|
On April 23 2012 10:32 Durp wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2012 03:42 ThirdDegree wrote:On April 23 2012 03:01 avilo wrote:
If people want warpgate to ever become balanced and add back in the dynamic of defender's advantage to Protoss in all three match-ups there is a very simple solution that blizzard can implement to Heart of the Swarm that will make it impossible to do random warp-gate all-ins across the entire map.
And no, it's not really arguable that warp-in is balanced - it defies one of the principle concepts of wargames which is travel distance.
To keep warp-in in the game to allow Protoss their unique race advantage but not make it overwhelming in lategame or too good with all-ins like it currently is Blizzard can do the following things.
Blizzard can make it so Protoss is only allowed to warp-in units in proximity to their nexus's or the gateways themselves. They can add in a late-game research/upgrade that allows protoss players to build a pylon and pay a cost of minerals/small gas cost to turn that pylon into a "warp-in pylon." What this does, is it still allows protoss players to abuse warp-in defensively, but now in mid-game Protoss players cannot randomly 2 base warp-in all-in without walking reinforcements across the map like a GOOD RTS game.
Of course, warpgate all-ins are still possible with use of the warp prism, which was the entire point of the warp prism in the first place, which is perfectly fine because then there is the investment of the robo + a warp prism, which inherently also makes protoss mass gate all-ins easier to scout.
This also fixes PvP making it possible to play games that aren't mostly 1 base vs 1 base because now reinforcements have to cross the entire map to reach the opponent, giving that defender's advantage...back to the defender.
Blizzard can fix warp-gate in a way like this and they know it is broken, but whether they "fix" it and add defender's advantage back into the game is up to them. Building a 100 mineral building allowing instant reinforcements is the key reason why PvP is such a trash match-up, PvT has problems lategame as well simply because of warping in chargelots, along with mid-game problems in terms of dice rolling gateway all-ins that have instant reinforcements and are very forgiving for the protoss player. PvZ warp-gate all-ins are also very easy to execute. So making it necessary to build a warp prism to do these all-ins, along with forcing protoss to walk reinforcements to battles...it just fixes the entire issue with warp-in.
And then Blizzard can decide if they want to allow protoss to build a 100 mineral building to upgrade lategame to allow warp-ins across the map that defy every RTS principle. As a toss, I kind of like this solution. Proximity to nexus warpgate and an upgrade to individual pylons in the late stage (maybe allow probes to build this upgraded pylon from the get go, I don't know). My only gripe with this is that is generally kills any 2 base all ins that we can do. As a whole, the protoss army is pretty slow (I know blink stalkers can zip around but I'm talking about a cohesive force), and we would really only be able to push with huge armies if we can't rely on quick reenforcements. Has anyone ever made a custom map that plays with these mechanics? I'd be curious to play with some of the changes suggested. This would cause tons of problems for Protoss. Since it would horribly limit your surface area to warp in units. What happens if you start to sim city? Suddenly you've got pretty minimal space to warp in units. Protoss units are so painfully slow that they would all die walking across the map to rally up with your army. Unlike zerg and terran you don't produce mass amounts of Protoss units at once, and your measly reinforcement army would get eaten alive by just about anything in the middle of the map. Also remember that if you're keeping warpgate, unlike the other races once you have warpgate you're not rallying your units, so the whole principle of how Protoss attacks relies on the fact that your reinforcements arrive right at the battle. Unlike zerg and terran units, they're all really expensive, flimsy, and only come 4-8 at a time.
Sorry, I didn't mean a radius around the nexus is your warp in space, more like pylons within that radius are able to warp in. And the radius can be pretty large, although making it work with various map sizes can be difficult. Since the game was built around having WG, it's very difficult to adjest without severely crippling the protoss. I remember them saying that there will be no more high ground warp ins from low ground pylons once HotS comes out. Hopefully this will solve a lot of the problems.
|
Obviously removing or changing the way warp gates works now, would have impact on balance, however I think it would make games much more interesting tactically and to watch, if it was gone or severely changed.
It would help with defenders advantage etc.
