|
On April 30 2014 00:12 SC2Toastie wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2014 23:53 Big J wrote:On April 29 2014 23:21 SC2Toastie wrote:On April 29 2014 23:17 Big J wrote:On April 29 2014 23:13 SC2Toastie wrote:
I would -LOVE- experimentation with flat out damage buffs (or even +1 range or -1 range on overcharge) to the siege tank. Possibly a +15/20 buff vs all with a fusion core upgrade! Bring back the positional powerhouse!
With current larger an open maps (nerf was with Steppes of War in mind ffs), muta buffs, vipers and half the Protoss anti-tank arsenal still in place, I think testing this out is something not too harmful and might make Terran biotank a TON more interesting.
Upgrade must be really late game though, with the intention of favoring Tank play by giving them longevity, and so it comes after the air transition in mech v bio. Opinions?
Marine tank games are the best games in history of SC2 No thanks, Mech vs Zerg can already be boring enough, no need to enforce even longer games by making it even better even later. This is what the guy above me talks about. Mech TvZ has a problem with economy in this game and Zerg lacking strong Anti Air without resorting to SH+Static. It's a problem with Zerg AA (also vs Toss) and SH design.. Lower level players struggling to end mech (it hardly happens in pro levels! Don't bring up 2/3 incidents) is not an argument. Zerg has no AA problem. They have two very strong antiair units in the form of Corruptors and Infestors. And moveable static defenses. Unless you want to go back to WoL status where zerg was able to clean the board of AtA capable units with fungal+corruptors at will (and then abuse that situation with BLs), I don't know why you bitch about it. SHs are bonkers, but they are needed, not just because of T/P airplay. Even if the Terran/Protoss doesn't go more air than needed to counter BLs, you'd still have to completely resort to them to stand a chance against Tank/Thor or Colossus/Immortal/Archon/HT based armies. Their usage has acutally very little to do with the actual airunits of the opponent, but with all the ground support units that have to be kept in check and which are the actual problems for Corruptors/Infestors/Hydras/Queens/Spores/Vipers. And yes, Mech has a problem in the economy game in the lategame on maps that aren't supereasy to split. So fix that problem (e.g. by nerfing mutalisks, which are the core issue why it is so hard to take bases that aren't in a supertight cluster) instead of rewarding players even more for sitting on their asses doing nothing but massing up hightech Units. Zerg has no AA problem? Viking/Raven and Voidrays would like a word with you. I said, Zerg needs SH+Static to supply sufficient anti air to deal with the other races aerial compositions. That, in my opinion, is a weakness, because static defense implies defense, in other words, you're very weak offensively because you cannot engage. I call that weak. Call it whatever you want. Also, I don't like the word 'bitching' either. You don't have to see everything binary. There's a lot of space between this situation and the 'clean the board of AtA capable units with fungal+corruptors at will' situation. There's grey between black and white. As for Swarm Hosts, the only reason they are needed is precisely BECAUSE of Air units. Swarm Hosts are the only units capable of allowing your air army to take on the opponents air army by zoning out the ground support at no cost. Zerg armies can deal with Tank/Thor and Collosus/Immortal/Archon/Templar when they have air control, and if the opponent dedicates that much supply to a ground force, well, guess what, you can take air control with corruptors or mutalisk. That, however, is not the case currently, which forces the use of Swarm Hosts and the corresponding situations of awkwardness. As for the economy + mech situation, we're talking about a different thing. I'm talking about how easy it currently is against less experienced players to take 4 bases and trollolol yourself to Raven tech. The need to expand to open yourself up for more gasses isn't there, which is a fundemental problem in SC2 economy and has nothing to do with split map situations (which I despise, by the way).
I don't see it binary. Hydra and Infestor based timings have wrecked Protoss players that tried to go for airballs more than once. Corruptor/Muta based play has quite some potential against Protoss.
Apart from very lategame airballs Zerg can absolutly find ways to kill airarmies of the other races without spores.
Not to mention that the other races need static Ds just as much against Zerg air. Terran probably even more than Zerg, without mass, mass turrets mutas just wreck meching players.
As for you saying that SHs are needed for air units and then go on to say "because of the ground support". Where exactly is the part where you need the SHs because of the air units? The SHs are needed so that you don't get rolled by the tanks and Thors, not because you cannot fight the raven/Viking part.
Yes, Zerg can deal with such armies when they have air control, which lies in the nature of Broodlords. But BLs are actually very binary. You either have strong airsuperiority and clean the enemy airforces so that your BLs can actually do something or you don't.
If you don't have aircontrol, well then it is back to SHs for you against Tanks/Thors or Immortals/Colossis/Archons/Templar.
OK, then I have no clue what you were talking about originally. Because I was under the impression that you were telling me that good Zergs have no problem breaking Mech.
