EPTThe Actual Issues Affecting Gameplay - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Tazza
Korea (South)1678 Posts
| ||
|
eLFootman
Chile58 Posts
On September 02 2010 04:46 Jermstuddog wrote: OP hit all the nails straight on the head with every issue. Creep Tech Labs Marauders 1-sided Micro Abilities Maps add a minor tweak on high ground mechanic, and the game would get much more interesting... | ||
|
arsenic
United States163 Posts
On September 02 2010 01:02 OHtRUe wrote: Creep Mechanic It permits the supposed "aggressive" race to be completely defensive. It's a mechanic that is a handicap instead of bonus and makes the race who's strengths are supposed to be it's mobility be completely immobile. I think the word you want is "forces" not "permits" which is what Saracen had issue with. And yes, the creep mechanic is in need of help whether they just get rid of it entirely or make it a debuff for enemies would be fine. It's like they balanced the Terran and Protoss unit move speeds around having creep around the entire map but didn't realize that the Zerg would never have creep over the entire map. On September 02 2010 01:02 OHtRUe wrote: The Versatility of the Tech Lab When Terran can tech switch from reapers into marauders INSTANTLY with no punishing factor it is terrible game design. Terran can tech switch instantly with nothing that punishes them from doing it. Being able to switch army compositions quickly is fine. All races can do that and it is necessary for the "build the counter" part of the game. What's not okay is just how it opens up both Marauder and Reaper which means that even if you scout the Tech Lab, you still don't know what he's going to build and how you should respond. That... and Reapers are just a fundamentally flawed unit in design (they move way too fast for a cliff walker and do too much damage to buildings) which leads to abuse that an additional 5 ingame seconds on building won't fix. On September 02 2010 01:02 OHtRUe wrote:The Maps The maps are too small and too narrow which is what Starcraft plays terribly on.However they continue to implement wide open naturals which pretty much kills early economic builds forcing more and more 1 base play. Maps... just need work. Too small, too narrow, naturals too exposed or they have a high ground right next to it. But Zerg units need to move faster off of creep too or else larger maps won't mean very much. | ||
|
Azile
United States339 Posts
Completely agree with your thoughts on creep, it forces defensive play and as you said to be agressive you either have to make the units that don't rely on creep (muta/ling), be very significantly ahead of your opponent, or wait till the whole map is creeped.. which won't happen vs any decent player considering all you need is detection and 30 seconds to ruin what the zerg player has spent the whole game building up. I don't agree with your thoughts on tech labs. I don't think the issue lies with how easy it is to switch from unit to unit, I think it lies in how hard these units steamroll early game zerg. Instantly switching to marauders wouldn't be a big deal if marauders didn't steamroll buildings, roaches, and stalkers so easily with concussive leaving no chance of micro. Leave the cost and build time of tech lab as is, however..... ..it wouldn't be a big deal if there was an additional building required for some units (banshees come to mind..) I don't care if it costs 10 minerals, 10 gas, and 10 seconds to build.. there needs to be something more for a scouting player to see that gives a clue as to what units are coming because right now you're basically playing blind until you see actual production heading your way. It's not about making terran have to spend more to get what he wants, it's about there being bigger cues to the opponent to know what's coming. Right now they can open with 1/1/1 and you could be looking at damn near any viable strategy in the world heading your way. You scan my spire you know exactly what's coming. Also, /facepalm @ the guy who said tanks need to be stronger. | ||
|
Smurfz
United States327 Posts
Above all else, I HATE the way Psi Storm works right now. Instead of a few, powerful storms that you need to try to dodge, they just blanket your whole army and it's not really worth it to try to dodge it (the exception is in this korean replay I saw where he used burrow on roaches w/ tunneling claws whenever a storm was on them, which almost negates the Psi Storm). | ||
|
thesmoosh
113 Posts
In late game it makes it so making an additional rax to increase marauder production takes twice as long. Tech labs are not the problem. People should just wait and see how the planned patch turns out. I think with the siege tank nerf and the changes to zealot/reaper training time people are going to be much more satisfied with the state of the game. I don't think you guys realize how huge an impact small changes like those have on the metagame. | ||
|
drlame
Sweden574 Posts