Assuming associated changes were made to rebalance the game (which won't be a small feat) of course.
|
On April 23 2012 12:05 BenAD wrote:
Obviously removing or changing the way warp gates works now, would have impact on balance, however I think it would make games much more interesting tactically and to watch, if it was gone or severely changed.
It would help with defenders advantage etc.
Assuming associated changes were made to rebalance the game (which won't be a small feat) of course.
One big problem though is that pvt early game is insanely terran favored and changing the way warpin works would allow more balance changes that could alleviate this while also balancing out lategame pvt being p favored.
|
On April 23 2012 12:42 Drowsy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2012 12:05 BenAD wrote:
Obviously removing or changing the way warp gates works now, would have impact on balance, however I think it would make games much more interesting tactically and to watch, if it was gone or severely changed.
It would help with defenders advantage etc.
Assuming associated changes were made to rebalance the game (which won't be a small feat) of course. One big problem though is that pvt early game is insanely terran favored and changing the way warpin works would allow more balance changes that could alleviate this while also balancing out lategame pvt being p favored.
I think the whole idea of Ts early game being imba is just a myth and rather their mid game is where they are deadly when all the upgrades kick in. The key problem is the sudden burst of DPS from the MM ball gained by stim where a wrong move could wipe the P force in a blink of an eye.
Basically, the main contributor to this massive advantage T gains mid game is due to the marauder. The unit can tank, gain quick MS buff for a duration, destroy all armoured targets on ground and make sure nothing gets away. I think its time this unit needs to undergo a change (whether its the numbers or unit dynamics like changing concussive shell to a move interesting skill/spell/passive w/e) so that other units (Tanks!!!!!) aren't so much foreshadowed by such a boring A move unit. Marines I think are fine because even if they do deal alot of damage, they are VERY fragile due to low hit points making them less problematic than say marauders.
Coming to think of it, I think units that deal such an insane amount of damage in a short period of time AND be able to take alot of punishment dont quite well fit into the design with other units.
|
On April 23 2012 13:11 YyapSsap wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2012 12:42 Drowsy wrote:On April 23 2012 12:05 BenAD wrote:
Obviously removing or changing the way warp gates works now, would have impact on balance, however I think it would make games much more interesting tactically and to watch, if it was gone or severely changed.
It would help with defenders advantage etc.
Assuming associated changes were made to rebalance the game (which won't be a small feat) of course. One big problem though is that pvt early game is insanely terran favored and changing the way warpin works would allow more balance changes that could alleviate this while also balancing out lategame pvt being p favored. I think the whole idea of Ts early game being imba is just a myth and rather their mid game is where they are deadly when all the upgrades kick in. The key problem is the sudden burst of DPS from the MM ball gained by stim where a wrong move could wipe the P force in a blink of an eye. Basically, the main contributor to this massive advantage T gains mid game is due to the marauder. The unit can tank, gain quick MS buff for a duration, destroy all armoured targets on ground and make sure nothing gets away. I think its time this unit needs to undergo a change (whether its the numbers or unit dynamics like changing concussive shell to a move interesting skill/spell/passive w/e) so that other units (Tanks!!!!!) aren't so much foreshadowed by such a boring A move unit. Marines I think are fine because even if they do deal alot of damage, they are VERY fragile due to low hit points making them less problematic than say marauders. Coming to think of it, I think units that deal such an insane amount of damage in a short period of time AND be able to take alot of punishment dont quite well fit into the design with other units.
The funny thing about the marauder is most true Terran players hate the marauder. It goes against everything that Terran basically was in Brood War.
But then the opposite holds true. Blizzard/Browder LOVE the marauder. So much that any time mech has become viable in TvP, they have nerfed mech to be utterly bad, and kept the marauder the same. It's a bit sad =/ they are waiting for HOTS to "fix mech" but even then you can see Browder's hate/bias/chip on shoulder of hating mech because they release a unit preview of the most lulzy unit for HOTS - a siege unit that would make mech even worse in TvT. =/
|
On April 23 2012 13:23 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2012 13:11 YyapSsap wrote:On April 23 2012 12:42 Drowsy wrote:On April 23 2012 12:05 BenAD wrote:
Obviously removing or changing the way warp gates works now, would have impact on balance, however I think it would make games much more interesting tactically and to watch, if it was gone or severely changed.
