EPTSo yeah... I think it's Blizzard's responsibility to do something in that regard by rethinking their map pool and changing from showing off their cool new features(gold expos, watch towers, rocks/debris, etc.) to something that allows for longer, more macro oriented games(longer distances, no rocks, no gold expos, adding some map features that become very interesting in the late game, etc.)
Blizzard and the All-In - Page 5
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Mooncat
Germany1228 Posts
So yeah... I think it's Blizzard's responsibility to do something in that regard by rethinking their map pool and changing from showing off their cool new features(gold expos, watch towers, rocks/debris, etc.) to something that allows for longer, more macro oriented games(longer distances, no rocks, no gold expos, adding some map features that become very interesting in the late game, etc.) | ||
|
Foooky
Australia205 Posts
On December 11 2010 08:47 Chronoboosted wrote: What was this guy warned for? I think he does bring up a good point about mule nerfing. As we've seen several times in the GSL, a terran player can drop a mule and send all of his SCVs with a few marines to the opponent's base while still getting decent income. Its obvious that it doesnt contribute to the topic whatsoever. The thread is about whether should 1-2 base play become dominant, whether changes from blizzard would be substantiated. As to what changes are necessary is a topic of balance which is NOT the theme of this thread. | ||
|
StarStruck
25339 Posts
There is a lot more emphasis with timing attacks because of macro mechanics in the game and you could also make an argument for unit specialization & hard counters as well. The map pool is another deterrent. In the end, give it more time. | ||
|
hellsan631
United States695 Posts
It will always be advantages to take an expansion. Players of equal ability, if they both 2 base, and 1 takes a 3rd, the one who takes the expo will win (given the game lasts long enough). The better people get at unit control, the easier it is to stretch that extra 400 minerals out of units to take an expansion. | ||
|
R0YAL
United States1768 Posts
There are some things that I think are questionable from a design perspective. Mules are very powerful because they can both mine minerals extremely fast and stack with SCVs on a mineral patch. This is however not a problem rather than more of a pro of the Terran race. What is a problem is that Terrans can all-in with SCVs early game and still retain a steady (enough) income with mules. Furthermore, when a Terran forgets to mule there is no punishment since you can drop as many mules at a time as you have energy for. I for one think mules need to be tweaked a bit so that they either have: 1) An increased duration but still only mine the same amount of minerals -and/or- 2) Get rid of the mule energy cost and replace it with a cooldown The problem with #2 is that it would require the OC to be redesigned because you no longer have to spend energy on mules which would give you extra scans and supply call-downs. The only real way to make it viable would be to get rid of the energy entirely and make all 3 abilities share a global cooldown. I am also not fond of the relation between Gateways and Warpgates. No one ever settles for Gateways because it requires almost no investment to get Warpgates and they are vastly better. If they moved Warpgate tech to the Twilight Council I think that would be much better from a design perspective as well as making all-ins less strong but still viable. This is only speculation however, I could very well be mistaken. User was warned for this post | ||
|
HalfAmazing
Netherlands402 Posts
On December 11 2010 08:09 JTouche wrote: In my opinion All-In Strategies are not going to warrant any rebalancing for the game. All In's are frustrating, but if you react appropriately you can hold it off. There's no All In that is undefeatable. All In's are a legitimate strategy. With a little bit of scouting and experience you will overcome the dreaded All-In. No offense dude but this is some Bronze-level wisdom.  | ||
|
MorroW
Sweden3522 Posts
as players get better and refine their solid builds to defend vs all cheese early game u will start think they should buff 1basing  just wait and seeit really just comes down to mindgames caliber of players and which maps they play on. if u get metalopolis cross pos between 2 very high level players the odds of allin working is very low while if u have 2 avarage diamond players on steppes of war its pretty unlikely they wont expand... | ||
|
taintmachine
