|
On August 25 2014 21:36 Foxxan wrote:
RNG should go away as much as possible.
As close to 100% skill as possible is the fun part. 40% win chance builds is pure crap...Pure bloody crap.
But this doesnt mean there will be no attacks... Thats a pretty weird look at it.
There will be agressive builds, agressive playstyles.
Instead of all-in or cheese attacks there will be consistent attacks with micro and decision making for both sides..
Its so bloody boring watching someone go all-in
People talk about RNG all the time. How is it RNG if an attack works which is scoutable?
It isn't RNG, it is one player being lazy about scouting /playing safe and getting owned cause of it.
Would you prefer it to have no fog of war for example? It certainly would reduce the RNG BY A LOT.
Would it make the game better? No probably not.
|
On August 25 2014 22:00 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2014 21:36 Foxxan wrote:
RNG should go away as much as possible.
As close to 100% skill as possible is the fun part. 40% win chance builds is pure crap...Pure bloody crap.
But this doesnt mean there will be no attacks... Thats a pretty weird look at it.
There will be agressive builds, agressive playstyles.
Instead of all-in or cheese attacks there will be consistent attacks with micro and decision making for both sides..
Its so bloody boring watching someone go all-in People talk about RNG all the time. How is it RNG if an attack works which is scoutable? It isn't RNG, it is one player being lazy about scouting /playing safe and getting owned cause of it. Would you prefer it to have no fog of war for example? It certainly would reduce the RNG BY A LOT. Would it make the game better? No probably not.
Nobody has a problem when the builds are reasonably scoutable, but in many cases they are not.
Pre-patch, Blink/Oracle could both be tweaked to look identical in the early stages, and hidden anywhere on the map. Furthermore, it is entirely possible to completely shut down scouting with proper stalker placement. Blind countering one of these builds is a guarenteed loss against the other.
Even worse, a blink play was never a true committment since it prevented the terran from getting any information. It was easy to start chronoboosting probes and there was no way for the terran to know if the protoss was still committed.
This was rightly nerfed.
As an example of a properly balanced cheese, look at the 2rax. There are a finite number of viable rax placements due to travel distance, it can be scouted by overlord or drone, and a minor economic sacrifice can generally protect you from it. Same thing with cannon rush.
|
On August 25 2014 22:00 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2014 21:36 Foxxan wrote:
RNG should go away as much as possible.
As close to 100% skill as possible is the fun part. 40% win chance builds is pure crap...Pure bloody crap.
But this doesnt mean there will be no attacks... Thats a pretty weird look at it.
There will be agressive builds, agressive playstyles.
Instead of all-in or cheese attacks there will be consistent attacks with micro and decision making for both sides..
Its so bloody boring watching someone go all-in People talk about RNG all the time. How is it RNG if an attack works which is scoutable? It isn't RNG, it is one player being lazy about scouting /playing safe and getting owned cause of it. Would you prefer it to have no fog of war for example? It certainly would reduce the RNG BY A LOT. Would it make the game better? No probably not.
How is a dice RNG? Just learn rolling it, it's all physically possible.
The problem is that gambles are shit to watch and even shittier to play against. I do not want to play coinflips when starting starcraft. When i want to play coinflips, I just play coinflips. It's that simple.
Starcraft does not need to include that kind of gameplay. It also does not include Sodoku and I dont see people bitching about the game missing out on something because of that.
And yes, removing/altering fog of war would be very good for RTS games imo. It's a massive attacker advantage in its Starcraft-form. It forces the defender to work/spend a lot for information, while the right principle would be that the attacker has to work/spend a lot to hide information.
|
My initial post was about the nydus, i don't think it is BS at all and i don't think it is the same category as a lot of other "gambles".
There will always be strategies like that in a rts game, and i don't think that is the problem. It starts to be one if the defender doesn't have the tools to deal with it properly.
But that is another point entirely.
Why would it be the right principle? Cause you say so? The defender already has the advantage of, well defending...
I think you are extremely biased tbh
|
On August 25 2014 23:13 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2014 22:00 The_Red_Viper wrote:On August 25 2014 21:36 Foxxan wrote:
RNG should go away as much as possible.
