EPTOn July 12 2011 20:00 hellbound wrote:
Wow SC2 people sure like their balls.
Wow SC2 people sure like their balls.
lol
Dynamic Unit Movements, Your Thoughts? - Page 32
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Slago
Canada726 Posts
lol | ||
|
Moshikaro
135 Posts
| ||
|
MavercK
Australia2181 Posts
still waiting for this to be released T_T | ||
|
FindMuck
63 Posts
| ||
|
bo0
Belgium550 Posts
one thing I don't understand though is people claiming "But AoE will be so much weaker" - then how come siege tanks, lurkers and reavers were so powerfull in BW? | ||
|
Island
Sweden22 Posts
Assuming that AoE in the game is balanced around units clumping at the moment, it would be "buffed" to compensate for units moving spread out if this was implemented. However, the worst-case scenario would still be that my units are clumped when being shot by AoE, especially on the already very tight SC2 maps. And lets not forget forcefields... What I'm saying is I'd rather have the AoE in the game balanced around the worst-case scenario (units clumped) and then obtain something better by micro/extra effort than have it balanced around the best-case (units spread) and then have the now super-OP worst-case imposed on me by my opponent due to positioning/forcefields. I'd rather be in charge of winning my games than just hope for my opponent to lose. | ||
|
Piledriver
United States1697 Posts
| ||
|
makmeatt
2024 Posts
On July 12 2011 21:00 Meancookie wrote: I've been reading some random pages in this thread, and tbh, as a SC2 player that has never ever played BW before I'd be happy with a change like this (I messed around with the SC2BW custom map and the pathing/clumping feels pretty awesome) one thing I don't understand though is people claiming "But AoE will be so much weaker" - then how come siege tanks, lurkers and reavers were so powerfull in BW? We have no lurkers or reavers now and stats of tanks were very different exactly for the reason of units being spread. Now it's quantity over damage. The whole concept of AoE damage in the game would have to be rebalanced if you changed the way groups move around by default, I don't see this happening any time soon. | ||
|
HornyHerring
Papua New Guinea1059 Posts
| ||
|
bo0
Belgium550 Posts
On July 12 2011 21:08 JohnMadden wrote: We have no lurkers or reavers now and stats of tanks were very different exactly for the reason of units being spread. Now it's quantity over damage. The whole concept of AoE damage in the game would have to be rebalanced if you changed the way groups move around by default, I don't see this happening any time soon. what I meant was: if they made it so AoE worked fine in the dynamic unit movement model, they can just tweak the stats on the aoe units a small bit from what we have now basically it's not like "aoe will become useless" or anything | ||
|
TheKefka
Croatia11752 Posts
The one unit that fell victim to the AI is the Thor however.I think Blizzard intended thors to be good anti-muta/phoenix but people learned how to magic box and avoid the unit clumping and,correct me if I'm wrong I'm not a terran player,but the thor is like the worst terran unit right now in my eyes and has literally little to no critical use,yes you can build one and its a nice supplement,but you can rather throw down 3 rax with reactors for the same price and have all that a thor can do with marines just much more effective. | ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
Just imagine a colossi shooting heat seeker missiles (not seeker missiles), that are so fast only lings could run away. And it has a storage of 5 and the missiles cost 15 mins. Thats a reaver, 5 ravens in one only backdraw is that its slow as a thor. In general blizzard would only need to reduce the maximum selection to 12 again an tada superior bw movement. I guess people only want to get their free wins back from when they got units because of the bad ai out of position because they run around in a straight line after a few seconds. In bw aoes were weak when you got an army out of posi but the rest was super strong, now aoes are strong but the rest is weak. Not much has changed there. People still stop before the opponents army and split no one wanting to make the first move. All that i see that changed is that armys aren't that badly out of position anymore when moving. But they are still easy to rip appart when done right. Just not achieved via an bwish 9xa click | ||
|
Masayume
Netherlands208 Posts
A button that allows you to determine if armies retain formation and/or wait for slower units to arrive at the same time, or just moving at their own speeds. This way you can decide for yourself instead of being forced into type A or type B movement. It is a lot nicer to be able to set up your army the way you want to, set them to move out and not having to constantly fight the clumping (even with many control groups it still screws with you). For people saying that pro players will get better apm and micro better accordingly, I have only one thing to say: It becomes impossible. You would have to reach inhumane APM levels to go anywhere beyond what the very best players are accomplishing right now. It is just a natural limit. | ||
