EPTOn the other hand, the OP suggestion is interesting as well. Are there examples of games where this causes an 'unstoppable' problem that would be fixed by this?
Attack move units: Reparing Scvs #1 Priority. - Page 5
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
edahl
Norway483 Posts
On the other hand, the OP suggestion is interesting as well. Are there examples of games where this causes an 'unstoppable' problem that would be fixed by this? | ||
|
ejac
United States1195 Posts
On August 19 2010 19:44 edahl wrote: I kinda like the idea of not having attack priorities at all. Isn't this the way it was in BW? ? There are priorities in sc, although they're not nearly as prevalent. They also lead to some interesting bugs: This occurs due to priority bug in the sunken ai. Basically the pylon is in range of the sunken, but the cannon is a higher priority unit so the sunken wants to attack that instead. The glitch occurs when the sunken doesn't check if the higher priority unit is in range. Some more instances of priorities screwing up are workers on ramps/walling off. The units want to attack the ranged units behind them walloff/block, but are to dumb to kill the units in front of them to get there. | ||
|
MonkeyKungFu
Norway154 Posts
| ||
|
Osmoses
Sweden5302 Posts
| ||
|
MonkeyKungFu
Norway154 Posts
| ||
|
kidcrash
United States620 Posts
On August 19 2010 19:52 Osmoses wrote: Why is it that everyone started thinking autorepair was the problem? The problem isn't autorepair, any idiot can hotkey the scvs and right click the thor the second it takes damage, the problem is what to do when they're repairing. Auto repairing is actually a pretty big deal.. I mean ya any idiot can right click on a thor and tell his scvs to repair... but it's not really that simple. When the thor reaches max HP, your scvs stop repairing and you have to re-click. This becomes a big issue because if you tell them to start repairing too early (after only 5 of so HP is taken) they then finish and just sit there. So without auto repair, you have to time the repair so it doesn't start too early, but also doesn't start too late to save either. Edit: Not saying I'm against the mechanic.. just making a point that's it's actually a pretty huge mechanic | ||
|
Jameser
Sweden951 Posts
I say remove autorepair altogether and force some micro on terrans, only then can you be expected to individually target scvs... | ||
|
hoovehand
United Kingdom542 Posts
medivac high priority is stupid, it makes stalkers and hydra insanely vulnerable because they waste so much time firing at the non-threat units and therefore die before taking out any bio units. especially when the medivacs can be micro'd to the back after soaking a substantial amount of damage. | ||
|
Competent
United States406 Posts
| ||
|
RxN
United States255 Posts
| ||
|
pSeUd0
14 Posts
regarding the auto repair issue the problem is obvious and known - scvs autorepair thereby "walling off" the unit or structure they repair. this leads to to an asymetrical distribution of required actions by the players. this should not be the case in an "optimal" scenario. on the other hand if u give autorepairing scvs priority, the terran player could put an autorepairing scv in the back of his army and every attacking unit would try to run around the terran army to finish off this scv. therefor changing the priority is not a solution. (at least to the thor/scv/ling problem) a third alternative would be to remove prioritys at all like it was already sugested. On August 19 2010 13:52 Disarray wrote: I am alone in wishing units had no priority over what they would attack ? They should just attack the thing closest to them ? I cannot stand when i swarm 30 lings into a mineral line, Attack Move them, just to have them all leave to surround one dumb unit but removing all priority would probably lead to units behaving retarded. therefor some priority system is reasonable. for example any unit > any building > rest (e.g. warping-in units, zerg larva or mules). with this approach would be implementing global classes with different prioritys. target choosing within the class might be implemented with a a simple check on the distance to the next target of the actual calss that is prioritized. therefor units do not behave retarded and if a player wants his army to target the "jucy" stuff first, he has to work(micro) in order to do so. furthermore one might add simple modifiers that force units to prioritize entities within a class over others out of this calss if these units are able to attack (e.g. cannons over pylons, spinecrawlers over hatcheries and bunker over depots) Edit: i think the issue that stuff is done automaticly (autorepair etc) is to be differenciated from the issue what is targeted first by a-moving units. even without outorepair a terran player could tell his scvs to repair a thor and we are back to square one. to comment on this supposedly off topic issue: in my personal oppinion we have moved WAY to far into automated processes in sc2. some of these changes are ok for they apply to all races(e.g. automining). others are just a bad joke (e.g. autorepair or autoslow). but these are just my thoughts. | ||
|
kidcrash
United States620 Posts