As close to 100% skill as possible is the fun part. 40% win chance builds is pure crap...Pure bloody crap.
But this doesnt mean there will be no attacks... Thats a pretty weird look at it.
There will be agressive builds, agressive playstyles.
Instead of all-in or cheese attacks there will be consistent attacks with micro and decision making for both sides..
Its so bloody boring watching someone go all-in People talk about RNG all the time. How is it RNG if an attack works which is scoutable? It isn't RNG, it is one player being lazy about scouting /playing safe and getting owned cause of it. Would you prefer it to have no fog of war for example? It certainly would reduce the RNG BY A LOT. Would it make the game better? No probably not. How is a dice RNG? Just learn rolling it, it's all physically possible. The problem is that gambles are shit to watch and even shittier to play against. I do not want to play coinflips when starting starcraft. When i want to play coinflips, I just play coinflips. It's that simple. Starcraft does not need to include that kind of gameplay. It also does not include Sodoku and I dont see people bitching about the game missing out on something because of that. And yes, removing/altering fog of war would be very good for RTS games imo. It's a massive attacker advantage in its Starcraft-form. It forces the defender to work/spend a lot for information, while the right principle would be that the attacker has to work/spend a lot to hide information.
I think the problem is map design. I am so sick and tired of the "1 small ramp from main into enclosed natural expansion." Main bases should be level with the natural and possibly even have a wider opening. The game should force each player to open gas or with more units to some extent to stay safe if they want to expand rather than this super boring greedy macro play that has basically become standard that loses to stupid unscouted allins because people want to be so greedy all the damn time. An attacker is already taking on the risk of sacrificing his economy for a strong attack, so the defender must also take a similar risk if they decide to expand without sufficient information. Still though, 99% of maps ever is Main>skinny ramp> enclosed natural. SO. Boring.
|
On August 25 2014 23:48 johnbongham wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2014 23:13 Big J wrote:On August 25 2014 22:00 The_Red_Viper wrote:On August 25 2014 21:36 Foxxan wrote:
RNG should go away as much as possible.
As close to 100% skill as possible is the fun part. 40% win chance builds is pure crap...Pure bloody crap.
But this doesnt mean there will be no attacks... Thats a pretty weird look at it.
There will be agressive builds, agressive playstyles.
Instead of all-in or cheese attacks there will be consistent attacks with micro and decision making for both sides..
Its so bloody boring watching someone go all-in People talk about RNG all the time. How is it RNG if an attack works which is scoutable? It isn't RNG, it is one player being lazy about scouting /playing safe and getting owned cause of it. Would you prefer it to have no fog of war for example? It certainly would reduce the RNG BY A LOT. Would it make the game better? No probably not. How is a dice RNG? Just learn rolling it, it's all physically possible. The problem is that gambles are shit to watch and even shittier to play against. I do not want to play coinflips when starting starcraft. When i want to play coinflips, I just play coinflips. It's that simple. Starcraft does not need to include that kind of gameplay. It also does not include Sodoku and I dont see people bitching about the game missing out on something because of that. And yes, removing/altering fog of war would be very good for RTS games imo. It's a massive attacker advantage in its Starcraft-form. It forces the defender to work/spend a lot for information, while the right principle would be that the attacker has to work/spend a lot to hide information. I think the problem is map design. I am so sick and tired of the "1 small ramp from main into enclosed natural expansion." Main bases should be level with the natural and possibly even have a wider opening. The game should force each player to open gas or with more units to some extent to stay safe if they want to expand rather than this super boring greedy macro play that has basically become standard that loses to stupid unscouted allins because people want to be so greedy all the damn time. An attacker is already taking on the risk of sacrificing his economy for a strong attack, so the defender must also take a similar risk if they decide to expand without sufficient information. Still though, 99% of maps ever is Main>skinny ramp> enclosed natural. SO. Boring.
And that map design stems from protoss having weak gateway units and needing to rely so heavily on FF.
|
On August 26 2014 00:00 MrMatt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2014 23:48 johnbongham wrote:On August 25 2014 23:13 Big J wrote:On August 25 2014 22:00 The_Red_Viper wrote:On August 25 2014 21:36 Foxxan wrote:
RNG should go away as much as possible.