United States431 Posts
also i really hope GSL4 does not use a random map pool for each series. i think gomtv's choice to remove map veto in S3 led to some bad matches/series and might have hurt the community's view of the game. the veto system will help to at least let players remove the maps that make certain matchups look simply abusive to viewers (hello steppes). i have kind of lost hope in blizzard either improving its own map pool or seeking content from the community. | ||
|
HarmoniCa
Sweden33 Posts
Terrans so ask why and foucs on that race mechanis maybe? Really it all comes down to the mule bec of the extra money it gives you so fast. You can afford loosing your scvs in the all in and still have more minerals then your opponent in worst case. Why not use this as terran? A good player always looking for a advatange. Its a mechanic problem really the problem is mule gives that extra mineral boost so early if it was later in game like at150energy it would make no sense to all in. Blizz shud try to balance out the timing of when the ''mineral boost'' kicks in for each race. Dealy the mule i would say to get rid of all ins. User was warned for this post | ||
|
HiHiByeBye
Canada365 Posts
Unlike Broodwar Zerg - 6 pool, 3 hatch hydra, 3 hatch ling Thats about it. Terran - 8 rax, 2 fac, hmm Protoss - 4 gate, 2 gate proxy, 2 gate zealot, | ||
|
BattleSheen
United States58 Posts
that being said, the players who rely on all ins may be lame (rain vs nestea) but honestly nestea didn't deal with it properly. i'm sure he will have learned his lesson for GSL 4, and so will everyone else in time. | ||
|
k20
United States342 Posts
On December 11 2010 09:34 HalfAmazing wrote: No offense dude but this is some Bronze-level wisdom. Explain | ||
|
HiHiByeBye
Canada365 Posts
On December 11 2010 09:43 HarmoniCa wrote: Who do you see doing all ins? Terrans so ask why and foucs on that race mechanis maybe? Really it all comes down to the mule bec of the extra money it gives you so fast. You can afford loosing your scvs in the all in and still have more minerals then your opponent in worst case. Why not use this as terran? A good player always looking for a advatange. Its a mechanic problem really the problem is mule gives that extra mineral boost so early if it was later in game like at150energy it would make no sense to all in. Blizz shud try to balance out the timing of when the ''mineral boost'' kicks in for each race. Dealy the mule i would say to get rid of all ins. if blizzard delay the mule, they should reduce chrono boost time and decrease the # of larve being injected... Or else terran will get outmacroed harder by zerg and cannot hold off protoss rushes | ||
|
MrMotionPicture
United States4327 Posts
| ||
|
R0YAL
United States1768 Posts
On December 11 2010 09:53 MrMotionPicture wrote: I think if the maps were larger, like other people stated, there would be less all-in builds. And I also think the game will evolve and all-ins will not be as common. Just takes time. I believe Blizzard's intentions are to have a large variety of maps that would require diverse players to be the most successful. The reason they like small maps is that it promotes aggression which is more fun to watch for a spectator. This is especially true for people who don't particularly know whats going on. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15714 Posts
| ||
|
Andre112
Canada52 Posts
I don't like the fact that all-in failed or retreated, and they can just go back and tutrle up, while i can't do anything even tho I'm ahead. I'm a zerg player. | ||
|
Pulimuli
Sweden2766 Posts
On December 11 2010 09:43 HarmoniCa wrote: Who do you see doing all ins? Terrans so ask why and foucs on that race mechanis maybe? Really it all comes down to the mule bec of the extra money it gives you so fast. You can afford loosing your scvs in the all in and still have more minerals then your opponent in worst case. Why not use this as terran? A good player always looking for a advatange. Its a mechanic problem really the problem is mule gives that extra mineral boost so early if it was later in game like at150energy it would make no sense to all in. Blizz shud try to balance out the timing of when the ''mineral boost'' kicks in for each race. Dealy the mule i would say to get rid of all ins. User was warned for this post delay the mule so terrans get raped harder by protoss all-in? wow seriously gtfo and no, its not only terrans who do all-ins, i rarely ever do it and most players ive met who does 1base all-in'ish styles are protoss | ||
|
lowercase
Canada1047 Posts
| ||
|
da_head
Canada3350 Posts
| ||
| ||