On August 19 2010 21:21 pSeUd0 wrote: if there is a priority system, there are always complications. regarding the auto repair issue the problem is obvious and known - scvs autorepair thereby "walling off" the unit or structure they repair. this leads to to an asymetrical distribution of required actions by the players. this should not be the case in an "optimal" scenario. on the other hand if u give autorepairing scvs priority, the terran player could put an autorepairing scv in the back of his army and every attacking unit would try to run around the terran army to finish off this scv. therefor changing the priority is not a solution. (at least to the thor/scv/ling problem) a third alternative would be to remove prioritys at all like it was already sugested. but removing all priority would probably lead to units behaving retarded. therefor some priority system is reasonable. for example any unit > any building > rest (e.g. warping in units or zerg larva or mules). with this approach would be implementing global classes with different prioritys. target choosing within the class might be implemented with a a simple check on the distance to the next target of the actual calss that is prioritized. therefor units do not behave retarded and if a player wants his army to target the "jucy" stuff first, he has to work(micro) in order to do so. but thats just my thoughts. furthermore one might add simple modifiers that force units to prioritize entities within a class over others out of this calss if these units are able to attack (e.g. cannons over pylons, spinecrawlers over hatcheries and bunker over depots) Although that's a very elaborate and well thought out idea, the problem like you said is with any priorities system, something is always compromised. With no priority system units would just act retarded as you stated. I still think nerfing repairing scv to have diminishing returns for each additional scv is the most effective solution. I understand lore has no place in balance discussion but picture for a second mechanics working on a car. Would there not be diminishing returns on the speed at which the car was finished being repaired when you compared, lets say 1 mechanic, 3 mechanics, 5 mechanics and 10 mechanics repairing it? | ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On August 19 2010 13:35 JPSke wrote: An easier idea would probably be just to limit the amount of scvs who can repair a specific unit at any one time. Maybe three for a thor, six for a PF, etc. That gets rid of both the surround issue and the "thor + repairz = GodMode" occurrences. I'd rather just remove auto-repair then. On August 19 2010 19:44 edahl wrote: I kinda like the idea of not having attack priorities at all. Isn't this the way it was in BW? Changing mechanics like this because of the strategies people pick just seems like it might screw us over in the long run. On the other hand, the OP suggestion is interesting as well. Are there examples of games where this causes an 'unstoppable' problem that would be fixed by this? Compare probe+zealot vs zerglings in SC2 to SC1. | ||
|
pSeUd0
14 Posts
On August 19 2010 21:35 kidcrash wrote: Although that's a very elaborate and well thought out idea, the problem like you said is with any priorities system, something is always compromised. With no priority system units would just act retarded as you stated. we need to figure out the one solution that generates the smallest amount of problems and simultaneously distributes these problems equally to all races. its the only way i can think of a reasonable solution to this issue. there is no first best solution here | ||
|
ta2
125 Posts
| ||
|
HubertFelix
France631 Posts
On August 19 2010 20:43 Competent wrote: You want your 1a lings to 1a better so you don't have to micro? I don't get it... target fire the SCVs. Having to fight against the A.I. is a bad way to make a game harder. Look at the planetary fortress, it's ridiculous. | ||
|
Meff
Italy287 Posts
On August 19 2010 21:39 pSeUd0 wrote: we need to figure out the one solution that generates the smallest amount of problems and simultaneously distributes these problems equally to all races. its the only way i can think of a reasonable solution to this issue. there is no first best solution here There's actually a simpler way: make repairing SCVs have the same priority as the thing they are repairing. Priority switches based on actions already happen with workers (think of the difference in targeting between an attacking worker and a mining one), so that's nothing new. | ||
|
SkeweredFromEarToEye
Canada19 Posts
On August 19 2010 22:03 Meff wrote: There's actually a simpler way: make repairing SCVs have the same priority as the thing they are repairing. Priority switches based on actions already happen with workers (think of the difference in targeting between an attacking worker and a mining one), so that's nothing new. Perfect. | ||
|
kidcrash
United States620 Posts
On August 19 2010 22:03 Meff wrote: There's actually a simpler way: make repairing SCVs have the same priority as the thing they are repairing. Priority switches based on actions already happen with workers (think of the difference in targeting between an attacking worker and a mining one), so that's nothing new. I think that this might cause the AI to bug out though and I'll try to explain why through an example, although it may be hard because it's complicated. Let's use zerglings attacking a bunker for an example. The zerglings will always start attacking the bunker before the scvs because the bunker isn't damaged yet. So now one single SCV goes to repair the bunker. Do all of the lings attacking the bunker stop attacking it to kill one SCV? You'd probably have to program it so the ling closest to the scv attacked the scv and the rest kept attacking the bunker. Blizzard would have to draw a line between how close the zerglings would have be to the repairing scvs before it chose to attack it (the scv), unless you want all your zerglings to stop attacking the main target over 1 single repairing scv. Remember when the zerglings enter the battleground, it is assumed nothing is damaged beforehand, therefore the #1 priority will always technically be the attacking unit/structure over the scvs. The AI will then have to make a decision as to which zerglings should attack the repairing scvs or which lings should target the attacking unit instead, unless you want all your zerglings to attack even just single scv. This could probably all be bypassed if units could just mind-read which scvs were on auto repair and which ones weren't, although this would be slightly controversial. Scvs repairing walls would also be another situation where there would be AI issues as well. Edit: In the end I believe if Blizzard wanted to they could probably program it correctly, and I do believe this is the best method, the question is are they willing to do it? | ||
|
eLFootman
Chile58 Posts
| ||
| ||