As close to 100% skill as possible is the fun part. 40% win chance builds is pure crap...Pure bloody crap.
But this doesnt mean there will be no attacks... Thats a pretty weird look at it.
There will be agressive builds, agressive playstyles.
Instead of all-in or cheese attacks there will be consistent attacks with micro and decision making for both sides..
Its so bloody boring watching someone go all-in People talk about RNG all the time. How is it RNG if an attack works which is scoutable? It isn't RNG, it is one player being lazy about scouting /playing safe and getting owned cause of it. Would you prefer it to have no fog of war for example? It certainly would reduce the RNG BY A LOT. Would it make the game better? No probably not. How is a dice RNG? Just learn rolling it, it's all physically possible. The problem is that gambles are shit to watch and even shittier to play against. I do not want to play coinflips when starting starcraft. When i want to play coinflips, I just play coinflips. It's that simple. Starcraft does not need to include that kind of gameplay. It also does not include Sodoku and I dont see people bitching about the game missing out on something because of that. And yes, removing/altering fog of war would be very good for RTS games imo. It's a massive attacker advantage in its Starcraft-form. It forces the defender to work/spend a lot for information, while the right principle would be that the attacker has to work/spend a lot to hide information. I think the problem is map design. I am so sick and tired of the "1 small ramp from main into enclosed natural expansion." Main bases should be level with the natural and possibly even have a wider opening. The game should force each player to open gas or with more units to some extent to stay safe if they want to expand rather than this super boring greedy macro play that has basically become standard that loses to stupid unscouted allins because people want to be so greedy all the damn time. An attacker is already taking on the risk of sacrificing his economy for a strong attack, so the defender must also take a similar risk if they decide to expand without sufficient information. Still though, 99% of maps ever is Main>skinny ramp> enclosed natural. SO. Boring. And that map design stems from protoss having weak gateway units and needing to rely so heavily on FF.
Can't remember last time I saw a protoss player warp in a sentry in the early game to be quite honest, so it it really still the case? Either way, this should be fixed. It is a joke. It makes every map basically the same exact thing which causes very little variety in strategy and leads to people crying about unscouted allins being viable when the the defender is greeding up a storm.
|
On August 26 2014 00:00 MrMatt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2014 23:48 johnbongham wrote:On August 25 2014 23:13 Big J wrote:On August 25 2014 22:00 The_Red_Viper wrote:On August 25 2014 21:36 Foxxan wrote:
RNG should go away as much as possible.
As close to 100% skill as possible is the fun part. 40% win chance builds is pure crap...Pure bloody crap.
But this doesnt mean there will be no attacks... Thats a pretty weird look at it.
There will be agressive builds, agressive playstyles.
Instead of all-in or cheese attacks there will be consistent attacks with micro and decision making for both sides..
Its so bloody boring watching someone go all-in People talk about RNG all the time. How is it RNG if an attack works which is scoutable? It isn't RNG, it is one player being lazy about scouting /playing safe and getting owned cause of it. Would you prefer it to have no fog of war for example? It certainly would reduce the RNG BY A LOT. Would it make the game better? No probably not. How is a dice RNG? Just learn rolling it, it's all physically possible. The problem is that gambles are shit to watch and even shittier to play against. I do not want to play coinflips when starting starcraft. When i want to play coinflips, I just play coinflips. It's that simple. Starcraft does not need to include that kind of gameplay. It also does not include Sodoku and I dont see people bitching about the game missing out on something because of that. And yes, removing/altering fog of war would be very good for RTS games imo. It's a massive attacker advantage in its Starcraft-form. It forces the defender to work/spend a lot for information, while the right principle would be that the attacker has to work/spend a lot to hide information. I think the problem is map design. I am so sick and tired of the "1 small ramp from main into enclosed natural expansion." Main bases should be level with the natural and possibly even have a wider opening. The game should force each player to open gas or with more units to some extent to stay safe if they want to expand rather than this super boring greedy macro play that has basically become standard that loses to stupid unscouted allins because people want to be so greedy all the damn time. An attacker is already taking on the risk of sacrificing his economy for a strong attack, so the defender must also take a similar risk if they decide to expand without sufficient information. Still though, 99% of maps ever is Main>skinny ramp> enclosed natural. SO. Boring. And that map design stems from protoss having weak gateway units and needing to rely so heavily on FF.