It would help with defenders advantage etc.
Assuming associated changes were made to rebalance the game (which won't be a small feat) of course. One big problem though is that pvt early game is insanely terran favored and changing the way warpin works would allow more balance changes that could alleviate this while also balancing out lategame pvt being p favored. I think the whole idea of Ts early game being imba is just a myth and rather their mid game is where they are deadly when all the upgrades kick in. The key problem is the sudden burst of DPS from the MM ball gained by stim where a wrong move could wipe the P force in a blink of an eye. Basically, the main contributor to this massive advantage T gains mid game is due to the marauder. The unit can tank, gain quick MS buff for a duration, destroy all armoured targets on ground and make sure nothing gets away. I think its time this unit needs to undergo a change (whether its the numbers or unit dynamics like changing concussive shell to a move interesting skill/spell/passive w/e) so that other units (Tanks!!!!!) aren't so much foreshadowed by such a boring A move unit. Marines I think are fine because even if they do deal alot of damage, they are VERY fragile due to low hit points making them less problematic than say marauders. Coming to think of it, I think units that deal such an insane amount of damage in a short period of time AND be able to take alot of punishment dont quite well fit into the design with other units. The funny thing about the marauder is most true Terran players hate the marauder. It goes against everything that Terran basically was in Brood War.
Agreed.
Its funny when you look at how blizzard made bio viable in all matchups in SC2 by increasing hitpoints dramatically compared to BW (40->55 for marines, 125hp for marauder and 45->100 Ghosts). Its like giving a tank a new costume and instead of siege mode, you got stim. I would expect T players to be able to choose certain tech trees (air, mech, bio or mixture) within the T arsenal based on its strength and weaknesses e.g mech = highest firepower but the current incantation of bio in SC2 means that all other tech trees are inferior in almost all aspects. And coming to think of it, its because of that one unit.
I cant for the life me remember the last time I built marauders outside of allins, or cheese. They really need to come up with ways of toning down bio based strat ala marauder so the other tech trees in the terran arsenal aren't so neglected..
|
On April 23 2012 13:23 avilo wrote:
But then the opposite holds true. Blizzard/Browder LOVE the marauder. So much that any time mech has become viable in TvP, they have nerfed mech to be utterly bad, and kept the marauder the same. It's a bit sad =/ they are waiting for HOTS to "fix mech" but even then you can see Browder's hate/bias/chip on shoulder of hating mech because they release a unit preview of the most lulzy unit for HOTS - a siege unit that would make mech even worse in TvT. =/
I think its more to due them having big concerns about tweaking their "core" units and how they are afraid that it might cause too big of an outcome due to these small changes. It was from an interview somewhere, hence why they never touch their "core" units in balance patches ever. Instead they try to work around their "core" units which to me as its pros and cons but to this date, I think its biting them back.
Wasn't one of the reasons why they are trying to force people to go Bio is because mech is apparently to difficult? Instead of forcing people, they should still leave the strategy viable (instead of nerfing units to oblivion). This whole "play based on our image of SC" that blizzard has is really hurting.
|
On April 23 2012 13:32 YyapSsap wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2012 13:23 avilo wrote:On April 23 2012 13:11 YyapSsap wrote:On April 23 2012 12:42 Drowsy wrote:On April 23 2012 12:05 BenAD wrote:
Obviously removing or changing the way warp gates works now, would have impact on balance, however I think it would make games much more interesting tactically and to watch, if it was gone or severely changed.
It would help with defenders advantage etc.