On September 02 2010 02:45 Zoroth wrote: Uhm, I think the OP needs to revisit a number of these things and try actually seeing things in action, because the way you present these things makes it look like you haven't done any of that at all. Your theories are full of holes and you're trying to find issues that don't exist. Have you discussed these things with pro players and tried to figure out why Blizzard have these things implemented? Cause most of this has already been addressed. Just a little hint - things aren't necessarily always as they immediately seem. There might be a little deeper thought behind Blizzard's decisions than what you seem to assume. The Art of War is a great book to read, I recommend it to anyone regardless. It's even a suitable book for skimming, so you don't need to read it word-by-word. Probably the most useless post in this thread, I could basically copy/paste your post and post it just about any thread on teamliquid. What holes in his theories? What things aren't necessarily as they immediately seem? What does the art of war have to do with anything he wrote? Please, gtfo troll. I have to agree that the creep mechanic is a hindrance to the mobility of the zerg, as have already been said Hydras are useless of creep. Imagine the stalker move as slow as the hydra when not on psionic matrix. I also have to agree with your thoughts on the tech lab, they should definitely try to bring back the academy to make the terran have to devote more minerals when going bio. Imo, it's too easy for the terran to start with early bioball pushes to transition into tank/marine play without any type of punishment. | ||
|
drlame
Sweden574 Posts
| ||
|
Jyvblamo
Canada13788 Posts
| ||
|
Sorrowbane
Canada26 Posts
On September 02 2010 01:02 OHtRUe wrote: Creep Mechanic The number one flaw of the game as it butchers Zerg completely. It permits the supposed "aggressive" race to be completely defensive. It's a mechanic that is a handicap instead of bonus and makes the race who's strengths are supposed to be it's mobility be completely immobile. [...] The real only fix to this is to keep creep, but instead of mobility bonus it should be HP Regen. This is because it promotes aggressive play and makes creep a place to fall back to after an attack instead of a mandatory TO attack. On creep speed is now the same as off creep speed (can be adjusted for certain units) It already was an HP regen bonus in BW and that didn't really add anything to the game. For the Zerg maybe, but certainly not for their opponent. Creep add an extra element to fight over and Zerg units move insanely fast on it which gives them a *clear* advantage. It is a "fun" and "balanced" mechanic which emphasizes Zerg being dominant on their own ground, that's as good as it can get. The Versatility of the Tech Lab This is what is breaking Terran right now. For 50 minerals 25 gas and 25 seconds Terran opens EVERY SINGLE UNIT out of a production building instead of incredibly niche units. This makes it so it's impossible to accurately scout or predict what Terran is doing and makes it impossible to punish Terran as they can just tech switch anyway. When Terran can tech switch from reapers into marauders INSTANTLY with no punishing factor it is terrible game design. When you can go from a banshee into any air unit you want INSTANTLY with no punishing factor its terrible game design. Terran can tech switch instantly with nothing that punishes them from doing it. This is why TvZ is broken in the early game. The fix to this is to increase tech lab build time to 35 seconds and increase the cost to 50/50 AND bring back the academy to open up reaper tech tree and certain infantry upgrades. This makes Terran have to go a distinct tech tree for bio and makes it easier to have a strategy ready to combat it. I also would enjoy Banshee's cloak being a fusion core upgrade, but thats overkill~ I can't see how that is such a big issue considering Terran is the only race that has to cut their military unit production to access tech, on literally every building. Sure it gives them a slight edge early game but its nothing experience/scouting can't help you see. Then when you head into mid/late game and take a look at Zerg's retarded tech swapping ability or toss' ability to instantly create just the right mix of units they need, everything seems rather balanced. Please don't make giant assumptions either like "this is why TvZ is broken in the early game", the only "broken" part of TvZ early game is the strenght of early Reapers. Terran is just no longer the predictable slug with no map control they were early game in BW. The Power of the Marauder Honestly I think the marauders are an awesome unit and amazing to play with (terran main) but i can admit that they are overpowered in the early game and in certain aspects. First off marauders give free map control for the whole early game and forces protoss to go tier 2 instantly which eliminates FE play for Toss while letting Terran doing anything they want. The second problem is there upgrades which makes marauders into super heroes. Concussive shells disallows any micro from the opponent and punishes skirmishes and harassment. Stim and marauders is just ridiculous in how fast marauders can kill anything armored, how fast they become (lol synergy), and how little drawbacks are there from using it. I'm not gonna even get into marauder drops which are completely stupid (again im a terran main) I agree with Marauders being very powerful but to a certain extent they need to be. I would cut their damage VS