| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
9-BiT
United States1089 Posts
Problem: Terran cannot win early game against protoss without attacking at least twice before to bait out Overcharges. Protoss however can win early with various all ins. Solution: Photon overcharge costs 150 energy, or drains nexus energy and can't work without it. Side Effects: Protoss has to defend more, and can't use photon overcharge as a crutch, or as the mistake button. | ||
|
Kruxxen
United States149 Posts
| ||
|
fried_rice
198 Posts
On September 23 2013 02:36 9-BiT wrote: + Show Spoiler + Problem: Terran cannot win early game against protoss without attacking at least twice before to bait out Overcharges. Protoss however can win early with various all ins. Solution: Photon overcharge costs 150 energy, or drains nexus energy and can't work without it. Side Effects: Protoss has to defend more, and can't use photon overcharge as a crutch, or as the mistake button. I've thought about the energy increase myself, I think it's the best, most elegant and most balanced solution. | ||
|
ChristianS
United States3304 Posts
| ||
|
Sabu113
United States11078 Posts
On September 19 2013 08:03 Thieving Magpie wrote: Oh right! Yeah, totally. Most games in Broodwar were the exact same compositions over and over again. Usually there will be 1-3 variations that come and go as time passes, but it always lead back to the same compositions. Bam finally. I don't know what's this fetishization of infinite combos. That will never occur in any strategy game. What matters is that the dynamics of what does pop up is interesting. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
On September 23 2013 10:12 Sabu113 wrote: Bam finally. I don't know what's this fetishization of infinite combos. That will never occur in any strategy game. What matters is that the dynamics of what does pop up is interesting. Card games, mobas, they all thrive on an 'infinite' number of match-ups. How popular would those games be if you stripped them down to just one match-up, but one with 'interesting dynamics'? I don't think they would be, since even very awesome unit interactions can still be played out and become dull to watch. This would be acceptable if people would only watch the game during Blizzcon once a year, but since SC2 aims to amuse audiences all of the year, you need more variety. Brood War had this because the execution was so important, so if there was a standard timing attack it was still exciting because there were so many questions to raise beforehand. Furthermore, Brood War had more positional play, so in the course of the game you can easily run into situations that are more chaotic and unique, which is more exciting for players and spectators. | ||
|
Schism
Australia85 Posts
See people still wanting SC2 to become Broodwar - check Needs more discussion on the fact we need better, more innovative maps - check! I'd like to see a map or two with higher minerals in the main, It might make for more interesting and robust openings instead of the frantic "omg i lost 2 units i'd better grab a 3rd i'm too far behind!!" expansion fest. I think the maps have a lot to answer for in the current SC2 problems | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On September 23 2013 18:57 Schism wrote: Log in to thread - check See people still wanting SC2 to become Broodwar - check Needs more discussion on the fact we need better, more innovative maps - check! I'd like to see a map or two with higher minerals in the main, It might make for more interesting and robust openings instead of the frantic "omg i lost 2 units i'd better grab a 3rd i'm too far behind!!" expansion fest. I think the maps have a lot to answer for in the current SC2 problems And with more robust you mean MC going: "$$$ finally 1base 6gate at 6:30 is viable $$$" | ||
|
Xequecal
United States473 Posts
On September 23 2013 07:59 ChristianS wrote: I mean, PvP is the obvious concern with an energy increase. The other concern being that Blizzard wants to reward players for using the MsC cleverly out on the map. If you make it so that the only way to be safe with it is to leave it at home all the time, then there's no chance for good players to use it well and distinguish themselves from bad players. 1/1/1 is a serious problem again for Protoss on some of the current maps with an overcharge nerf. The main reason it's not viable now is not because of overcharge itself, (as the siege tech removal and cloak research cost reduction essentially gives Terran a free Raven relative to WoL to blank it with) but because the existence of overcharge allows gate core nexus robo openings. This kind of opening was suicidal in WoL, but now it's perfectly safe. The earlier robo means much faster scouting and the ability to have many more immortals or even colossi on the field when the push hits. If you nerf overcharge and force Protoss players to open with gate core nexus gate gate gate again like in WoL to not die to early aggression, 1/1/1 will become stupidly overpowered again, at least on the maps that don't have chokepoints to FF their army out. Derelict Watcher and Akilon Wastes are particularly bad here, as your expansion can be sieged from the low ground and you simply need a critical mass of robo units to protect it. | ||