What a stupid myth... The "one ramp access" comes from Speedlings dominating everything if the defender cannot rely on terrain to close the door.
|
On August 25 2014 23:43 The_Red_Viper wrote:
My initial post was about the nydus, i don't think it is BS at all and i don't think it is the same category as a lot of other "gambles".
There will always be strategies like that in a rts game, and i don't think that is the problem. It starts to be one if the defender doesn't have the tools to deal with it properly.
But that is another point entirely.
Why would it be the right principle? Cause you say so? The defender already has the advantage of, well defending...
I think you are extremely biased tbh
I have no clue in which context you think Im biased tbh. I main Zerg and argue against giving Zerg easywin options.
It would be the right principle because we want the defender to have advantages. Just "being" the defender does not help you at all. As I wrote, that is my opinion. If you prefer a game with attackers advantages, then that is ok for me too.
And again Im going to tell you that your comment about "rts games in general" is wrong. Very, very simply wrong.
|
On August 25 2014 23:13 Big J wrote:
And yes, removing/altering fog of war would be very good for RTS games imo. It's a massive attacker advantage in its Starcraft-form. It forces the defender to work/spend a lot for information, while the right principle would be that the attacker has to work/spend a lot to hide information.
What about a global +1 vision range for all units? Spotting all sorts of proxy buildings, tech and army movement would be easier then.
|
On August 26 2014 00:07 johnbongham wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2014 00:00 MrMatt wrote:On August 25 2014 23:48 johnbongham wrote:On August 25 2014 23:13 Big J wrote:On August 25 2014 22:00 The_Red_Viper wrote:On August 25 2014 21:36 Foxxan wrote:
RNG should go away as much as possible.
As close to 100% skill as possible is the fun part. 40% win chance builds is pure crap...Pure bloody crap.
But this doesnt mean there will be no attacks... Thats a pretty weird look at it.
There will be agressive builds, agressive playstyles.
Instead of all-in or cheese attacks there will be consistent attacks with micro and decision making for both sides..
Its so bloody boring watching someone go all-in People talk about RNG all the time. How is it RNG if an attack works which is scoutable? It isn't RNG, it is one player being lazy about scouting /playing safe and getting owned cause of it. Would you prefer it to have no fog of war for example? It certainly would reduce the RNG BY A LOT. Would it make the game better? No probably not. How is a dice RNG? Just learn rolling it, it's all physically possible. The problem is that gambles are shit to watch and even shittier to play against. I do not want to play coinflips when starting starcraft. When i want to play coinflips, I just play coinflips. It's that simple. Starcraft does not need to include that kind of gameplay. It also does not include Sodoku and I dont see people bitching about the game missing out on something because of that. And yes, removing/altering fog of war would be very good for RTS games imo. It's a massive attacker advantage in its Starcraft-form. It forces the defender to work/spend a lot for information, while the right principle would be that the attacker has to work/spend a lot to hide information. I think the problem is map design. I am so sick and tired of the "1 small ramp from main into enclosed natural expansion." Main bases should be level with the natural and possibly even have a wider opening. The game should force each player to open gas or with more units to some extent to stay safe if they want to expand rather than this super boring greedy macro play that has basically become standard that loses to stupid unscouted allins because people want to be so greedy all the damn time. An attacker is already taking on the risk of sacrificing his economy for a strong attack, so the defender must also take a similar risk if they decide to expand without sufficient information. Still though, 99% of maps ever is Main>skinny ramp> enclosed natural. SO. Boring. And that map design stems from protoss having weak gateway units and needing to rely so heavily on FF. Can't remember last time I saw a protoss player warp in a sentry in the early game to be quite honest
It was yesterday for me, San vs Polt and Stardust vs Taeja. To my defense, I didn't pay a lot of attention today so maybe there were some in Inno vs Dear and I missed them.
|
On August 26 2014 00:29 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2014 23:13 Big J wrote:
And yes, removing/altering fog of war would be very good for RTS games imo. It's a massive attacker advantage in its Starcraft-form. It forces the defender to work/spend a lot for information, while the right principle would be that the attacker has to work/spend a lot to hide information. What about a global +1 vision range for all units? Spotting all sorts of proxy buildings, tech and army movement would be easier then.