Lower level players struggling to end mech (it hardly happens in pro levels! Don't bring up 2/3 incidents) is not an argument.
|
On April 29 2014 16:25 prokofiev wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2014 18:01 TW wrote:The fact that the game is easier to play than BW does not relate to its balance. But: - it is more likely that potentially worse player can beat the better one (it is fine for me). - when we take 40 best of the best starcraft players, and make them play in a league format, I am pretty sure you will get totally different results each time the league ends. I think that sc2 should have more units, more magics, - more units and strategies would mean even more coin flip results at the highest level of play. Yeah, we disagree in one important point here: I don't think it's fine that worse player are likely to win a better one in sc2. I think the game is funnier when the better play really and clearly appears like the better player. When we can clearly see the difference between a better player and a worse one. Everyone with the same level? What's the fun? And didn't want too be specific about "more units" or "more strategies", my point is that it seems to me that sc2 lacks a little bit in micro and skill. Everyone thinks its great when we see huge micro/macro skills from some player. But, it seems like in sc2 everyone can play at the high level. Its relatively "easy". For me, the game loose his magic. Everyone can be a "ronaldo", a "pelé", a "messi", in this game. The best players change a lot. There is no THE BEST (as BW jaedong, BW Flash, BW Boxer). I think I was clear. That's my view. The game could be harder to play (more micro and macro options), so new "genius" would appear 
I don't necessarily disagree with your specifics, but I have always had this problem that "SC2 is too easy" using the example of no 1 individual is a class above the rest while ignoring that there is a level of play that is for the most part inaccessible to more than 90% of the player population. Sure Parting and Rain are very very close in skill--but you don't really expect players like Huk, Nony, Incontrol to be 50/50 with them (no offense to those players, they will roflstomp 90% of the players in America, but they are not the top 1% of SC2).
There is a distinct gap between top players and less talented players and its not only very visible, but its been very consistent. Some people talk light of it saying "Koreans this" and "Koreans that" and for the most part the struggle is that that subgroup of the pro-scene is able to practice so much better than everyone else that simply playing with them improves foreigner skills by magnitudes.
So while its true that we don't have a Ronaldo or Messi, we do have a Yankees.
|
On April 30 2014 00:56 SC2Toastie wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2014 00:47 Pursuit_ wrote:On April 29 2014 23:26 DinoMight wrote:On April 29 2014 23:11 Ghanburighan wrote:
This is why this thread has a bad reputation, people like DinoMight responding to a long well written suggestion with `l2p, brah'. You think it's well written. I think it's a pile of crap. Claiming that Gold Zergs got to Masters on the back of the queen range buff sounds a bit QQ-y to me... @thedwf Marine tank raven w/ SCV pull if unscouted is basically unbeatable. Any sort of rushed out widow mine attack can do big damage. Pre-medivac sim bio push that catches P with too few units. Even just standard mech play if unscouted can crush you. Say what you will about how allin these things are, but my comment stands - if P doesn't scout for these things they can do a lot of economic damage. And if they get scouted and defended properly T is behind. I've never seen nor heard of a marine / tank / raven all-in working in a professional match, and the 1/1/1 has been figured out for a long time in WoL and it included a raven. But I'll give you the 8min premedivac stim timing, it almost never wins games outright but it can do quite a bit of damage if unscouted. This is pretty much the only thing Protoss needs to look out for in the first 8 minutes of the game unless their build doesn't include a robo. Maru v San on MGR last week at GSL GT
That was not a 1-1-1 all-in but a 2-bases timing, though. If we except the lift to gold on Habitation, the last time I remember a one-base 1-1-1 all-in in a TvP was in a troll game in Proleague ("The Special") between Bbyong and Best... in March 2013.
|
On April 30 2014 00:20 SC2Toastie wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2014 23:53 SC2Toastie wrote:On April 29 2014 23:49 Dingodile wrote:
remove or a redesign for sh and wm.
all 1 supply units (marines, lings, ...) except workers are removed or are now 2 supply. We have just too much units on the field if 1supply units are there (especially TvZ).
all T3 units need redesign except Vipers & Ultras. They are utterly boring to watch (too slow, too much damage, ...)
air, melee and range upgrades removed, we need to stop 2sec fights. Errr... Nope. I think Errr.... Nope doesn't quite justify as a reply, so here you are with some more. A) Redisign SH/WM, I'm fine with that. Swarmhost so they become more hit and run, for example, larger Locust footprints which makes the DPS/Area lower. Mines to be come a spammable defensive unit akin to Spider Mines, possibly with AA capability. B) Lings are .5 supply. Other 1 supply units; Reaper, Observer, Marine. Reapers and Observers really don't warrant more supply IMO. Marines? For sure not. This is a dumb suggestion. Why not lower max supply instead of fucking up early game balance majorly? Oh wait, all of a sudden we don't need a third base anymore. uh-oh, welcome to Warcraft HOTS? I like warcraft, but it's a different game. C) All T3 units are boring to watch? Templar? Ghost? Raven? Siege Tanks? Broodlords? These are all units with some kind of interesting trait. I don't like how BC/Thor/SH work, those are the only problem cases IMO (I'm taking T3 as lategame here, as SC2 doesn't function with Tiers). D) Upgrades are one of the most telling differentiations between going for a faster push or for a more lategame oriented style. They allow for stylistic differentiation, different build, new interactions and a lot of timings. We're playing an RTS here, upgrades are a very important part of RTS because they make up a large portion of the S, strategy, part of the game. Stop 2 sec fights. Yeah, they happen fast, 2 sec is an overstatement and I'd like more spread out/longer fights as well,m but your suggestions... no thanks.
