|
On May 18 2011 05:58 Bippzy wrote:
Alright time to go against this.
-Rebalancing the game completely is untangible because of the pro scene. It'd be like giving the pros a new game to learn and telling them go try to win tournaments.
6 years ago in the NHL, there were some major rule changes that were brought about. Some of the changes were the removal of the two-line pass, the area behind the net being the only area past the goal line that a goaltender could play the puck, and most importantly the changes on goaltender's pad sizes, and an increase of four feet in each offensive zone, essentially changing the position of the blue lines and goal lines. This drastically changed many aspects of the game, and forced every professional hockey player to relearn things that they had known since playing in the league. And yet it still happened because, while debatable to the casual spectator, the league felt that it improved the quality of the game. And this was the NHL, something much grander than SC2 could ever dream of becoming. A league with players who had million dollar salaries.
And yet here you and others are, saying that it 100% wouldn't be reasonable to make any major changes to SC2 because it would make professional players have to relearn some aspects of the game. Are you buds with some of these supposed pro players, is that where you've gotten this information from? I'd like to know. Because I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but in order to make Starcraft 2 into the best e-sport possible, major changes are going to need to be made. Maybe not the changes mentioned in this thread, maybe not the changes anyone has ever speculated on this forum yet, but believe me, there is absolutely no way that SC2 in its current state will survive as the premier competitive videogame to drive e-sports into the spotlight.
Also, blizzard isnt super pro at balancing as it is..I don't want to see them have to try again.
So basically, you're agreeing that Blizzard hasn't made a balanced game, and yet you're still arguing against changes that could potentially improve the game tenfold just because it's different than what it is now? So what is it that you actually want then? An unbalanced game that will forever remain in its current state? I don't understand.
-Blobs look unnatural. What? This is a game and nothing is real in it. It can never look natural. From a lore standpoint, a well trained army, a psionically linked army, or an army controlled by a hive mind would probably clump up because there are strength in numbers.
Look at this picture: http://i.imgur.com/J0iBR.jpg
Now look at it again: http://i.imgur.com/J0iBR.jpg
That is really what you enjoy looking at?
Lore has nothing to do with it. What people mean by "it looks unnatural" is it's an absolute cluttered eyesore.
-Do NOT make the game easier. We have to accept the challenges we get. This game is about getting big balls or getting something to hold big balls in one place or destroy the big ball. Making the big ball easier just isn't tangible. This sounds like a little complaint about difficulty dressed up in a suit.
It doesn't make the game easier, and as many others have already explained in depth in this thread, it probably makes it even more difficult to control an army well, but gives overall even greater control if used properly. It's not about accepting the challenges we get. What kind of noble statement is that? Did you or anyone else say "we have to accept the challenges we get" when the 5 rax reaper rush came to light in TvZ? Did anyone say "we have to accept the challenges we get" when siege tanks killed literally everything, or marauders started out with concussive shell? No, people complained about it because it was something that actually was bad for the game. There's a difference between accepting challenges, and seeing that something is obviously not very good for the well-being of the game and wanting it changed.
I know not everyone has the same opinions and viewpoints on matters when it comes to how SC2 is and/or should be, but the people who want changes like this one are only wanting them for the good of the game. They aren't trying to relive BW nostalgia, they aren't trying to make the game easier, they are seeing an obvious flaw in their eyes and trying to mend it.
|
In the long run, only good things would come from implementing this. Thanks for bringing it up OP.
|
every morning i'm gonna wake up and bump this piece of shit till something in this game changes. I'm not gonna play your ball vs my ball for very much longer. I'm at the top of the player base and I can't see players being able to fight the game mechanics to reduce this effect. As it stands the units that benefit from clumping having such a stupid advantage they either are considered OP or have been nerfed into the ground.
|
Hi, I would like to share my opinion on this idea.
I've read some of your reaction and there is some point I'd like to discuss.
First of all, some people suggest that Blizzard will never do this kind of change to the game because it's too much work to rebalance everything accordingly
...We are talking about Blizzard, the compagny that have patch SCBW for 12 years.They work on the same game during 12 years ! There is no reason why "rebalancing the game" is too much of a task for them.