Hm, to be honest for Starcraft I have no clue how to repair e.g. proxy building strategies (in particular ones like Dark Shrines or Twilights). But yeah, such scouting tweaks would help, though global +1 would also alter a lot of interactions such as siege tanks TvT or Blink/MsC allins. I would very much welcome it for reapers and observers though. Also +2 for workers and zealot/zergling/marine which have abmysal values on sight.
The idea was more directes towards future RTS games, since he keeps on talking how information gambles must always be part of RTS games. Which is obviously true if you do not change the parameters that enable them. (Or expand your horizont beyond Starcraft and keep on calling Starcraft-occurances RTS-principles)
|
On August 26 2014 00:12 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2014 23:43 The_Red_Viper wrote:
My initial post was about the nydus, i don't think it is BS at all and i don't think it is the same category as a lot of other "gambles".
There will always be strategies like that in a rts game, and i don't think that is the problem. It starts to be one if the defender doesn't have the tools to deal with it properly.
But that is another point entirely.
Why would it be the right principle? Cause you say so? The defender already has the advantage of, well defending...
I think you are extremely biased tbh I have no clue in which context you think Im biased tbh. I main Zerg and argue against giving Zerg easywin options. It would be the right principle because we want the defender to have advantages. Just "being" the defender does not help you at all. As I wrote, that is my opinion. If you prefer a game with attackers advantages, then that is ok for me too. And again Im going to tell you that your comment about "rts games in general" is wrong. Very, very simply wrong.
It is no "easywin" option. it is no more an easy win option than boosting with medivacs in the protoss base and snipe the nexus in 2 seconds withotu losing a single unit.
I don't see how sc2 has an attackers advantage at all, this is simply you stating something as a fact.
Also i don't see how allins have anything to do with "the defender has to do all the scouting".
That might be true for strategies which are generally too strong, but if you have a nice balance and design the attacker has to scout just as much for his attack to be even viable/successful.
Ok, if you max the devender advantage into regions where you can't do anything till lategame, i might agree with you, otherwise there will be builds which straight up win vs "greedy" ones.
Also i wanna hear your idea about the fog of war, how would you implement somethign like that?
|
I'd make the whole map revealed in general and then have fogged/clouded/vegetation regions on maps.
Maybe make it so that certain regions (like bases) activate a fog of war once a player has claimed that spot (e.g. a starcraftlike main or natural would be hidden upon completing a nexus).
Then one could have units that can generate Smoke etc. so you can create FoW, but it's an extra cost you have to pay first to get those units and fog something, before you can start proxying.
|
Euh so you "proxy" the fog of war to proxy something? I don't think that would work tbh 
|
On August 26 2014 01:36 The_Red_Viper wrote:Euh so you "proxy" the fog of war to proxy something? I don't think that would work tbh
I hope it wouldnt, except for one in a million cases.
|
On August 26 2014 01:36 The_Red_Viper wrote:Euh so you "proxy" the fog of war to proxy something? I don't think that would work tbh
Gap generators (tower form) and mobile gap generators (vehicle form) from C&C: Red Alert. Good times. Were always so frustrating to play against, too.
|
On August 26 2014 01:24 Big J wrote:
I'd make the whole map revealed in general and then have fogged/clouded/vegetation regions on maps.
Maybe make it so that certain regions (like bases) activate a fog of war once a player has claimed that spot (e.g. a starcraftlike main or natural would be hidden upon completing a nexus).
Then one could have units that can generate Smoke etc. so you can create FoW, but it's an extra cost you have to pay first to get those units and fog something, before you can start proxying.
Sounds like old cnc games. Once you uncovered the black shroud, there was no fog of war, so later on you could see everything on the map. There were also buildings that generated fog in an area. I think SC2's / 'modern rts' style is fine.
|
Thats pretty cool actually.
