EPTTrue, but there is truth in the OP, that sc2 has been dumbed down to be attractive to all ranges of players, from the newb to the pro. Essentially making it less complicated and more one dimensional.
[D] What SC2 is missing? - Page 23
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
noobcakes
United States526 Posts
True, but there is truth in the OP, that sc2 has been dumbed down to be attractive to all ranges of players, from the newb to the pro. Essentially making it less complicated and more one dimensional. | ||
|
Manimal_pro
Romania991 Posts
Clearly this is not beneficial to the absolute top players because it's harder to see who is actually better at the game mechanics-wise | ||
|
karpo
Sweden1998 Posts
It would be pretty smart as it would be easy for RTS noobs to get into SC2, yet with time it could develop into something more similar to BW. Whaddaya think? I personally hope to see more units with potential, i already love the game but there's always room for improvement. | ||
|
malaan
365 Posts
My input: Multiplyers? Well, Reactors, larvae inject, and warp gates tech. The reason games are over once one significant battle takes place is because it's simply too easy to mass up and roll over your opponent. Cheese is also super effective because you can mass a ton of units from one base.. 1 base 4 gate all in is super strong, 1base mass speedling is super strong, 1base mass marine is ridiculously strong in tvp. Because you can just macro up an army so quickly, the importance of preserving your units is meaningless. The mirror matchups are just rock paper scissors unless someone cheeses. Protoss vs protoss is boring to play because every unit hard counters every other unit. It's 99% luck and positioning that wins you the game. | ||
|
zeru
8156 Posts
| ||
|
Zerebreat
Germany32 Posts
On April 16 2011 22:45 Callous wrote: Has anyone here played SC2BW [...] I just played around a bit on that map and actually noticed something I'm really missing and actually turns the having-to-battle-the-UI argument the other way. Pressing s+X and instantly morphing all larvae to eggs instead of having to hold the button down for multiple seconds feels great. | ||
|
niteReloaded
Croatia5281 Posts
"Hey, let's have 2 sequels to SC2 and add units to each sequel. We'll leave some default units out on purpose, just so we can add them back later". | ||
|
Kid-Fox
Canada400 Posts
| ||
|
Archvil3
Denmark989 Posts
Your first point being the micro I mostly disagree with, making it harder just for the sake of making it harder is terrible and a big step backwards. I think that a better approach to it is to make it as simple and smart as possible but to compensate expand the possibilites and reward the better choises in combat. At this point I think a lot has been compensated already by the higher pace, creating a new level of intensity. What I would like to see though is more choise in battles to which I think is SC2's greater weakness(as it was pointed out by OP as well). The combination of multiple choises and the high pace is a new level of skill that puts a lot more pressure on the moment rather then on the build-up as described in OP. I think that is the direction the game is taking and no amount of BW fans is ever going to change that. Where I fully agree with OP is the anti-micro abilities force-fields and fungal growth. I think they are terrible for the game, a terrible design and I pray to the starcraft gods that Blizzard will reconsider these abilities for the upcomming expansion. I also agree that stronger positional play will make the game more interesting, and I think there is a lot that would agree with me as well. I think that TvT is the most interesting matchup and people who agree on this also understand how positional play is extremely exiting and one of the most interesting aspects of the game. I will join the crowd of SC2 fans that wishes for a lurker comeback in Heart of the Swarm and in general I hope that HoTS will bring in some of the qualities of BW while they ignore the "lets make it harder like BW, just for the sake of making it harder" | ||
|
Jyxz
United States117 Posts
Auto surround: There was absolutely no reason to add this to the game, all it does it really mess with the balance of the game and detract from the skill of unit control, but one of the worst part is it allows zealots and zerglings to get hits on workers that in SC1 would never happen. It used to be a huge test of micro to deny scouting with lings or to do damage to a worker line with zealots. What this effectively does is make melee units almost like range units... it would almost be as silly as making tons of low tier units have ridiculous long ranges... remember in SC1 how dragoons had insane range dominance and were an essential part of any army... imagine in SC2 if they made tons of units start with 5 range or even 6, with even units that are suppose to but pseudo melee like huntresses in warcraft 3 have range of 4... Oh. shit. I think this was a response to the 3D engine but I can't be sure... I just don't understand how everything had roughly 4 range or less with an expensive upgrade to make units have 5 range and now in SC2 everything has seemingly insane ranges, except for defensive structures which I think is pretty bad for the game also... | ||
|
Velocity`
United Kingdom343 Posts
On April 16 2011 22:48 suejak wrote: You do understand that SC2 has already succeeded? Maybe on paper it has, but in terms of BW fans watching the games, and battles specifically, there is definitely something missing which is exactly what made BW so great and feels almost like a let-down for SC2. I'm not saying SC2 is bad, but it just feels as if something is missing, which I think is the main point of the OP in the first place. | ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
 . Just my opinion though.I like watching bw and sc2. sc2 a bit more, as bw games are often looking the same(they still might be awesome, but not awesome awesome just standard awesome), so i just watch recommended bw games ^^. For playing i still play both games, but i prefer sc2 i love microing units and in bw i have to reproduce units and don't really see alot of the fight. In sc2 i can reproduce units while watching the fight controling units always when there is need. (move the marauders in the front that are focused by the colossi so the next colossi shot only hits one unit etc, moving the next in front already after the stalker shot wave, so the next colossi shots will waste the next round etc) | ||