Also, the clumping, whatever his source in the code, have the consequence of making the battle shorter. This alone should justify the change. For this metagame, the way to increase the duration of game was to publish huges maps. I think we have escape the problem instead of solving it.
The beta was the sign that something was wrong. Every unit ( other that Marine, Zealot and Zergling and worker) that has return without changes from BW has been OP until some nerf. Siege tanks, HT with storm, Emp, etc. So the original balance was to have unit that doesn't clump.
Finally the last complain about micro ans strategy. I feel that my games shouldn't resolve around who have spread the most his army, but instead was a factor of who has flank, retreat, attack, snipe, surround, surprise the most that will be the winner.
Because even if you spread your army, you still a-move your "spread army" before engaging. So there is more micro and awesome situation that await us.
I've seen IdrA Flank and surround marines with zergling and banelings. A pure Chef-d'oeuvre. But what i see from GOM.Tv is just very well controlled blob against very well controlled blob. The most interresseting part are the harass, because it's small army against everything. I would just love if the army part was as inspiring and entertaining as the harass.
In SC2BW ( the threat on TL.net in SC2 customs games), which consist of BW but with the graphic of SC2 ( the clumping isn't present), lies a video of a PvZ that have beautifull micro.
For supporting my post, i have buy SCBW. Yes i have buy SC2, then BW
|
|
|
There isn't a way to do this without making units move less efficiently, or without making hitboxes a lot larger than the units appear to be (which would just be confusing). I don't think this change is necessary. Players are figuring out how to spread their units naturally because it gives them an advantage (considering how crazy powerful splash damage is in SC2).
There are a lot of SC2 games now where the player who ends up winning key battles is the one who has the bigger concave, and I feel like because of this players will end up spreading their units even more than they do now. The only way that I feel like this change would contribute anything to the game is that it looks a little better for spectators when the units are moving across the map. But really, is it that important?
|
This would actually remove skill from the game in terms of unit spreading.
It will only look more 'BW' like, and splash won't be as strong. I would rather have the game have mechanics that give advantages to spreading your units out in small hitsquads rather than just changing the pathing and have the same game except with spreaded out units.
|
On May 18 2011 10:59 sluggaslamoo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2011 10:52 PartyBiscuit wrote:On May 18 2011 07:15 Brief.Starcraft wrote:
Can a map be made with this movement type? Is there anyone out there interested in making one so we can see how it works in practice? Search "No Deathballs" on NA and I believe EU server, it's a custom map for Xel Naga and metal. IIRC no deathballs just increased the radius of units. This just means less tightly packed balls, but it is still not the desired army movement we are looking for.
He's right. All it does is artificially make the units interaction radius without making them bigger. In other words, you can't clump if you want to, and you are forced to engage whilst spread.
|
On May 18 2011 19:13 Chaosvuistje wrote:
This would actually remove skill from the game in terms of unit spreading.
It will only look more 'BW' like, and splash won't be as strong. I would rather have the game have mechanics that give advantages to spreading your units out in small hitsquads rather than just changing the pathing and have the same game except with spreaded out units.
What you mean that no Brood War player ever management his army before engaging? That microing units that is closer togheter is harder than to micro units that is farther spread out?
Of course, it would have some effects to splash units and AoE spells, however how huge the effects are is extremly dependable on how you define the pathing.
*Edit*
I can't see this being such a big change if it was implented into Sc2, but I don't think Blizzard will make a patch with such a huge change to their scripts (talking about the amount of time they would have to spend on new pathfinding), so I believe they will not change it unless they redeem it neccesaary for greater gameplay or such a reasoning.
|
I agree with that it would look better for Terran and Protoss (I kind of like the "swarminess" of the Swarm). However, this change would be massive to the game in terms of map design, area-effect/splash spells/weapons, etc.
I don't see this happening.
|
I think it would be even better if players could control whether or not a unit avoided other units, or pushed them. That way there would be some level of critical thinking needed to determine which pathing state is better in a given situation.
Oh, and actually it is possible to spread out a group of units before hand in such a way that they will maintain their distance relative to each other while moving. However, depending on unit size, there is a limit to how big this arrangement can be.
|
oh god I want something like this so bad.