See the whole map but its possible to fog an area for a cost.
|
On August 24 2014 19:47 Tyrhanius wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2014 10:33 chatuka wrote:
Zergs been strong since day one of the game. They keep on gettting good options to use like
swarm hosts, vipers, changelings. On top of that they have useful foot soldiers like Roaches, Hydras(HP is too low on the Hydralisk), Zerglings, banelings. They have air support in mutalisks corruptors, and defensive options like spore crawlers. I don't want to nerf the Zerg, it's a great race to play, but they need to make Terran units more useful against countless zerg options.
I've said they needed to buff the thor, and they have. They need to make the banshee's defense stronger. The raven should be buffed as well, slightly of course. The reaper finally got speed which is great, I still think that it should be a bit cheaper. 25 gas, instead of 50 gas. why does a reaper need that much gas in the first place? +5 attack instead of +4.
-Ghosts cost so much, at least make them powerful to useful against Zergling aggression right? you could increase the range(but decrease EMP attack power), increase the HP, or even increase the speed of the ghosts. Or, the Snipe attack could be upped to 40-50 Air or Ground.
-Ravens cost 200 gas yet they only have 140 hit points? why? they should have at least 170-190 hit points.Or you can reduce the cost of gas from 200G to 150 Gas.
-The siege tank (150/125)for the gas it costs should have 180-200 hit points or the Tank should have an increase in GP(16-18) or an increase in range(12-13). .
-The Swarmhost is 200/100G and so is the ghost. yet the ghosts HP is only 100, and the SH is at 160. This is crazy stuff. The Swarmhost can release these locusts that have their own supply of HP and Attack power. it's a great weapon for Zerg, but terran needs more units that can deal with the Swarm host late game.
-The cost of the Thor(300/200) is 10 times more than a marine yet, the HP of a Thor is only about 9 times as much as a marine. The HP of a Thor should be upped to 450 IMO.
-the Viking, the HP of a Viking should probably be around 140-145 not 125. Yet it costs 150M/75? what is this? mutalisk
gas should be probably 50-75 instead of 100. why so much gas for one mutalisk?
-If the roach is only 75/25 yet it has 145 HP, with +16 attack. why isn't there an answer to it like either a marauders who's cost should be either more similar to the Roach, or increase the HP of the reaper, or they could make hellions cheaper or slightly increase the HP.
- The Banshee needs more hit points upped to probably 160-170. Ground Power should be probably around 13-14. The cloak could last longer, but be more difficult to obtain easily, by making it a long time upgrade. maybe 2 minutes to prevent cheesiness by terrans.
Confirmed troll post ^^ Contrary at this post i think zerg hasn't really changed since the beginning of HOTS (the most important patch of HOTS for zerg is overseer speed). The roach speed, and hydra dps buff haven't really change the meta; Stephano has already played roach hydra during WOL vs Terran. The reason roachs/hydras are more played is more the WM strenght + the threat of Hellbat timing than roach hydra being better vs Terran. I love to see more viable harass option for zerg which are a bit limited to zergling runby, and mutalisk. Drops cost 100/100+200/200 = 300/300, roach burrow mouvement cost 100/100+150/150=250/250, Nyndus 200/200+ 100/100=300/300, it's way too expensive for the dmg you can do with this. It's just all-in and not comparable with T or P cheap dropship/banshee/oracle with can do a ton of dmg, and don't make you lose if you make no dmg.
Zergs can certainly be modified, but the more pressing issue is the lack of terran options late game and lack of strength of units or prohibitive cost of units late game for Terrans. Changelings might not be that useful but they are an option and i think it is true the zerg composition is the deepest and most varied of all the races at this point.
I am terran favored, but I in favor of balance more than superiority of any race since I don't play a particular race.
Perhaps some of my proposed buffs for Terrans are bit too strong, I am always in favor of watering down the buff of course to make the game more balanced and interesting.
"It's just all-in and not comparable with T or P cheap dropship/banshee/oracle with can do a ton of dmg, and don't make you lose if you make no dmg"
zergs have spore crawlers/spinecrawlers that are affordable defensive options and queens in the main. i'm know very little on protoss , so there.
As well, burrowed ability should be expensive. but perhaps it is a bit too expensive at this point. as well all your upgrades that you say are too expensive are upgrades that pertains to specific zerg composition units. So the cost is shared or less impacted as the increase in cost of one heavy infantry or aerial unit being would be exponential or multiple .
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