I like your A) and B) replies/suggestions.
About C), exactly these units + Tempest are the most boring units of the game. After watching HyuN games in the last 6 months I noticed that. Games are super entertaining to watch without such units, especially in lategame.
D) I dont think that 2sec is an overstatement. 200/200 fights feels 50% quicker than 100 vs 100supply fights. 200/200 needs longer fights than what we have now. They can keep the armor upgrades and maybe add "regeneration upgrade" (.5 hp per sec healing per upgrade or whatever).
|
On April 30 2014 01:09 Dingodile wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2014 00:20 SC2Toastie wrote:On April 29 2014 23:53 SC2Toastie wrote:On April 29 2014 23:49 Dingodile wrote:
remove or a redesign for sh and wm.
all 1 supply units (marines, lings, ...) except workers are removed or are now 2 supply. We have just too much units on the field if 1supply units are there (especially TvZ).
all T3 units need redesign except Vipers & Ultras. They are utterly boring to watch (too slow, too much damage, ...)
air, melee and range upgrades removed, we need to stop 2sec fights. Errr... Nope. I think Errr.... Nope doesn't quite justify as a reply, so here you are with some more. A) Redisign SH/WM, I'm fine with that. Swarmhost so they become more hit and run, for example, larger Locust footprints which makes the DPS/Area lower. Mines to be come a spammable defensive unit akin to Spider Mines, possibly with AA capability. B) Lings are .5 supply. Other 1 supply units; Reaper, Observer, Marine. Reapers and Observers really don't warrant more supply IMO. Marines? For sure not. This is a dumb suggestion. Why not lower max supply instead of fucking up early game balance majorly? Oh wait, all of a sudden we don't need a third base anymore. uh-oh, welcome to Warcraft HOTS? I like warcraft, but it's a different game. C) All T3 units are boring to watch? Templar? Ghost? Raven? Siege Tanks? Broodlords? These are all units with some kind of interesting trait. I don't like how BC/Thor/SH work, those are the only problem cases IMO (I'm taking T3 as lategame here, as SC2 doesn't function with Tiers). D) Upgrades are one of the most telling differentiations between going for a faster push or for a more lategame oriented style. They allow for stylistic differentiation, different build, new interactions and a lot of timings. We're playing an RTS here, upgrades are a very important part of RTS because they make up a large portion of the S, strategy, part of the game. Stop 2 sec fights. Yeah, they happen fast, 2 sec is an overstatement and I'd like more spread out/longer fights as well,m but your suggestions... no thanks. I like your A) and B) replies/suggestions. About C), exactly these units + Tempest are the most boring units of the game. After watching HyuN games in the last 6 months I noticed that. Games are super entertaining to watch without such units, especially in lategame. D) I dont think that 2sec is an overstatement. 200/200 fights feels 50% quicker than 100 vs 100supply fights. 200/200 needs longer fights than what we have now. They can keep the armor upgrades and maybe add "regeneration upgrade" (.5 hp per sec healing per upgrade or whatever).
This may turn out to be an interesting discussion :D!
As for C/D, which IMO overlap a bit;
Are these units boring in themselves, or is that a problem in the game design?
I'm not familiar with every Hyun game in the last 6 months, but his style is a style I like to watch, the style that made me a fan of LiquidHerO; no turtling, no amoves, constant aggression all over the map.
That is superexciting to watch.
The problem in SC2 is that unit density, combined with super high DPS and powerful AoE. 'Battles' don't really occur, one army disintegrates and the other army takes 20 supply in losses, and the game end there. There's not a lot of comeback potential. I like to bring that back to the lack of defenders advantage and board control (Protoss has this, Zerg has speed to make up for it, Terran kinda lacks this in the current metagame) where you can attack or defend with smaller armies and the game becomes more positional and less head on kill kill kill.
This all goes back to how you only need 3 expansions to max out and sustain 20-30 supply/cycle in production. Armies grow sooo fast and an advantage snowballs easilly. Combine this with poor defenders advantage and ye, huge battles that end quickly happen often.
As for upgrades, they're one of the defining differences in RTS between short term or long term oriented play - they're not to blame for 200/200 2s battles.
|
I really like the pace of SC2 to be honest. Feels like a legit sport and not just watching a bunch of people play WoW.
WC3 battles felt really really slow to me.
It's kind of like watching soccer where a game can be going nowhere for 50 minutes and then all of a sudden you see two quick goals back to back. That's what makes it exciting, that something can happen at any time that changes the outcome of the game and the pace is fast.