One of the main issues with sc2's clumping is how badly it mitigates defender's advantage. Compare trying to run up a SCBW map with dragoons, where only one could fit at a time, to running up a SC2 ramp with stalkers. It's ridiculous.
Look at maps like Destination in SCBW, where the bridges give a HUGE defender's advantage, but with the ridiculous clumping in SC2, this wouldn't happen at all. Once you get this effect, then it opens up the game to much more macro/tech openings and also much more harassment, since you can defend with less units. Instead of just sitting your army in your base waiting to hit 200/200, you have to engage in a dance with your opponent around the map, preventing him from crossing any choke points and gaining any position, scouting where he's keeping his army and how he's moving it, etc.
NEEDED NEEDED NEEDED
|
And yet here you and others are, saying that it 100% wouldn't be reasonable to make any major changes to SC2 because it would make professional players have to relearn some aspects of the game. Are you buds with some of these supposed pro players, is that where you've gotten this information from? I'd like to know. Because I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but in order to make Starcraft 2 into the best e-sport possible, major changes are going to need to be made. Maybe not the changes mentioned in this thread, maybe not the changes anyone has ever speculated on this forum yet, but believe me, there is absolutely no way that SC2 in its current state will survive as the premier competitive videogame to drive e-sports into the spotlight.
This already happens with the current balance changes, what you're talking about is a completely new game, or like turning ice hockey into roller hockey. The unit movement would only be the beginning, nearly every unit would have to be changed weather it would be damage, splash or speed etc. Basically you're asking everyone to just throw away all the work that has been put into SC2, and start over from the beginning. All to make SC2 look and feel more like BW, why not let SC2 develop as a different game?
I can just as easily ask you - when you say SC2 cannot survive in it's current state - where are you getting your information from!?! The fact is though, changes are on the way, and it is up to Blizzard to make them however they wish, and then it is up to the community to follow them or go in a different direction with a pro mod or a different game.
Well SC2 is still pretty new, so maybe a pro mod community will grow and become popular, or maybe Blizzard will include something like this in the next versions of the game. Well personally I hope this doesn't gain too much ground, because stability is also important for a sport, and more importantly for the industry that is supporting it. I really hope the community doesn't splinter off with a mod, I think there is a lot of spectator value in having the pros play the same game as the average joes
|
|
|
+ Show Spoiler +On May 18 2011 18:07 Angra wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2011 05:58 Bippzy wrote:
Alright time to go against this.
-Rebalancing the game completely is untangible because of the pro scene. It'd be like giving the pros a new game to learn and telling them go try to win tournaments. 6 years ago in the NHL, there were some major rule changes that were brought about. Some of the changes were the removal of the two-line pass, the area behind the net being the only area past the goal line that a goaltender could play the puck, and most importantly the changes on goaltender's pad sizes, and an increase of four feet in each offensive zone, essentially changing the position of the blue lines and goal lines. This drastically changed many aspects of the game, and forced every professional hockey player to relearn things that they had known since playing in the league. And yet it still happened because, while debatable to the casual spectator, the league felt that it improved the quality of the game. And this was the NHL, something much grander than SC2 could ever dream of becoming. A league with players who had million dollar salaries. And yet here you and others are, saying that it 100% wouldn't be reasonable to make any major changes to SC2 because it would make professional players have to relearn some aspects of the game. Are you buds with some of these supposed pro players, is that where you've gotten this information from? I'd like to know. Because I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but in order to make Starcraft 2 into the best e-sport possible, major changes are going to need to be made. Maybe not the changes mentioned in this thread, maybe not the changes anyone has ever speculated on this forum yet, but believe me, there is absolutely no way that SC2 in its current state will survive as the premier competitive videogame to drive e-sports into the spotlight. Show nested quote +Also, blizzard isnt super pro at balancing as it is..I don't want to see them have to try again. So basically, you're agreeing that Blizzard hasn't made a balanced game, and yet you're still arguing against changes that could potentially improve the game tenfold just because it's different than what it is now? So what is it that you actually want then? An unbalanced game that will forever remain in its current state? I don't understand. Show