Assuming associated changes were made to rebalance the game (which won't be a small feat) of course. One big problem though is that pvt early game is insanely terran favored and changing the way warpin works would allow more balance changes that could alleviate this while also balancing out lategame pvt being p favored. I think the whole idea of Ts early game being imba is just a myth and rather their mid game is where they are deadly when all the upgrades kick in. The key problem is the sudden burst of DPS from the MM ball gained by stim where a wrong move could wipe the P force in a blink of an eye. Basically, the main contributor to this massive advantage T gains mid game is due to the marauder. The unit can tank, gain quick MS buff for a duration, destroy all armoured targets on ground and make sure nothing gets away. I think its time this unit needs to undergo a change (whether its the numbers or unit dynamics like changing concussive shell to a move interesting skill/spell/passive w/e) so that other units (Tanks!!!!!) aren't so much foreshadowed by such a boring A move unit. Marines I think are fine because even if they do deal alot of damage, they are VERY fragile due to low hit points making them less problematic than say marauders. Coming to think of it, I think units that deal such an insane amount of damage in a short period of time AND be able to take alot of punishment dont quite well fit into the design with other units. The funny thing about the marauder is most true Terran players hate the marauder. It goes against everything that Terran basically was in Brood War. Agreed. Its funny when you look at how blizzard made bio viable in all matchups in SC2 by increasing hitpoints dramatically compared to BW (40->55 for marines, 125hp for marauder and 45->100 Ghosts). Its like giving a tank a new costume and instead of siege mode, you got stim. I would expect T players to be able to choose certain tech trees (air, mech, bio or mixture) within the T arsenal based on its strength and weaknesses e.g mech = highest firepower but the current incantation of bio in SC2 means that all other tech trees are inferior in almost all aspects. And coming to think of it, its because of that one unit. I cant for the life me remember the last time I built marauders outside of allins, or cheese. They really need to come up with ways of toning down bio based strat ala marauder so the other tech trees in the terran arsenal aren't so neglected..
Well, to be fair I can see the Marauder working much much better if he had something like 80 HP.
Still tanky enough so that it can be used as the tank of Bio but not tanky enough to break tank lines.
I'd still like for a Siege tank buff instead.I don't really mind Bio being viable in all MUs, I'd love for mech to be on par to Bio in overall goodness.The Ghost being tanky is not much of an issue but just to stay consistant a health nerf would be good too IMO
|
Yeah, a hitpoint nerf could work with a slight tweak in damage numbers but I would kill for a tank buff.
If tanks are able to deal full damage to shields, it would make them viable in TvP without having to jiggle around with its damage against light/massive units and messing its relationship with other matchups.
|
On April 23 2012 12:42 Drowsy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2012 12:05 BenAD wrote:
Obviously removing or changing the way warp gates works now, would have impact on balance, however I think it would make games much more interesting tactically and to watch, if it was gone or severely changed.
It would help with defenders advantage etc.
Assuming associated changes were made to rebalance the game (which won't be a small feat) of course. One big problem though is that pvt early game is insanely terran favored and changing the way warpin works would allow more balance changes that could alleviate this while also balancing out lategame pvt being p favored.
Sure changing the way warpgates would break the balance in every matchup, but I'd still love for blizzard to do it for HotS or LotV and then balance it through the matchups / game periods as much as possible.
I just think it would make the game and the PvX matchups more interesting to play and watch.
|
On April 23 2012 14:21 YyapSsap wrote:
Yeah, a hitpoint nerf could work with a slight tweak in damage numbers but I would kill for a tank buff.
If tanks are able to deal full damage to shields, it would make them viable in TvP without having to jiggle around with its damage against light/massive units and messing its relationship with other matchups.
Wouldn't tank buff destroy ZvT?
I'm more in favor of a Raven buff...
Terrans need late game AOE.
|
On April 23 2012 14:29 neoghaleon55 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2012 14:21 YyapSsap wrote:
Yeah, a hitpoint nerf could work with a slight tweak in damage numbers but I would kill for a tank buff.
If tanks are able to deal full damage to shields, it would make them viable in TvP without having to jiggle around with its damage against light/massive units and messing its relationship with other matchups. Wouldn't tank buff destroy ZvT? I'm more in favor of a Raven buff... Terrans need late game AOE.
I think I might agree with a Raven buff. Some way to make it more viable as a flying spellcaster for the terran army, though to be fair I think all it's abilities are pretty powerful already.
I would also be in favour of giving thors or battlecruisers more splash viability, probably in an ability form. In the campaign the hero-thor (whatever it was called) had a AoE ability that was really strong, and maybe not something of that level, but same principle could work. Battlecruisers could also easily have their Yamato reworked to be splash-like for probably a straight-up damage nerf. I know when I started using BC's as a sc2 noob the hit effect made me think it was doing damage anyway, then I turned healthbars on haha.