|
IAmSpooner
Sweden111 Posts
On April 16 2011 23:23 Jyxz wrote: Auto surround: There was absolutely no reason to add this to the game, all it does it really mess with the balance of the game and detract from the skill of unit control, but one of the worst part is it allows zealots and zerglings to get hits on workers that in SC1 would never happen. It used to be a huge test of micro to deny scouting with lings or to do damage to a worker line with zealots. Are you suggesting that melee units need to be weaker? Is that the problem in Starcraft 2? Even if you don't like automatic surround I don't see how you can accept units automatically bunching while maintaining that position. | ||
|
eviltomahawk
United States11135 Posts
On April 16 2011 23:15 niteReloaded wrote: I'm 99% sure lurkers are coming back anyway in Heart of Swarm. And it was probably intended that way from the moment they decided: "Hey, let's have 2 sequels to SC2 and add units to each sequel. We'll leave some default units out on purpose, just so we can add them back later". I really doubt it. In several interviews, Dustin Browder gave some decent reasons why they removed the Lurker in the first place. On one hand, burrowed Roaches and Banelings overlapped with the role of the Lurker, at least during the mid-game (according the Browder). Coupled with the fact that Hydras are now Lair tech, Lurker tech was moved up the tech tree into Hive tech. Because of the unit clumping syndrome, the Lurker had to be nerfed. To differentiate its splash-damage role from that of the Baneling, the Lurker's range was slightly increased and it was made into somewhat of a siege unit. In the end, Browder said that the Lurker became too different from its BW rendition, yet it was still being underused in testing due to its place so high up the tech tree while Banelings became a more viable alternative. Consequently, I don't think the inclusion of Blizzard's rendition of this kind of Lurker would be helpful to the game considering that it seems that it would end up like the Ultralisk after being so expensive, high tech, and nerfed from its BW form. As Hive tech, the Lurker no longer could be a mid-game map-control unit forcing detection. Without accompanying Dark Swarm, it would be hard for it to survive in the late game with detection, tanks, and Colossi out on the field by that time. Perhaps Blizzard might implement one or more units filling the Lurker's role in creating a map-control dynamic and forcing detection as a mid-game cloaked attacker. However, I really doubt the Lurker itself will return, at least in multiplayer. | ||
|
mordek
United States12704 Posts
On April 16 2011 10:07 SnuggleZhenya wrote: The other big one I think is map control, as you brought up. If anyone has a premium NASL subscription and hasn't seen Nada v. DDE from last night, GO WATCH IT. Game 3 especially. Some old school tank lines in that game, and I won't spoil it, but that match felt very "old school" to me. In fact, the one matchup that produces those kinds of games tends to be TvT - and Tanks probably sums up the reason. Anyway, I'm a noob in the end, and more spectator than player , so my opinions aren't exactly "pro" but I'm not sure what else can be done in the current state of the game besides hope that players get even better at unit control. Perhaps HotS will offer up some protoss and zerg units that can can act more as territory control. I love that you mentioned that game. I remember watching that and at the end think to myself, "Now that was an awesome game to watch." Army movement, positioning, multiple attacks at once, drops, it was great! Part of me feels that, like you said, TvT lends itself to these kind of games. The unit interactions are so dynamic it really makes for an interesting game. Here's to hoping everything gets more fleshed out with the expansions and we see more of that in every matchup  | ||
|
vebis
Germany33 Posts
But: You mainly looked at what BW got and SC2 hasnt, try to switch your pov and look was favours SC2 over BW. BW controls are e.g. broken imho. most of the time you fight the game and not the opponent, is that what you call a better game or good for competetive gaming? From a viewer perspective: BW isnt eye catchy anymore, it wasnt 6 years ago... and with the viewers the game crows or not.. there are still some other points i havent figured out yet, because im a noob but yeah w/e AND coming to sources (images/vids) 1-9 sc2-bw are you kidding me, how imba? ^^ | ||
|
Alphasquad
Austria505 Posts
| ||
|
aderum
Sweden1459 Posts
Compared to BW, people still suck at this game, so i think we will only see more and more micra and epic battles. Nonetheless its and good OP that sparks the discussion. But that is my 2 cents of it. | ||
|
Gak2
Canada418 Posts
On April 16 2011 21:13 haflo wrote: okay i must say thats the one line that drove me to write this post instead of working on my article. bad mechanics are bad thingfor a game or a spot . it can NEVER be a good thing , and if you think it is , think why . artificial/technical obsticals are exactly that , bugs . yes it can be beautifull to see a player select each unit and tell it to move to a specific position because if you just tell everyone to move they will walk in circles. but its simply better players waste their time on stratagic decision , microing each spellcaster or macroing more bases. Huge disagreement here... I've asked people before to name a competitive sport where strategy is more important than technical skill. (and don't say chess. Why? because that game is pure strategy. Sports should have both technical skill and strategy). You'll see that... if there are any, there are very few. This is because a sport isn't impressive if some guy can just learn strategy and win a lot of his games... he needs to spend hours refining technique in order for people to stand in awe of the person's capabilities. I feel the same way about starcraft. | ||
|
Cade
Canada1420 Posts
| ||
| ||