nested quote +-Blobs look unnatural. What? This is a game and nothing is real in it. It can never look natural. From a lore standpoint, a well trained army, a psionically linked army, or an army controlled by a hive mind would probably clump up because there are strength in numbers. Look at this picture: http://i.imgur.com/J0iBR.jpgNow look at it again: http://i.imgur.com/J0iBR.jpgThat is really what you enjoy looking at? Lore has nothing to do with it. What people mean by "it looks unnatural" is it's an absolute cluttered eyesore. Show nested quote +-Do NOT make the game easier. We have to accept the challenges we get. This game is about getting big balls or getting something to hold big balls in one place or destroy the big ball. Making the big ball easier just isn't tangible. This sounds like a little complaint about difficulty dressed up in a suit. It doesn't make the game easier, and as many others have already explained in depth in this thread, it probably makes it even more difficult to control an army well, but gives overall even greater control if used properly. It's not about accepting the challenges we get. What kind of noble statement is that? Did you or anyone else say "we have to accept the challenges we get" when the 5 rax reaper rush came to light in TvZ? Did anyone say "we have to accept the challenges we get" when siege tanks killed literally everything, or marauders started out with concussive shell? No, people complained about it because it was something that actually was bad for the game. There's a difference between accepting challenges, and seeing that something is obviously not very good for the well-being of the game and wanting it changed. I know not everyone has the same opinions and viewpoints on matters when it comes to how SC2 is and/or should be, but the people who want changes like this one are only wanting them for the good of the game. They aren't trying to relive BW nostalgia, they aren't trying to make the game easier, they are seeing an obvious flaw in their eyes and trying to mend it.
I was going to make the same reference to the changes in the NHL but your post explored that idea very nicely. The rule changes really changed how the game was played and this was with million dollar salaries.
Whether these changes are the correct ones, I'm not too sure. But I can agree that watching 15-20 minutes of massing with very minor attacks (harass to slow down his mass) into a ball vs ball that lasts 15 seconds where everything dies to AoE isn't enjoyable at all to play nor watch.
|
This would be an awesome change.
I understand it's not necessarily feasible, but I can only imagine positive effects on the skill cap, legitimacy and spectator experience of SC2 from this.
On May 19 2011 01:09 Razith wrote:
Whether these changes are the correct ones, I'm not too sure. But I can agree that watching 15-20 minutes of massing with very minor attacks (harass to slow down his mass) into a ball vs ball that lasts 15 seconds where everything dies to AoE isn't enjoyable at all to play nor watch.
Also, this.
|
I would love this change, but I wouldn't hold your breath for blizzard to completely redesign unit relationships and game balance at this point. Browder and co. seem relatively happy with the game they made as far as I can tell.
On May 18 2011 18:37 Schtroumpfs wrote:
...We are talking about Blizzard, the compagny that have patch SCBW for 12 years.They work on the same game during 12 years ! There is no reason why "rebalancing the game" is too much of a task for them.
Please look things up before perpetuating this myth. The last Brood War balance patch was in 2001... Brood War did not take "12 years of tweaks" to be relatively balanced to the point where people could overcome things through refinement in their own gameplay.
|
At best they will add some more space between bigger units. Adding the whole "units blocking eachother" that BW and WC3 had i really don't think they want to add again.
Some of the most retarded stuff happens in BW due to this mechanic. Just look at dragoons trying to walk around anything really, they are stupid and their huge hitboxes makes their pathing complete crap.
|
Even though this idea would really make groups of units look much more realistic, what makes people think Blizzard would listen to the community in a such game changing matter? I'd really like to believe they would think about implementing this but seriously i don't see it happening, if ever, only after some expansion, and A LOT, of noise by the community, and most certainly in their forums, not here.
With all the tournaments coming up, SC2 for now would probably lose more than win with this, since stability is probably more needed than a more realistic setting but with some new imbalance situations coming along.
|
OP
You're making the comparison to BW, but in BW units clumped together as well.
Micro in that game as well as not having a whole 200/200 army together at all times is what made the units not stay in such a ball. Marine split to avoid lurker splash. Zealot spreading to breach a tank line to avoid splash. Vultures moved to defend several parts of a siege line instead of all being pushed to one direction.
This happened in BW as well, the players knew a ball formation would hurt them, so they used micro to fix that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