|
Deleted User 137586
7859 Posts
On September 23 2013 21:24 Xequecal wrote: 1/1/1 is a serious problem again for Protoss on some of the current maps with an overcharge nerf. The main reason it's not viable now is not because of overcharge itself, (as the siege tech removal and cloak research cost reduction essentially gives Terran a free Raven relative to WoL to blank it with) but because the existence of overcharge allows gate core nexus robo openings. This kind of opening was suicidal in WoL, but now it's perfectly safe. The earlier robo means much faster scouting and the ability to have many more immortals or even colossi on the field when the push hits. If you nerf overcharge and force Protoss players to open with gate core nexus gate gate gate again like in WoL to not die to early aggression, 1/1/1 will become stupidly overpowered again, at least on the maps that don't have chokepoints to FF their army out. Derelict Watcher and Akilon Wastes are particularly bad here, as your expansion can be sieged from the low ground and you simply need a critical mass of robo units to protect it. That's simply not the case. 111 was dead at the end of WoL so it cannot be that the Msc is the only way to beat it. A nerfed msc, not even its disappearance entirely, cannot thus necessarily lead to the resurgence of 111. | ||
|
vthree
Hong Kong8039 Posts
On September 23 2013 21:51 Ghanburighan wrote: That's simply not the case. 111 was dead at the end of WoL so it cannot be that the Msc is the only way to beat it. A nerfed msc, not even its disappearance entirely, cannot thus necessarily lead to the resurgence of 111. No siege required and cheaper cloak. So the timing would hit faster or harder. | ||
|
Xequecal
United States473 Posts
On September 23 2013 21:51 Ghanburighan wrote: That's simply not the case. 111 was dead at the end of WoL so it cannot be that the Msc is the only way to beat it. A nerfed msc, not even its disappearance entirely, cannot thus necessarily lead to the resurgence of 111. 1/1/1 was dead because every single map in the pool had choke points far away from the natural where you could stall endlessly by forcefielding the Terran out and splitting his SCVs from the rest of his army. Those two maps don't have these features. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
On September 23 2013 21:57 Xequecal wrote: 1/1/1 was dead because every single map in the pool had choke points far away from the natural where you could stall endlessly by forcefielding the Terran out and splitting his SCVs from the rest of his army. Those two maps don't have these features. We demand the return of Xel Naga Caverns! | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On September 23 2013 18:57 Schism wrote: Log in to thread - check See people still wanting SC2 to become Broodwar - check Needs more discussion on the fact we need better, more innovative maps - check! I'd like to see a map or two with higher minerals in the main, It might make for more interesting and robust openings instead of the frantic "omg i lost 2 units i'd better grab a 3rd i'm too far behind!!" expansion fest. I think the maps have a lot to answer for in the current SC2 problems Wow ... you want even more resources in the game? Hasnt it dawned on you that TOO MUCH (economy and production) might be the root of the problem? That is the bottom line to solve the "critical numbers problem" of SC2. | ||
|
RampancyTW
United States577 Posts
On September 23 2013 23:42 Rabiator wrote: A "problem" entirely of your own invention. Critical numbers existed in BW. Critical numbers exist in any situation where there is a disparity in range, burst damage, movement speed, unit size, etc. It would even exist if all of these things were identical for every unit, because different unit number disparities would allow/disallow different unit behaviors.Wow ... you want even more resources in the game? Hasnt it dawned on you that TOO MUCH (economy and production) might be the root of the problem? That is the bottom line to solve the "critical numbers problem" of SC2. Your "critical numbers problem" is a natural consequence of having a game where two players don't always have the exact same iterations of tools at their disposal. It's impossible to remove. | ||
|
larse
1611 Posts
When multiple anti-SC2 comments got to the top of a popular reddit thread, there are something wrong. These rants never get any upvotes. After watching BW in the form of Bisu's streaming, it looks like many SC2 people are realizing something, something wrong about the game that is called SC2. | ||
|
ChristianS
United States3304 Posts