|
Poplicola
Sweden15 Posts
From http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349486 On July 02 2012 08:13 Bommes wrote: Well, I could start clarifying what the value exactly does and maybe upload a little video and some pictures. But basically it just defines what it says, up to what distance a unit group stays in the formation that you issued the order to. Lets say you have 3 Marines in a specific formation: .........O................................ ........................................... ...............O.......................... .....O................................... .......................................... As far as I understand it as soon as you issue an order to them they get a personal region that defines the "inside" of this specific unit group. Now lets say Formation Diameter has a value of 6 (default value for melee maps), it means they will hold their specific formation (that means the distance and angles between themselves) as long as they get issued an order that is less than 6 range away from the center of their region. So lets say you order them to a spot with range 3 away it will look like this with the formation holding: .................O...................... ......................................... .......................O................. .............O.......................... ......................................... Now you order them to move to a spot that has a distance of say 7 from their center point (with Formation Diameter set to 6): ....................................................... ......................................O.............. .......................................O............ ......................................O............. ....................................................... They clump up. Now if you set Formation Diameter to a high value it just means that whatever happens every unit group that gets an order will always hold the formation. If they are clumped up before they will stay clumped up, and if they are spread out (which should be way more often the case) they will stay spread out. If you issue an order to inside the region that defines the unit group (practically if you click in between the units) they will automatically all run to the point with no formation standing. I think thats similar to how SCBW units behave. Of course that means that it is way more complicated to do difficult unit movements the more spread out the units are. Because they will stay in the formation they were before. So you will automatically have no choice but babysit your units way more and you can't have too many different unit types in the same control groups without messing all the positioning up. Which I personally think would be cool to see/use, but I'm not sure everyone would like it. And it could complicate a lot of things a lot, I haven't tested how it behaves if you use it in a serious melee match  Should be tested. | ||
|
tEhbatZ
United States1 Post
The reason units clump in Sc2 is that when controlled in a selection group, the Sc2 engine applies two steering behaviors: Alignment and Cohesion. Alignment steers each unit to the average heading of the group. Cohesion steers each unit to the average position of the group. Between the two behaviors groups of units will A) clump together and B) move in a coordinated as a group. In other words, the way that Sc2 clumps units is 100% intentional and by design. They could have (easily) added a behavior called Seperation which, when combined with the before-mentioned behaviors, would allow units to spread out more rather than clumping. But, they didn't, so its obvious they wanted units to clump like that (likely to add the extra micro challenge it provides). EDIT: Here is a good overview of what Steering Bahaviors are: http://www.red3d.com/cwr/boids/. It provides a nice visual example that shows how fish behave. | ||
|
hitpoint
United States1511 Posts
| ||
|
Lorch
Germany3697 Posts
If we really have that value, then I say someone go ahead and throw lets say the tsl4 map pool with that value set to like 10k so they never autoclump on eu/na/kr and have the community run games with it. It's a map value so we could easily just it in every tournament out there, thus probably forcing blizz to adapt. | ||
|
Darneck
Sweden1394 Posts
| ||
|
wcr.4fun
Belgium686 Posts
If you want to have the perfect game, you've gotta do what's necessary, if that involves this change and having to change a lot of values of units? So be it. Perfection takes time and work. | ||
|
Fishgle
United States2174 Posts
but not this one.... http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=117987 | ||
| ||