Anyway, I agree with the concept that perhaps Terran need alternative splash ability in their arsenal and that perhaps a tank buff (especially in damage numbers alone) would be too powerful in TvZ where they are already pretty darn good. Their damage in TvP is nothing to scoff at still, however the standard terran fight is about mobility in TvP rather than forcing fights into sieged locations as is a possibility in TvT and TvZ. I'm sort of hoping the battle hellion and warhounds will promote this style of combat in TvP.
For the current WoL game however, a little more splash would be nice somewhere. Protoss do walk everything in a big fat deathball after all. Would be nice to see Tier 3 units or the Raven be more viable in the matchup too.
|
On April 23 2012 14:29 neoghaleon55 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2012 14:21 YyapSsap wrote:
Yeah, a hitpoint nerf could work with a slight tweak in damage numbers but I would kill for a tank buff.
If tanks are able to deal full damage to shields, it would make them viable in TvP without having to jiggle around with its damage against light/massive units and messing its relationship with other matchups. Wouldn't tank buff destroy ZvT? I'm more in favor of a Raven buff... Terrans need late game AOE.
Well, zerg units dont have shields do they?  hence my reasoning that tanks should do full damage to shields and everything else remains the same. (I think this is better than having a bonus to massive which i initially thought),
And agreed with a raven buff. I mean instead of the HSM which seems so hard to buff (big problem being that its instant damage), i would love to have those flame turrets instead. would be so much more useful. It sort of gives the raven a mobile defense setup unit role where they fly around and bolster defenses for a given period of time til the reinforcements arrive etc.
|
[B]
The funny thing about the marauder is most true Terran players hate the marauder. It goes against everything that Terran basically was in Brood War.
But then the opposite holds true. Blizzard/Browder LOVE the marauder. So much that any time mech has become viable in TvP, they have nerfed mech to be utterly bad, and kept the marauder the same. It's a bit sad =/ they are waiting for HOTS to "fix mech" but even then you can see Browder's hate/bias/chip on shoulder of hating mech because they release a unit preview of the most lulzy unit for HOTS - a siege unit that would make mech even worse in TvT. =/
Agreed %100. Never understood why the Marauder was introduced in its current state or pre-nerf state, and have hated it since before beta before ever even playing it and 2 years later i still have to force myself to build them. PLEASE can i have my siege tank back.
|
I actually like the marauder. Now it is possible to go bio vs mech. Sometimes the pro who goes bio will win, and sometimes its the meching player will win. Without the marauder we would only see mech in tvt. That would be fun...
Apparently mech is also viable against protoss. Se the "How to mech protoss cry" thread.
And people keep comparing sc2 to bw. Sure bw was awesome. But this is a new game. Do you guys honestly only want a graphics updated bw?
|
On April 23 2012 14:29 BenAD wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2012 12:42 Drowsy wrote:On April 23 2012 12:05 BenAD wrote:
Obviously removing or changing the way warp gates works now, would have impact on balance, however I think it would make games much more interesting tactically and to watch, if it was gone or severely changed.
It would help with defenders advantage etc.
Assuming associated changes were made to rebalance the game (which won't be a small feat) of course. One big problem though is that pvt early game is insanely terran favored and changing the way warpin works would allow more balance changes that could alleviate this while also balancing out lategame pvt being p favored. Sure changing the way warpgates would break the balance in every matchup, but I'd still love for blizzard to do it for HotS or LotV and then balance it through the matchups / game periods as much as possible. I just think it would make the game and the PvX matchups more interesting to play and watch.
It would not break balance at all. All it would do is make it so protoss cannot do dice roll warpgate all-ins in every match-up. And if they are, they'll need a warp prism.
It just makes them have to walk their units across the map meaning travel distance matters like in every good RTS game. SC2 warp-in is currently similar to having arbiter recall available to research on the cybernetics core and every pylon is an arbiter. Warp-in is one of the reasons even why PvP remains in it's current state where all-ins and 1 base play are basically more powerful than almost everything else. Can you imagine PvP with an actual defender's advantage and attackers being required to travel the distance of the map to the opponent's base? Suddenly you get more PvP macro games on 2+ bases because the game isn't ended by an all-in over 50% of the time.
