actually do pretty well versus stalkers, for a counter, and immortals tear them up.
|
With the release coming up has anyone heard anything about a Official Blizzard Launch party? Similar to those hosted for WoW at Frys? Also anyone know when the WoW launch parties were announced relative to their release dates?
|
On July 02 2010 05:28 Newguy wrote: How well does obs sniping work in TvP? I feel that if you had cloaked banshees and a few vikings it would be fairly easy to snipe their obs, cloak your banshees, and rape their army. Vikings have 9 range and obs have barely any hitpoints, so I don't think it would be very difficult.
I've been wondering about banshee + PDD harrass vs P. PDD laughs at stalkers. Too gas intensive to be an early game option, but it seems like it could be good later.
|
I've pre-ordered SC2 from gamestop (June 12thish) and was under the impression that when the beta came back I would receive a beta key. Is there a process I should follow or just expect a random invite to show up in my email?
Should it be impossible for me specifically to receive an invite/key: 1. Are there keys still for sale? 2. Can you share accounts? 3. What is your best advise?
Lastly, without having the game to tinker around with, is there a wiki with full descriptions of tech trees/unit stats/counters?
Thanks!
|
Looks like there's some server side prep work going on for phase 2.
Opening up starcraft you get a mesage saying "You are trying to login using a client version not recognised by the Battle.net service."
Also, they've removed the info window regarding the end of phase 1.
Damn, it's gotta be soon, chewing my arms off with frustration here; especially since I can't play Brood War for more than half an hour at a time without it locking up my computer. -.-
On this topic, do you reckon they'll announce it in good time (aka at least a few days) before it opens up or just spring it on us?
|
i think i can share one beta key with you ))
|
Need some map editor help,
1) How the fuck do I select multiple units and alter their properties (change their color/player controller, hp%, etc) 2) How the fuck do I save as a UMS map where I don't spawn with HQ+6 workers on start location
|
Anyone noticed that when you try to login to the beta now it says (paraphrasing) "Cannot login because client version does not match server" or something like that? Didn't think it warranted a thread because I'm sure everyone knows and I just haven't heard about it.
|
On July 02 2010 06:42 Ndugu wrote: Has anyone tried a Voidray + immortal build in PVP? Obviously supported by other gateway units.
I mean this as either an early build (fast-tech VR, switch to Robo when they counter with stalkers) or a combination once you've settled in to mid-game. Void rays actually do pretty well versus stalkers, for a counter, and immortals tear them up.
I have played against this build and used it myself, phoniexs with stalker support beat this very easily, lift the immortals kill the voids.
|
Don't you guys know.
Blizzard patches on Fridays and open beta phases on Mondays.
Just like their customers want it or something.
|
|
|
|