I don't want/need to watch 5 little units beating each other over the head for 5 minutes. I'd rather just see who wins that fight and move onto the next one. The planning/positioning/dancing before the fight and reaction to scouting is much more interesting.
|
On April 30 2014 01:07 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2014 00:56 SC2Toastie wrote:On April 30 2014 00:47 Pursuit_ wrote:On April 29 2014 23:26 DinoMight wrote:On April 29 2014 23:11 Ghanburighan wrote:
This is why this thread has a bad reputation, people like DinoMight responding to a long well written suggestion with `l2p, brah'. You think it's well written. I think it's a pile of crap. Claiming that Gold Zergs got to Masters on the back of the queen range buff sounds a bit QQ-y to me... @thedwf Marine tank raven w/ SCV pull if unscouted is basically unbeatable. Any sort of rushed out widow mine attack can do big damage. Pre-medivac sim bio push that catches P with too few units. Even just standard mech play if unscouted can crush you. Say what you will about how allin these things are, but my comment stands - if P doesn't scout for these things they can do a lot of economic damage. And if they get scouted and defended properly T is behind. I've never seen nor heard of a marine / tank / raven all-in working in a professional match, and the 1/1/1 has been figured out for a long time in WoL and it included a raven. But I'll give you the 8min premedivac stim timing, it almost never wins games outright but it can do quite a bit of damage if unscouted. This is pretty much the only thing Protoss needs to look out for in the first 8 minutes of the game unless their build doesn't include a robo. Maru v San on MGR last week at GSL GT That was not a 1-1-1 all-in but a 2-bases timing, though. If we except the lift to gold on Habitation, the last time I remember a one-base 1-1-1 all-in in a TvP was in a troll game in Proleague ("The Special") between Bbyong and Best... in March 2013.
I was referring to a marine tank raven (banshee) push.
|
On April 30 2014 01:28 DinoMight wrote:
I really like the pace of SC2 to be honest. Feels like a legit sport and not just watching a bunch of people play WoW.
WC3 battles felt really really slow to me.
It's kind of like watching soccer where a game can be going nowhere for 50 minutes and then all of a sudden you see two quick goals back to back. That's what makes it exciting, that something can happen at any time that changes the outcome of the game and the pace is fast.
I don't want/need to watch 5 little units beating each other over the head for 5 minutes. I'd rather just see who wins that fight and move onto the next one. The planning/positioning/dancing before the fight and reaction to scouting is much more interesting.
Well, I for one like seeing low unit counts with intensive micro. I don't like LAZ0rTO5S disintegrating 3 Zerg remaxes in a row (an example, not a complaint!), but I suppose we can disagree on that.
No offense, but maybe Civilization V is more your kind of game  ?
|
On April 30 2014 01:34 SC2Toastie wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2014 01:28 DinoMight wrote:
I really like the pace of SC2 to be honest. Feels like a legit sport and not just watching a bunch of people play WoW.
WC3 battles felt really really slow to me.
It's kind of like watching soccer where a game can be going nowhere for 50 minutes and then all of a sudden you see two quick goals back to back. That's what makes it exciting, that something can happen at any time that changes the outcome of the game and the pace is fast.
I don't want/need to watch 5 little units beating each other over the head for 5 minutes. I'd rather just see who wins that fight and move onto the next one. The planning/positioning/dancing before the fight and reaction to scouting is much more interesting. Well, I for one like seeing low unit counts with intensive micro. I don't like LAZ0rTO5S disintegrating 3 Zerg remaxes in a row (an example, not a complaint!), but I suppose we can disagree on that. No offense, but maybe Civilization V is more your kind of game ?
Technically, he said Soccer was his kind of game. I understand his comments though. Watching boxing is fun and all, but in the end its just two dudes microing their fists off for 6-12 rounds and I'd rather watch something like Hockey.
Civilization is also the opposite of what you're talking about since Civ is all about slow grindy fights with each engagement lasting for very very long periods of time.
|
On April 30 2014 01:28 DinoMight wrote:
WC3 battles felt really really slow to me.
I agree with you... after watching 4 years sc2 that wc3 battles felt really slow. That is true. I have two problems in sc2. First problem is 200/200 fights, they are just too quick.
I'd rather just see who wins that fight and move onto the next one.
I dont like this, it feels like "just make units" for next fight.
The planning/positioning/dancing before the fight and reaction to scouting is much more interesting.
[/QUOTE]
This is my second problem. positioning/planning/dancing with 200/200 army before fight (its a sc2 design problem: density is way too high -> back and forth very rare). dancing 5min before 2sec fights is not a pleasure, atleast for me.
As you can see, I have two problems, both with 200/200.
|
On April 30 2014 01:38 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2014 01:34 SC2Toastie wrote:On April 30 2014 01:28 DinoMight wrote:
I really like the pace of SC2 to be honest. Feels like a legit sport and not just watching a bunch of people play WoW.
WC3 battles felt really really slow to me.
It's kind of like watching soccer where a game can be going nowhere for 50 minutes and then all of a sudden you see two quick goals back to back. That's what makes it exciting, that something can happen at any time that changes the outcome of the game and the pace is fast.