Just food for thought. Warpgate all-ins in all match-ups are pretty lame with proxy pylons, but PvP would dramatically become better with having warpgate changed.
|
On April 23 2012 15:44 gronnelg wrote:
I actually like the marauder. Now it is possible to go bio vs mech. Sometimes the pro who goes bio will win, and sometimes its the meching player will win. Without the marauder we would only see mech in tvt. That would be fun...
Apparently mech is also viable against protoss. Se the "How to mech protoss cry" thread.
And people keep comparing sc2 to bw. Sure bw was awesome. But this is a new game. Do you guys honestly only want a graphics updated bw?
Posts like these makes me 
What most people want isn't BW with updated graphics but using what made BW so successful in terms of strategy/units/gameplay (the underlying concepts and rules), and taking that by incorporating those very formulas to make SC2 more interesting.
If they wanted a completely new game, why even call it "starcraft" in the first place?
|
On April 23 2012 16:18 YyapSsap wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2012 15:44 gronnelg wrote:
I actually like the marauder. Now it is possible to go bio vs mech. Sometimes the pro who goes bio will win, and sometimes its the meching player will win. Without the marauder we would only see mech in tvt. That would be fun...
Apparently mech is also viable against protoss. Se the "How to mech protoss cry" thread.
And people keep comparing sc2 to bw. Sure bw was awesome. But this is a new game. Do you guys honestly only want a graphics updated bw? Posts like these makes me What most people want isn't BW with updated graphics but using what made BW so successful in terms of strategy/units/gameplay (the underlying concepts and rules), and taking that by incorporating those very formulas to make SC2 more interesting. If they wanted a completely new game, why even call it "starcraft" in the first place?
And what would that be? What made SC:BW "so" successful - meaning extremly popular as an esport in Korea and respected as one outside of Korea.
Was it the crappy AI/pathing?
Was it the limited unit selection?
Was it unit design?
Was it unit balancing?
Was it the fact that it was the successor to (one of) the most selling PC game at that time - WC2?
Was it because there was hardly any competition in the esports scene?
Was it because one could "play/try it for free" (meaning you could pirate it and try it in LAN)
Some people from BW come to these forums and tell people how BW was better due to unit design and demand drastic changes and claim that SC2 is only being played because it's "new and cool and hyped".
But guess what, there is so much more to creating a successful and exciting game than whether an infantry unit may or may not have 120HP.
Read Barrins thread "Breadth of gameplay", he makes some good points about how to enforce the strengthes of active play (small unit squads instead of deathballs) and positional play (use of defensive power units instead of mass low Tier).
Pointing at the new units as source for the "new problems"(whether or not things like deathballs are such is probably even personal opinion. I'd prefer less deathballish play, yet I don't want to be forced in some C&C open base, each unit should be "out and about" scenario) is just pointing at the visually most different thing from BW.
|
Marauder HP nerf was right alongside my desire for Archons to be made massive (at least one of my hopes were answered...)
But lets be real folks. NOTHING will be touched till HotS.
And even that day looks extremely bleak.
|
On April 23 2012 16:49 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2012 16:18 YyapSsap wrote:On April 23 2012 15:44 gronnelg wrote:
I actually like the marauder. Now it is possible to go bio vs mech. Sometimes the pro who goes bio will win, and sometimes its the meching player will win. Without the marauder we would only see mech in tvt. That would be fun...
Apparently mech is also viable against protoss. Se the "How to mech protoss cry" thread.