On September 30 2013 09:04 larse wrote: http://www.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/1ndqeg/bisu_streaming_bw/ When multiple anti-SC2 comments got to the top of a popular reddit thread, there are something wrong. These rants never get any upvotes. After watching BW in the form of Bisu's streaming, it looks like many SC2 people are realizing something, something wrong about the game that is called SC2. That's a silly way to measure public opinion. Obviously the "Bisu streaming BW" thread is going to attract the "BW>SC2" crowd, and that crowd is likely to upvote anti-SC2 comments | ||
|
larse
1611 Posts
On September 30 2013 09:25 ChristianS wrote: That's a silly way to measure public opinion. Obviously the "Bisu streaming BW" thread is going to attract the "BW>SC2" crowd, and that crowd is likely to upvote anti-SC2 comments I guess you are right, but the thread is top 10 so I think most people will check it out and it won't be just BW crowd. | ||
|
Myrddraal
Australia937 Posts
On September 23 2013 23:45 RampancyTW wrote: A "problem" entirely of your own invention. Critical numbers existed in BW. Critical numbers exist in any situation where there is a disparity in range, burst damage, movement speed, unit size, etc. It would even exist if all of these things were identical for every unit, because different unit number disparities would allow/disallow different unit behaviors. Your "critical numbers problem" is a natural consequence of having a game where two players don't always have the exact same iterations of tools at their disposal. It's impossible to remove. I'm pretty sure his critical numbers problem is not that they exist in Sc2 and not BW, it's how fast you are able to reach critical numbers (due to the sc2 macro mechanics mules, inject and chrono), the fact that you don't need to spread out as much to reach critical numbers (due to the amount of resources in each base and distance of expansions) and critical mass just being more efficient due to unit clumping and more efficient pathfinding in Sc2. These differences are real, though it's up to you to determine whether you feel they amount to a problem or not. For me, I think it is a problem, since I don't really watch or play the game anymore, though of course there could be other reasons for my loss of interest. I think forcing players to spread out more before they can reach critical mass would give more opportunities for harassment and small skirmishes throughout the game which might make the game more dynamic and would be more appealing to me. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
On September 30 2013 10:24 Myrddraal wrote: I'm pretty sure his critical numbers problem is not that they exist in Sc2 and not BW, it's how fast you are able to reach critical numbers (due to the sc2 macro mechanics mules, inject and chrono), the fact that you don't need to spread out as much to reach critical numbers (due to the amount of resources in each base and distance of expansions) and critical mass just being more efficient due to unit clumping and more efficient pathfinding in Sc2. These differences are real, though it's up to you to determine whether you feel they amount to a problem or not. For me, I think it is a problem, since I don't really watch or play the game anymore, though of course there could be other reasons for my loss of interest. I think forcing players to spread out more before they can reach critical mass would give more opportunities for harassment and small skirmishes throughout the game which might make the game more dynamic and would be more appealing to me. Critical numbers will always exist and aren't always bad for the game. If you know that at some point you will be weaker due to worse scaling, you will be encouraged to attack your opponent, and whether this is all-in aggression or not is decided by other factors. Also, given that you are relatively stronger in small numbers, you could try your hand at multi-pronged aggression, to try to spread out the opponent's army to force engagements in your favor. So scaling can create exciting action-packed games. I do think Rabiator is correct that the scaling in SC2 is often extreme (due to pathfinding mostly) and maybe even unwanted, but it's a problem that can be fixed without changing the pathfinding really. To take the brood lord as an example, because of the broodlings it has a critical numbers effect which was very problematic in Wings of Liberty. In the expansion the brood lord stayed the same, but some synergy with the infestor was lost and now instead of needing 7-10 brood lords to create an unbeatable army it's 10+ that are required. A small change, and the critical numbers aspect still exists, but all of a sudden it's not problematic anymore. | ||
| ||
|
|
RSL Revival
Replay Cast
The PondCast
KCM Race Survival
WardiTV Map Contest Tou…
Gerald vs TBD
Clem vs TBD
ByuN vs TBD
Rogue vs MaxPax
ShoWTimE vs TBD
OSC
CranKy Ducklings
Escore
RSL Revival
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