I don't want/need to watch 5 little units beating each other over the head for 5 minutes. I'd rather just see who wins that fight and move onto the next one. The planning/positioning/dancing before the fight and reaction to scouting is much more interesting. Well, I for one like seeing low unit counts with intensive micro. I don't like LAZ0rTO5S disintegrating 3 Zerg remaxes in a row (an example, not a complaint!), but I suppose we can disagree on that. No offense, but maybe Civilization V is more your kind of game ? Technically, he said Soccer was his kind of game. I understand his comments though. Watching boxing is fun and all, but in the end its just two dudes microing their fists off for 6-12 rounds and I'd rather watch something like Hockey. Civilization is also the opposite of what you're talking about since Civ is all about slow grindy fights with each engagement lasting for very very long periods of time.
Yes, my example was sarcastic, but it came out poor :p
The thing with field hockey/soccer is, there's a lot of strategy going on, move like that to force this to open up that path and pass through that gaping hole in the defense and manouver lalalalalalalla etcetcetcetc.
I agree in SC2 shit dies FAST. way too fast. Because everything is close. Because spreading out is not rewarded. Because the economy caps at 3 bases.
Read up on the old FRB by Barrin, an initiative that wanted bases to mine out faster. It was interesting and very promising.
|
I feel like the problem with breaking it up though is that Protoss kind of needs its whole army in one spot when the T and P armies get too big though. So you need a deathball because the other two armies are much more mobile than you. Whenever I try to spready my army out too thin, Terran just regroups all his stuff in one place and hits the weak spot. This forces deathbally play.
One of my frustrations with Protoss is that I feel like I have APM that I can't use because my army needs to be in a specific place. Sure I can harass witha Warp Prism, but until super late game where I can warp in 10+ Zealots it's not THAT big of a factor. Just want to be able to take half my army and attack one base and half my army to attack another.
|
On April 30 2014 01:54 SC2Toastie wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2014 01:38 Thieving Magpie wrote:On April 30 2014 01:34 SC2Toastie wrote:On April 30 2014 01:28 DinoMight wrote:
I really like the pace of SC2 to be honest. Feels like a legit sport and not just watching a bunch of people play WoW.
WC3 battles felt really really slow to me.
It's kind of like watching soccer where a game can be going nowhere for 50 minutes and then all of a sudden you see two quick goals back to back. That's what makes it exciting, that something can happen at any time that changes the outcome of the game and the pace is fast.
I don't want/need to watch 5 little units beating each other over the head for 5 minutes. I'd rather just see who wins that fight and move onto the next one. The planning/positioning/dancing before the fight and reaction to scouting is much more interesting. Well, I for one like seeing low unit counts with intensive micro. I don't like LAZ0rTO5S disintegrating 3 Zerg remaxes in a row (an example, not a complaint!), but I suppose we can disagree on that. No offense, but maybe Civilization V is more your kind of game ? Technically, he said Soccer was his kind of game. I understand his comments though. Watching boxing is fun and all, but in the end its just two dudes microing their fists off for 6-12 rounds and I'd rather watch something like Hockey. Civilization is also the opposite of what you're talking about since Civ is all about slow grindy fights with each engagement lasting for very very long periods of time. Yes, my example was sarcastic, but it came out poor :p The thing with field hockey/soccer is, there's a lot of strategy going on, move like that to force this to open up that path and pass through that gaping hole in the defense and manouver lalalalalalalla etcetcetcetc. I agree in SC2 shit dies FAST. way too fast. Because everything is close. Because spreading out is not rewarded. Because the economy caps at 3 bases.Read up on the old FRB by Barrin, an initiative that wanted bases to mine out faster. It was interesting and very promising. This really, really isn't true. So much of TvZ and TvT revolves around 4th and 5th bases, Z and mech T require a ton of gas income, etc.
You can get a good solid army on 3 bases, but unless you can get access to your 8th and 10th geysers you have one shot to do damage with that army, because if you lose it without doing anything more than trading and your opponent is up a base, you're toast. The only real exception is PvP.
|
So unless your rework the units you cant split them. But if they added something like arbiters or a good transportation mechanic/whatever to the game they'd need to decrease the effectiveness of some of the untis because that could be a bit imba.
So it's difficult. But I enjoy watching and playing SC2 right now. Maybe maps could be a bit smaller to help T?
|
On April 30 2014 01:58 RampancyTW wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2014 01:54 SC2Toastie wrote:On April 30 2014 01:38 Thieving Magpie wrote:On April 30 2014 01:34 SC2Toastie wrote:On April 30 2014 01:28 DinoMight wrote:
I really like the pace of SC2 to be honest. Feels like a legit sport and not just watching a bunch of people play WoW.
WC3 battles felt really really slow to me.
It's kind of like watching soccer where a game can be going nowhere for 50 minutes and then all of a sudden you see two quick goals back to back. That's what makes it exciting, that something can happen at any time that changes the outcome of the game and the pace is fast.