armored to 15-16ish, increase stim cost to 30 and call it a day. I also have no idea why anything that eliminates FE play is necessarily a "bad" thing. You speak of punishment, its not because toss and zerg have spent 12 years grabbing free expos without Terran being able to do anything that it should be a given in SC2. Battle Dynamics Dynamics. It’s what makes Brood War tick. Even though the number of viable units in each match up is relatively small (you likely would see the exact same units every game), the amount of outcomes is enormous. The way each unit interacts on the battlefield, the way each player must exploit these units to their fullest potential gives Brood War its immense depth and longevity. It’s not something just anyone can master. It requires smart thinking and quick and accurate hands, everything we admire in a progamer. But it takes the hands of a god to play this game to perfection, and a battle between gods is so damn beautiful to watch. I have read your entire post about this and I didn't really understand anything else than long nostalgic talks about how BW used to be awesome. SC2 is everything BW was with less APM/multitask required to compete (which, depending how how you look at it, is either a bad or good thing. For every player who don't want to or can't get 400 APM, this should be a good thing). Still, I will attempt to argue your points. Personal note : I respect strategy and good decision-making alot more than I respect fast hands. Back in Brood War, you had a nice counter interaction between clearly overpowered spells – irradiate and dark swarm, EMP, stasis field, and recall, psionic storm and, well, storm dodging and mutalisk sniping. Fast forward to SC2 and the emergence of autocasting, and the dynamics and unit potential are changed entirely. How did any of this change ? With pretty much every caster and spell being easily acessible and viable, it creates even more potential. None of what you just quoted is gone and if anything, this part of the metagame has been vastly improved (exit the too costly or useless casters.) First, many spell interactions are no longer possible. Storm dodging is a thing of the past, as a pack of templar can deplete their energy in rapid succession faster than enemy units are physically able to move out of the damage radius. Spells like fungal growth suffer a similar fate. And then there are the new spells. Force field is a prime example of a spell that shuts down dynamics instead of promoting them, because, aside from a high-tech massive unit ramming into them, there is literally no way for an opponent to micro against force field. The success or failure of the battle, then (especially in the early and mid game), depends solely on a single player, and how well he places his force fields, while the other player can only sit back and watch. Compare this to even a terribly underused spell like disruption web, which forced more micro from the opponent, as well as created a positional advantage, and the difference between the two games is clear. And, with spells so much easier to handle, it’s blatantly obvious that a nerf is needed. But with the nerf to spells comes a terrible price – a single spell caster’s unit potential is decreased considerably. I agree with the storm-spam being rather ridiculous but it is in no way imbalanced or bad. Ghosts VS High Templar/Sentries is a fine metagame right now and you quote spells like Disruption Web forcing positional adjustement and micro yet at the same time bash Force Field which is everything that was exciting about Statis Field (how it could block chokes or create obstacles) with the advantage of being so much more accessible. All the AOE spells, Fungal Growth, Storm, etc., they are a little bit too spammy for my taste but they definitely make army formation an issue to think about. Again, +1 to strategy and metagame. I don't understand any of your points and why they make this bad for the game. Again, look at high templar. No amount of SC2 high templar will ever be able to match the devastation and havoc Jangbi's few could wreak on a tank line. No amount of infestors will change the a game as much as GGplay's defilers did versus Iris. And with the dumbing-down of spell casters, we lose one more important thing: key timing windows. Remember in TvZ when all the Zerg had to do was hold out until a single ability finished before he could turn the entire game around? Remember how nail-bitingly exciting it was to watch those old Savior games where he would stall and stall until the very last second? Or the hydra bust that comes right before storm finishes? Or the siege mode and mines that come out just in time to stop the early Protoss aggression? Such hit-or-miss precision, such tense anticipation is no more. This is where I really felt like you were just remembering the "good old days" and seemed to expect SC2 to deliver you the same experience instantly. This reminds me of WoW vanilla raiders saying BC raiding is dumb and Vanilla was the shit, then WOTLK raiders saying BC raiding was the best and WOTLK sucks, and then the next generation in Cataclysm which is going to say WOTLK ruled and Cataclysm is garbage. Quoting all of the intense SC1 moments that happened after years of the game being there