And people keep comparing sc2 to bw. Sure bw was awesome. But this is a new game. Do you guys honestly only want a graphics updated bw? Posts like these makes me What most people want isn't BW with updated graphics but using what made BW so successful in terms of strategy/units/gameplay (the underlying concepts and rules), and taking that by incorporating those very formulas to make SC2 more interesting. If they wanted a completely new game, why even call it "starcraft" in the first place? And what would that be? What made SC:BW "so" successful - meaning extremly popular as an esport in Korea and respected as one outside of Korea. Was it the crappy AI/pathing? Was it the limited unit selection? Was it unit design? Was it unit balancing? Was it the fact that it was the successor to (one of) the most selling PC game at that time - WC2? Was it because there was hardly any competition in the esports scene? Was it because one could "play/try it for free" (meaning you could pirate it and try it in LAN) Some people from BW come to these forums and tell people how BW was better due to unit design and demand drastic changes and claim that SC2 is only being played because it's "new and cool and hyped". But guess what, there is so much more to creating a successful and exciting game than whether an infantry unit may or may not have 120HP. Read Barrins thread "Breadth of gameplay", he makes some good points about how to enforce the strengthes of active play (small unit squads instead of deathballs) and positional play (use of defensive power units instead of mass low Tier). Pointing at the new units as source for the "new problems"(whether or not things like deathballs are such is probably even personal opinion. I'd prefer less deathballish play, yet I don't want to be forced in some C&C open base, each unit should be "out and about" scenario) is just pointing at the visually most different thing from BW.
Because BW could be interesting in any form of metagame, it was interesting when people didnt even discover natural expand and it is interesting in Flash Era of greediness.
Why? Well you listed the reasons for it.
1 "Crappy AI/pathing" Allowed for non linear unit movements and punished player who didnt pay attention.
2 "Limited united selection" Forced play we could call "appropriate" to your mechanics. Both this point 1 and point 2 and balance design made certain strategies weaker when performed by weaker mechanically player. Whenever you watch Idra stream you may notice he says "he should not be able to do it". Its refering to the fact that in BW a crappy player could not just think about something and do it , first he would need mechanics to back it off.
Also whenever a weaker mechanically player forced or was forced to a longer game he was more and more at disadvantage because of lack of MBS and unlimited unit selection. Stronger player will always move his army 1-2 sec faster and multitask better, in the end getting better reward for being better.
3 Unit design Allowed to use your units throughout the whole game, upgraded zerglings in BW was the scariest dps in the game, it could take down the nexus in 10 secs. Compare it to zergling in SC2, when at some point you just have to sacriface some unit just to "free up the supply" for good units that can actually kill high tier stuff from protoss/terran. Hydra could be used as lurker, "useless" mutalisks could be transformed into guardians and devourers. Because SC2 macro mechanics allow you to max in 11-15 mins most units become useless after few minutes, also the upgrades dont necesserily give the units expected longevity, tunneling roaches are still bad, grooved hydras are still the same hydras (compare it to speed hydras from bw, adrenal lings, speed/armor ultras, dragoon range marine range etc). Units in BW are in 99% of cases used throughout whole game, because upgrades and unit design (micro ability included) and supportive casters make them useful always.
4 Unit balancing This is the most interesting because BW game dmg mechanics dictated certain compositions like Mech vs Protoss only or Muta-zergling based ZvZ*. Still it didnt really make it "boring". Why? Well look at how the competetive gameplay progressed, unlike in SC2 BW emerged from Micro based game into Macro based game. The notion to this was very simple, units felt much stronger when used in tactical manner, when Boxer figured out dropship play everyone's jaw dropped on the floor, it was imbalanced on first glance, but when players started to figure out counter measures it became balanced. Look *tactical* measures not unit 1 dmg to unit 2 dmg. I believe the core example of unit balance is reaver, infamously known for its "buging" scarabs is in fact one of the most fair units in starcraft. Reaver drops became extremely strong in early competetive BW, however people started to figure out you can actually prevent or minimize the damage with fast reaction times, reaver scarab mechanic and delay was actually inentional.
And after 10 years can we say they did a fine job? I think yes. As there was still not a single notion that really proved reavers to be too bad or too good. But 1 thing stays true, it was interesting and always increased your heartbeat.
To the rest of your points many stays true, but we cant say that it was a game fault that it never took of in western countries, even in SC2 forums that would be laughable to say because its the same reason why SC2 is declining. Why it never took off in western country was very simple, the game was played casualy by masses (comparable to today SC2 populace) but the self improvemnt factor the game needed to overcome Koreans who got better WAY to fast because of their dedication and sudden infrastructure was to big. BW was as globally played as SC2 nowadays, the people who you watch in SC2 matches are people who came from BW and WC3.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