I don't want/need to watch 5 little units beating each other over the head for 5 minutes. I'd rather just see who wins that fight and move onto the next one. The planning/positioning/dancing before the fight and reaction to scouting is much more interesting. Well, I for one like seeing low unit counts with intensive micro. I don't like LAZ0rTO5S disintegrating 3 Zerg remaxes in a row (an example, not a complaint!), but I suppose we can disagree on that. No offense, but maybe Civilization V is more your kind of game ? Technically, he said Soccer was his kind of game. I understand his comments though. Watching boxing is fun and all, but in the end its just two dudes microing their fists off for 6-12 rounds and I'd rather watch something like Hockey. Civilization is also the opposite of what you're talking about since Civ is all about slow grindy fights with each engagement lasting for very very long periods of time. Yes, my example was sarcastic, but it came out poor :p The thing with field hockey/soccer is, there's a lot of strategy going on, move like that to force this to open up that path and pass through that gaping hole in the defense and manouver lalalalalalalla etcetcetcetc. I agree in SC2 shit dies FAST. way too fast. Because everything is close. Because spreading out is not rewarded. Because the economy caps at 3 bases.Read up on the old FRB by Barrin, an initiative that wanted bases to mine out faster. It was interesting and very promising. This really, really isn't true. So much of TvZ and TvT revolves around 4th and 5th bases, Z and mech T require a ton of gas income, etc. You can get a good solid army on 3 bases, but unless you can get access to your 8th and 10th geysers you have one shot to do damage with that army, because if you lose it without doing anything more than trading and your opponent is up a base, you're toast. The only real exception is PvP.
I agree with this. Economy is capped at 3 bases, but your bases DO mine out over time, therefore if you only expand to 3 you basically are doing a 3 base allin. If that push fails your main is mined out and you're back on 2 bases, which is less than optimal economy.
The reason denying Terran's 4th is so important in ZvT is that it allows him to keep up the 3 base parade push for so much longer. That push requires solid 3 base economy to get it going and it loses steam fast once the main gets mined out if no 4th is taken.
Also, spreading is rewarded......PvT ghosts will wreck an unspread army and Storm will do the same to unspread Terran. Banelings and Widow Mines and Siege Tanks all encourage Spreading in the TvT, TvZ, and ZvZ matchup.
So I don't agree with spreading having no impact on the game.
|
On April 30 2014 01:57 DinoMight wrote:
I feel like the problem with breaking it up though is that Protoss kind of needs its whole army in one spot when the T and P armies get too big though. So you need a deathball because the other two armies are much more mobile than you. Whenever I try to spready my army out too thin, Terran just regroups all his stuff in one place and hits the weak spot. This forces deathbally play.
One of my frustrations with Protoss is that I feel like I have APM that I can't use because my army needs to be in a specific place. Sure I can harass witha Warp Prism, but until super late game where I can warp in 10+ Zealots it's not THAT big of a factor. Just want to be able to take half my army and attack one base and half my army to attack another.
No. It's quite a big factor anytime a WP is in the Terran base.
|
On April 30 2014 02:09 Chaggi wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2014 01:57 DinoMight wrote:
I feel like the problem with breaking it up though is that Protoss kind of needs its whole army in one spot when the T and P armies get too big though. So you need a deathball because the other two armies are much more mobile than you. Whenever I try to spready my army out too thin, Terran just regroups all his stuff in one place and hits the weak spot. This forces deathbally play.
One of my frustrations with Protoss is that I feel like I have APM that I can't use because my army needs to be in a specific place. Sure I can harass witha Warp Prism, but until super late game where I can warp in 10+ Zealots it's not THAT big of a factor. Just want to be able to take half my army and attack one base and half my army to attack another. No. It's quite a big factor anytime a WP is in the Terran base.
It's good for harass but it's not a solid multiprong option like Terran or Zerg has. That is the point I'm trying to make. I can't attack your third with one colossus and your natural with one colossus. Because you'll just kill each army faster than it can retreat or group up with the other one.
Templar and Colossus are really slow, and the latter can be attacked by air units with 9 range. So really that encourages the deathball style more than anything.
|
On April 30 2014 01:54 SC2Toastie wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2014 01:38 Thieving Magpie wrote:On April 30 2014 01:34 SC2Toastie wrote:On April 30 2014 01:28 DinoMight wrote:
I really like the pace of SC2 to be honest. Feels like a legit sport and not just watching a bunch of people play WoW.
WC3 battles felt really really slow to me.
It's kind of like watching soccer where a game can be going nowhere for 50 minutes and then all of a sudden you see two quick goals back to back. That's what makes it exciting, that something can happen at any time that changes the outcome of the game and the pace is fast.