and then saying SC2 just isn't the same doesn't seem very relevant to me and is a very common syndrome. Nostalgia doesn't make a game better or worst. A similar phenomenon exists with the reduction of splash damage. We have gone from the lurker to the baneling, from the corsair to the phoenix, from the reaver to the immortal and colossus, from the spider mine to the, well, nothing, and from the archon to the pitiful ball of a unit that goes by the same name. In Brood War, splash damage was a double edged sword. It forced micro from both you and your opponent (manually targeting to maximize damage versus splitting your army to minimize damage), but it also exponentially grew in power, such that a critical mass was with ranged splash units existed at surprisingly small numbers. The point? Splashing units in small numbers are great in that they encourage battle dynamics, but a large number of splashing units is hard to balance. So, with SC2, the units lose much of their splashing ability and effectiveness to compensate for easier control and smart AI. And even then, you can still see the tremendous power of splash units en masse. Just take a look at all the “Terran mech imba” threads that clutter the strategy forum. For balance’s sake, there’s no way you could argue against Blizzard’s decision of watering down splash damage. But with that decision, you will no longer bet on how many kills a reaver harass will net, or watch one of the most brilliant timing attacks in Starcraft history. From the Spider Mine to the Helion ? I think the loss of Spider Mines kinda sucked but Helion micro is definitely there and there is potential to it. I also agree the loss of lurkers to ground Scourges hurt the game a little bit but again you have baneling targeting and flanking + desirability of using them on creep to keep it interesting. Again, im trying to understand what justifies your points here. Terran doesn't have Psionic Storm or Fungal Growth so they make it up by having mech units who splash. Where's the issue ? What has changed about Archons anyway ? In BW they took max damage from every unit, in SC2 "on the fly" merging has been vastly improved, they do bonus damage to bio/zerg and have no armor weakness and they're a pathetic ball of a unit ? lolwut ? The Maps The overarching flaw in the game. When you're playing the game you would think the thing you play on would be balanced and well designed, well Blizzard disagrees with you. The maps are too small and too narrow which is what Starcraft plays terribly on. Blizzard also seems to avoid having alternate routes to the enemy, all though ive got to give credit as they finally implemented more ways to flank on Delta Quadrant and Xel Naga Caverns. However they continue to implement wide open naturals which pretty much kills early economic builds forcing more and more 1 base play. Pretty much there really really bad and the community can't do anything about it because blizzard implemented the worst custom game and map making system possible.. Agree and disagree with you on this. I think some maps could use a bit of help as far as where central combat can take place but usually maps with a bland center have variable xel'naga tower/expanding mechanics to keep it interesting. The only thing that is narrow is generally the side-routes to some expos but if you make an expo there it has to be a strategic decision, not just "oh moar minerals ima make a nexus there". The flanking options are plenty and the only race that really benefits from chokes is Terran. The only one that overly suffers from it is Zerg. Either intercept T before they get there, don't engage them there or don't expo over there at all. +1 to decision making and strategy, again, explain to me how that is a bad thing. I'm not even going to go into why you seem to think 1 base play is bad and early economic builds are good. I'm pretty sure the whole TL community would agree micro is cool and "fun". There's nothing exciting about macro. It may be impressive, it may be done better by some players than others, but there is nothing to it. How much cash you got/how fast you build units/how many production buildings you have isn't very exciting compared to epic 1 base combats where each player is trying to gain an edge in small squad combat until ressources are almost dry. I have no idea why you defend fast expand play so much, they are what dumbed down the game and put players like Boxer in retirement. At least greediness is punishable by other stuff than more greediness, and I hope for the sake of the game that it never changes. The community has handled BW rather well but Blizzard is definitely determined to keep things in their own hands in SC2 which IMO is how it should be. Rest assured that they often make their design decisions based on the advice of players who have mastered the game. | ||
|
spacemaggot
United States11 Posts
It already was an HP regen bonus in BW stopped reading here and that didn't really add anything to the game. For the Zerg maybe, but certainly not for their opponent. Creep add an extra element to fight over and Zerg units move insanely fast on it which gives them a *clear* advantage. It is a "fun" and "balanced" mechanic which emphasizes Zerg being dominant on their own ground, that's as good as it can get. ... blah blah blah... newb babbling ... lol. you played world of warcraft and think u know anything about bw or rts? its funny that u think zerg gets HP regen bonus bceause they dont. sad. PLAY BROODWAR BEFORE SPEAK. | ||
