Dynamic Unit Movements, Your Thoughts? - Page 35

On July 03 2012 20:12 Garmer wrote:

tries to separate your army and then move out, you will see the difference

On July 03 2012 19:08 papaz wrote:
Nah, I actually like the deathball. Now all of you that wants more micro in SC2 suddenly wants to remove army splitting in battle?

Use your imba apm and get an advantage over us that can't marine split vs banelings.

On July 03 2012 19:14 Rabiator wrote:

Rofl ... what a stupid argument for the simple reason that it implies that "dynamic unit movement" prevents microing and it also implies that splitting armies is the only micro there is. If that was the case only Terrans are microing atm (they are the usual victims of Baneling mass attacks), but we also have blink micro, burrow micro and general positioning micro as well.

On July 03 2012 19:56 gronnelg wrote:
Wouldn't you just end up with two deathballs a-moving each other, but not being as clumped up?

On July 03 2012 20:38 Weerwolf wrote:


Yes, I think it will, but it will also mean multiple other things. I know people hate the reference to Broodwar, but Im going to reference to it anyway for the battles, just so people get some kind of a picture (or can look up a picture ).
In Broodwar, there are also some variety of deathballs, for example in TvP. 'Deathballs' will be spread far enough however that there is plenty of room for micro, plenty of room for movement, plenty of room for retreating and making strategic decisions. Because of this, you can actually retreat, without having to lose at least half or 75% of your army which leads to you immediatly losing the game if you went ahead with a deathball vs deathball battle, and lost. (which is the case with the current sc2 deathball vs deathball scenario).
However, it changes even more. Because units are more spread out, the damage per second at the moment the armies clash is far less. This is why there is more room for micro, movement and decisions.
Another effect, is that smaller armies will be usefull again! Instead of being instantly annihilated by the blob, the army size that is smaller can actually do some damage to the larger army, because not all of the dps of the larger army is at the front of the battle. Smaller armies could still exchange unfavorably, but some units (Like tanks), have more firing time because they will launch a couple of shots, annihilate the first couple of units and be reloaded by the time the rest of the opponents army is near them. In the current situation, tanks fire once or twice, but since all the units are at the front they get overwhelmed within seconds.
Because smaller armies are not almost inherently mean a waste of money, it is not useless for a player to attack multiple fronts. this means that the defending player can do two things:
1. Keep his army as a deathball and try to kill each group one by one. This will ofcourse work, and will kill the other army with somewhat of an advantage, but the other small groups still damage his economy. Since the player with the smaller armies all over the map wouldnt gain an immense disadvantage with engaging with smaller forces, he would have an ecomonic lead, still some forces, and could likely win the game.
2. Split up his forces to defend, counter attack, secure ground (yes, securing ground would be a lot more usefull and doable again). Attention of the two players would be needed everywhere, everywhere would need to be micro'd. Even with the new Hearth of the Swarm this would be great, since the new widow mine could secure ground against the smaller forces invading it.

On July 03 2012 20:45 Sated wrote:

Or you can use your APM to split your units, instead of having the AI do it for you. Herpderp.

On July 03 2012 20:39 pzea469 wrote:
I'm sure many of you already saw the other thread, but just like what Bommes uploaded for EU, I've uploaded "MMDaybreak" to NA. If you have a good competitive match and are highish level, please consider uploading a replay. Videos can then be made and put on youtube, for others to see what games look like with this change.

On July 03 2012 20:38 Weerwolf wrote:


Yes, I think it will, but it will also mean multiple other things. I know people hate the reference to Broodwar, but Im going to reference to it anyway for the battles, just so people get some kind of a picture (or can look up a picture ).
In Broodwar, there are also some variety of deathballs, for example in TvP. 'Deathballs' will be spread far enough however that there is plenty of room for micro, plenty of room for movement, plenty of room for retreating and making strategic decisions. Because of this, you can actually retreat, without having to lose at least half or 75% of your army which leads to you immediatly losing the game if you went ahead with a deathball vs deathball battle, and lost. (which is the case with the current sc2 deathball vs deathball scenario).
However, it changes even more. Because units are more spread out, the damage per second at the moment the armies clash is far less. This is why there is more room for micro, movement and decisions.
Another effect, is that smaller armies will be usefull again! Instead of being instantly annihilated by the blob, the army size that is smaller can actually do some damage to the larger army, because not all of the dps of the larger army is at the front of the battle. Smaller armies could still exchange unfavorably, but some units (Like tanks), have more firing time because they will launch a couple of shots, annihilate the first couple of units and be reloaded by the time the rest of the opponents army is near them. In the current situation, tanks fire once or twice, but since all the units are at the front they get overwhelmed within seconds.
Because smaller armies are not almost inherently mean a waste of money, it is not useless for a player to attack multiple fronts. this means that the defending player can do two things:
1. Keep his army as a deathball and try to kill each group one by one. This will ofcourse work, and will kill the other army with somewhat of an advantage, but the other small groups still damage his economy. Since the player with the smaller armies all over the map wouldnt gain an immense disadvantage with engaging with smaller forces, he would have an ecomonic lead, still some forces, and could likely win the game.
2. Split up his forces to defend, counter attack, secure ground (yes, securing ground would be a lot more usefull and doable again). Attention of the two players would be needed everywhere, everywhere would need to be micro'd. Even with the new Hearth of the Swarm this would be great, since the new widow mine could secure ground against the smaller forces invading it.