I don't want/need to watch 5 little units beating each other over the head for 5 minutes. I'd rather just see who wins that fight and move onto the next one. The planning/positioning/dancing before the fight and reaction to scouting is much more interesting. Well, I for one like seeing low unit counts with intensive micro. I don't like LAZ0rTO5S disintegrating 3 Zerg remaxes in a row (an example, not a complaint!), but I suppose we can disagree on that. No offense, but maybe Civilization V is more your kind of game ? Technically, he said Soccer was his kind of game. I understand his comments though. Watching boxing is fun and all, but in the end its just two dudes microing their fists off for 6-12 rounds and I'd rather watch something like Hockey. Civilization is also the opposite of what you're talking about since Civ is all about slow grindy fights with each engagement lasting for very very long periods of time. Yes, my example was sarcastic, but it came out poor :p The thing with field hockey/soccer is, there's a lot of strategy going on, move like that to force this to open up that path and pass through that gaping hole in the defense and manouver lalalalalalalla etcetcetcetc. I agree in SC2 shit dies FAST. way too fast. Because everything is close. Because spreading out is not rewarded. Because the economy caps at 3 bases. Read up on the old FRB by Barrin, an initiative that wanted bases to mine out faster. It was interesting and very promising.
No disagreement from me.
I could see where he was coming from but I'm not exactly on that boat. I do see a lot of the strategy in hockey and soccer within starcraft 2 in the whole positioning game. As both players try to get the proper concave and spread, constant scan/observer/ling pokes to always see the opponent's movement etc... Its very fun in a cerebral sort of way.
But seeing observer micro just isn't very sexy. Like, I know that moving the observer in just the right way to prevent it getting sniped is difficult and takes skill. But it just doesn't wow me.
|
On April 30 2014 01:58 RampancyTW wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2014 01:54 SC2Toastie wrote:On April 30 2014 01:38 Thieving Magpie wrote:On April 30 2014 01:34 SC2Toastie wrote:On April 30 2014 01:28 DinoMight wrote:
I really like the pace of SC2 to be honest. Feels like a legit sport and not just watching a bunch of people play WoW.
WC3 battles felt really really slow to me.
It's kind of like watching soccer where a game can be going nowhere for 50 minutes and then all of a sudden you see two quick goals back to back. That's what makes it exciting, that something can happen at any time that changes the outcome of the game and the pace is fast.
I don't want/need to watch 5 little units beating each other over the head for 5 minutes. I'd rather just see who wins that fight and move onto the next one. The planning/positioning/dancing before the fight and reaction to scouting is much more interesting. Well, I for one like seeing low unit counts with intensive micro. I don't like LAZ0rTO5S disintegrating 3 Zerg remaxes in a row (an example, not a complaint!), but I suppose we can disagree on that. No offense, but maybe Civilization V is more your kind of game ? Technically, he said Soccer was his kind of game. I understand his comments though. Watching boxing is fun and all, but in the end its just two dudes microing their fists off for 6-12 rounds and I'd rather watch something like Hockey. Civilization is also the opposite of what you're talking about since Civ is all about slow grindy fights with each engagement lasting for very very long periods of time. Yes, my example was sarcastic, but it came out poor :p The thing with field hockey/soccer is, there's a lot of strategy going on, move like that to force this to open up that path and pass through that gaping hole in the defense and manouver lalalalalalalla etcetcetcetc. I agree in SC2 shit dies FAST. way too fast. Because everything is close. Because spreading out is not rewarded. Because the economy caps at 3 bases.Read up on the old FRB by Barrin, an initiative that wanted bases to mine out faster. It was interesting and very promising. This really, really isn't true. So much of TvZ and TvT revolves around 4th and 5th bases, Z and mech T require a ton of gas income, etc. You can get a good solid army on 3 bases, but unless you can get access to your 8th and 10th geysers you have one shot to do damage with that army, because if you lose it without doing anything more than trading and your opponent is up a base, you're toast. The only real exception is PvP.
That is true. But aren't TvT and TvZ coincidentally also the best matchups with the most skirmishing?
I said that it is a problem you can max with a powerful army off 3 bases. Often, that fourth doesn't come into play as it all ends with 2 of those 3 base all ins. That is what saddens me quite a bit...
On April 30 2014 02:01 DinoMight wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2014 01:58 RampancyTW wrote:On April 30 2014 01:54 SC2Toastie wrote:On April 30 2014 01:38 Thieving Magpie wrote:On April 30 2014 01:34 SC2Toastie wrote:On April 30 2014 01:28 DinoMight wrote:
I really like the pace of SC2 to be honest. Feels like a legit sport and not just watching a bunch of people play WoW.
WC3 battles felt really really slow to me.
It's kind of like watching soccer where a game can be going nowhere for 50 minutes and then all of a sudden you see two quick goals back to back. That's what makes it exciting, that something can happen at any time that changes the outcome of the game and the pace is fast.