|
Sorrowbane
Canada26 Posts
owaitlul | ||
|
Infowarrior
United States9 Posts
On September 02 2010 02:54 JinDesu wrote: Good. Then make the tech lab match my cybernetics core costs. Cost to build 3 Marauders simultaneously = 600 Min 75 gas (3 rax @ 150m, 3 TL @ 50min 25gas/ea) Cost to build 3 Stalkers simultaneously = 600 Min (3 Gate @ 150min/ea , 1 Cyber Core @ 150min) Cost to build 3 Roaches simultaneously = 150 min (1 Roach Warren @ 150min) | ||
|
spacemaggot
United States11 Posts
- I think the academy building should be added to game, and be required for techlab/reactor. - think zerg speeds should be increased, but remove speed increase over creep. its stupid+promotes turtle. Queen should move faster on creep though. - remove maurader slow. It doesnt fit in with starcraft - nerf warpgate. It respawns energy too fast. Should be same time as gateway to build units. (i play protoss btw). This would force pvp at start to not tech to warpgate at start, because there would be no advantage of building units any faster, thus no stupid warpgate rushes) - put back reaver, but not have it require robotoics support bay. Robotics support bay costs WAY too much (or lower cost of support bay) - increase immortal range, 5 is pathetic. - remove dark shrine and put dark templar tech in templar archives.. like in bw. - nerf collososus, and buff zealots - remove the zealots "charge ability", and instead just make zealot speed upgrade, like in bw. | ||
|
arsenic
United States163 Posts
On September 02 2010 07:37 Infowarrior wrote: Cost to build 3 Marauders simultaneously = 600 Min 75 gas (3 rax @ 150m, 3 TL @ 50min 25gas/ea) Cost to build 3 Stalkers simultaneously = 600 Min (3 Gate @ 150min/ea , 1 Cyber Core @ 150min) Cost to build 3 Roaches simultaneously = 150 min (1 Roach Warren @ 150min) You really can't compare them like that. You have to allocate the sunk costs over each unit that is produced from the building. It's not like you have to pay for a new Barracks and Tech Lab for each Marauder you want to make. | ||
|
john92
United States40 Posts
On September 02 2010 07:40 spacemaggot wrote: I mostly agree with few people here. - I think the academy building should be added to game, and be required for techlab/reactor. - think zerg speeds should be increased, but remove speed increase over creep. its stupid+promotes turtle. Queen should move faster on creep though. - remove maurader slow. It doesnt fit in with starcraft - nerf warpgate. It respawns energy too fast. Should be same time as gateway to build units. (i play protoss btw). This would force pvp at start to not tech to warpgate at start, because there would be no advantage of building units any faster, thus no stupid warpgate rushes) - put back reaver, but not have it require robotoics support bay. Robotics support bay costs WAY too much (or lower cost of support bay) - increase immortal range, 5 is pathetic. - remove dark shrine and put dark templar tech in templar archives.. like in bw. - nerf collososus, and buff zealots - remove the zealots "charge ability", and instead just make zealot speed upgrade, like in bw. Nerfing Warpgate would possibly mess up PvT and maybe PvZ. But I agree that academy building should be added and the dark shrine was originally added because Blizzard wanted player to easily to identify if the protoss is teching up to DT but I think its better to merge dark shrine and templar archive together. | ||
|
Nemesis
Canada2568 Posts
On September 02 2010 07:31 spacemaggot wrote: Sorrowbane, lol. you played world of warcraft and think u know anything about bw or rts? its funny that u think zerg gets HP regen bonus bceause they dont. sad. PLAY BROODWAR BEFORE SPEAK. This is exactly why I avoid posting on the sc2 forums-.- Seriously, play broodwar first before you try and talk about it. Because all of the things you said are wrong. Zerg does not get an HP regen bonus in BW, and the rest of your post is pretty much utter bs(blah blah blah, this is sc2 not bw is all I read which is not a good reason to disagree with OP). Edit:To OP, Indeed, this covers most of the problem with sc2 gameplay right now. Although, I don't really think that tech lab is imba as Terran has to get tech lab on each of their buildings but the rest of the points are pretty good. | ||
|
Sorrowbane
Canada26 Posts
While we're into freshmen psychology, maybe you're insecure because someone disagrees with what you think is right ? My gosh, if that's true, MAYBE you use "game imbalance" and "game problems" as an excuse for your inability to become a better player O= But you don't see me accuse you of any of that. The game is fun. It is mostly balanced. If you have a beef with the core mechanics of the game itself and pretend you can be the judge of it, you better have solid arguments because the folk behind the actual game have more credit at game design than you ever will. Get rid of the personal bashing and present some arguments if you disagree. | ||
|
Wr3k
Canada2533 Posts
| ||
|
BeMannerDuPenner
Germany5638 Posts
| ||
| ||