I don't want/need to watch 5 little units beating each other over the head for 5 minutes. I'd rather just see who wins that fight and move onto the next one. The planning/positioning/dancing before the fight and reaction to scouting is much more interesting. Well, I for one like seeing low unit counts with intensive micro. I don't like LAZ0rTO5S disintegrating 3 Zerg remaxes in a row (an example, not a complaint!), but I suppose we can disagree on that. No offense, but maybe Civilization V is more your kind of game ? Technically, he said Soccer was his kind of game. I understand his comments though. Watching boxing is fun and all, but in the end its just two dudes microing their fists off for 6-12 rounds and I'd rather watch something like Hockey. Civilization is also the opposite of what you're talking about since Civ is all about slow grindy fights with each engagement lasting for very very long periods of time. Yes, my example was sarcastic, but it came out poor :p The thing with field hockey/soccer is, there's a lot of strategy going on, move like that to force this to open up that path and pass through that gaping hole in the defense and manouver lalalalalalalla etcetcetcetc. I agree in SC2 shit dies FAST. way too fast. Because everything is close. Because spreading out is not rewarded. Because the economy caps at 3 bases.Read up on the old FRB by Barrin, an initiative that wanted bases to mine out faster. It was interesting and very promising. This really, really isn't true. So much of TvZ and TvT revolves around 4th and 5th bases, Z and mech T require a ton of gas income, etc. You can get a good solid army on 3 bases, but unless you can get access to your 8th and 10th geysers you have one shot to do damage with that army, because if you lose it without doing anything more than trading and your opponent is up a base, you're toast. The only real exception is PvP. I agree with this. Economy is capped at 3 bases, but your bases DO mine out over time, therefore if you only expand to 3 you basically are doing a 3 base allin. If that push fails your main is mined out and you're back on 2 bases, which is less than optimal economy. The reason denying Terran's 4th is so important in ZvT is that it allows him to keep up the 3 base parade push for so much longer. That push requires solid 3 base economy to get it going and it loses steam fast once the main gets mined out if no 4th is taken. Also, spreading is rewarded......PvT ghosts will wreck an unspread army and Storm will do the same to unspread Terran. Banelings and Widow Mines and Siege Tanks all encourage Spreading in the TvT, TvZ, and ZvZ matchup. So I don't agree with spreading having no impact on the game.
That's not what I ment.
I ment spreading your army to different locations. Think there's 40 supply at the gold base at habitation, 60 between bases 2 and the lower third, and 30 supply at the fourth.
If each of these chunks of army is capable of defending against a 1.5x bigger army if well positioned and controlled, thanks to a strong defenders advantage, it becomes feasible to spread out to more bases to tech faster.
So, we need better defensive/positional units and weaker low basecount economy, either by making them mine out faster, or making it more efficient to have 3 mineral lines with 8 workers than having 2 mineral lines with 12 each.
|
On April 30 2014 01:58 RampancyTW wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2014 01:54 SC2Toastie wrote:On April 30 2014 01:38 Thieving Magpie wrote:On April 30 2014 01:34 SC2Toastie wrote:On April 30 2014 01:28 DinoMight wrote:
I really like the pace of SC2 to be honest. Feels like a legit sport and not just watching a bunch of people play WoW.
WC3 battles felt really really slow to me.
It's kind of like watching soccer where a game can be going nowhere for 50 minutes and then all of a sudden you see two quick goals back to back. That's what makes it exciting, that something can happen at any time that changes the outcome of the game and the pace is fast.
I don't want/need to watch 5 little units beating each other over the head for 5 minutes. I'd rather just see who wins that fight and move onto the next one. The planning/positioning/dancing before the fight and reaction to scouting is much more interesting. Well, I for one like seeing low unit counts with intensive micro. I don't like LAZ0rTO5S disintegrating 3 Zerg remaxes in a row (an example, not a complaint!), but I suppose we can disagree on that. No offense, but maybe Civilization V is more your kind of game ? Technically, he said Soccer was his kind of game. I understand his comments though. Watching boxing is fun and all, but in the end its just two dudes microing their fists off for 6-12 rounds and I'd rather watch something like Hockey. Civilization is also the opposite of what you're talking about since Civ is all about slow grindy fights with each engagement lasting for very very long periods of time. Yes, my example was sarcastic, but it came out poor :p The thing with field hockey/soccer is, there's a lot of strategy going on, move like that to force this to open up that path and pass through that gaping hole in the defense and manouver lalalalalalalla etcetcetcetc. I agree in SC2 shit dies FAST. way too fast. Because everything is close. Because spreading out is not rewarded. Because the economy caps at 3 bases.Read up on the old FRB by Barrin, an initiative that wanted bases to mine out faster. It was interesting and very promising. This really, really isn't true. So much of TvZ and TvT revolves around 4th and 5th bases, Z and mech T require a ton of gas income, etc. You can get a good solid army on 3 bases, but unless you can get access to your 8th and 10th geysers you have one shot to do damage with that army, because if you lose it without doing anything more than trading and your opponent is up a base, you're toast. The only real exception is PvP.
Just to clear things up.
In BW the more bases you got the bigger your economy got without a realistic upper limit. This meant that the more bases you got the bigger your production could get.
In SC2 there is a 3ish base cap and you're expanding to 4rths and 5ths to prevent mining out. This is a different dynamic since expanding is used for sustainability instead of increased production.
I personally find both to be okay. Some don't and its all subjective in the end. However, I just wanted to point out that it isn't about the number of bases but the impetus pushing players to get those extra bases. Both BW and SC2 wants to go to 4-7 bases every game--but they don't grab bases for the same reasons.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
