|
EDIT: this is a extremely long post and if you dont wanna read it all i feel this is the most important paragraph that probably gets my point across the most. if you read only one paragraph, read this one
Also another thing to note is when the spells deal damage like fungal or storm the spellish feeling is less because the spell really just feels like its just "the attack" of that unit. I guess at the end of the day what im getting at is sometimes spell mechanics might feel stupid to the viewer. And you dont wanna reach a point where the RTS feels like WoW PvP where its just a bunch of spells going off.
I feel wings of liberty is very similar to BW in terms of RTS-feel, RTS-gameflow, and competitive-ceiling.
Competitive ceiling means there is a huge gap of ability from bad to good player. This game is a test of certain talents. At the highest level everyone needs superb mechanics to even make it through the door, however once you are through the door the talents that are tested are many qualities of our mind / thinking ability / strategy making ability and im sure many other talents are tested within this competition.
The point of the term of competitive ceiling means a game is so hard to be good at and there is a huge gap of skill-levels between novice and pro. BW obviously has more "skill ceiling" than sc2 in terms of mechanics, but i feel SC2 is still very up there in terms of "competitive ceiling" which is the main thing esports fans want to see in a game and that is the main thing that makes it exciting. How good are you at the game, who is the best, thats what makes it fun to watch.
The qualities of BW and SC2:WOL as a RTS that determine the competitive ceiling are so woven into them that its hard to even truly see what they are. Id say its probably a combination of everything. How the units work, how the maps work, how the gametime works, etc. Its hard to pinpoint exactly the amazing qualities and the concepts im trying to explain with this thread are extremely vague and i cant even really figure out in my own mind what im trying to convey here.... but i will give it a shot so here i go.
First ill talk about "real time feel". I feel SC/BW/SC2 nailed the "real time feel" and made it very exciting for the viewer because of it.
Ive played many RTS's and SC/BW/SC2 and even WC3 have a very "real-time" feel to it. I guess i might also mean a "fast pace" feel. Both terms describe what im getting at i think. I mean theres RTS's out there that are more casual and more slow, starcraft is sort of more "mentally fast". And this mentally fast thing makes it hard to play, but fun to watch because the game isnt too long and so many things are happening every moment in each game. Now of course SC2 is probably not going to stray too far away from these "real time" feeling principles or other RTS principles that BW had, but im just trying to put my finger on a little bit of what i even mean by all of this "shouldnt stray too far from BW" business.
Another thing im noticing is I feel WoL is a little less "spell filled" or "spell-ish feeling" of an RTS than BW and in many ways i think thats a good thing. I feel like if a RTS feels too spell-ish" it can get annoying because you feel like your just watching a bunch of spells and not watching any real combat. I feel alot of excitement comes from how these huge armies are being built that are balanced around their units physical stats and damage/speed/attacktypes and such and how they interact with eachother. However i guess this is also kind of contradictory in a way because wc3 had tons of spells and even more spells than BW but even that game didnt "feel too spellish" to me.
In fact i thought BW felt "more spellish" than Wc3 because its not just the amount of spells, its how the spells interact with the gameplay and interact with the physical properties of the units. And in terms of WoL i feel WoL is the least "spellish feeling" RTS of the three with BW feeling more spellish than wc3 and once again i think thats kind of a good thing however contradictory because Wc3 had more spells than BW. I think a great RTS will have some spellish feeling but not too much, and most of its balanced is based around how the combat units are balanced and the balance is not too determined by the spells.
I guess thats actually a good way i can define what i mean by "spellish". I feel BW matchup balance was in ways more dependent on powerful spells compared to WoL.
Heres what im trying to say i guess in BW TvZ it seemed very spell filled or spellish dependent because alot of the balance of the matchup felt like it was "attached to" the spells terran had irradiate which after a while just aoe'ed all zerg stuff down and zerg had to do plenty of work with swarm/plague, but TvP didnt feel as "spell-ish" as TvZ there was storm and terran emp/lockdown but it didnt seem to make massive dependence in the matchup enough to make TvP "feel spellish". But dont get me wrong, storm was a massive factor in TvP and the matchups balance was even hugely "attached to that", but still that didnt really make TvP feel spellish because storm in a way just felt more like the attack of the templar instead of feeling like an actual spell, so storm felt "less like a spell" in some ways. In BW PvZ it felt slightly more spellish than PvT. in PvZ storm was a big spell and toss had alot of balance attached to it, but zerg also had plague/swarm where alot of balance was attached to that as well.
And im not saying having alot of the balance of the matchup attached to it is a "bad thing", im just saying theres a thin line you are walking between fun/entertaining and just "looking stupid".
I guess that is what im getting down to when i say the term "spellish" and i guess its a opinion. In my opinion it felt like BW matchups had "more of its balanced attached to spells" and thats why it "felt more spellish" than even Wc3 or WoL.... however the point im getting at here is even though BW felt more spellish than WoL, it still didnt feel "too much spellish" and so im not saying its a problem, im mostly trying to say that entertainment wise i feel WoL was actually doing a GOOD THING by moving away from the "spellish feel" of brood war.
I guess it is entirely opinion and in my opinion i felt moving away from the spellish feel and how it was more about individual unit balanced around how they do combat and compositions... without spells having as much of a factor... made it more exciting in my eyes.
And in the expansion it feels like the balance team is making Sc2 "more spellish" and i guess many people feel like its a good thing, and im not saying its a "bad thing" but i however I feel like they are walking a thin line because BW was more spellish and WoL, however BW wasnt "too spellish" and BW was still very fun to watch because it didnt cross the thin line, and honestly i feel a thin line is being walked and you never know when they might actually go over that line and make Sc2 actually feel "too spellish" and "more spellish" than BW and if that happened it might be a problem for the casual viewer. I feel im not the only one that feels this way and theres just something about having a RTS feeling as "real time" as WoL while also feeling "not spellish" that just makes it very exciting.
I guess that point im trying to get at here is BW added plenty of "combat units" (not much spell units) and that made it a great expansion because it wasnt adding too much to the spellish feeling aspect. Most of The new units in BW Valkyrie, medic, lurker, corsair, dark templar, and devourer were all combat units that were not spellish feeling.
The oracle, viper, replicant are all super spellish feeling, heck thats all they are. Terran got shredder, warhound, and battle hellion. all of that is combat feeling units.
zerg got swarm host, which spawns timed units thats pretty combat feeling, and the viper is spellish feeling.
Toss got tempest which is combat feeling, and then 2 spellish feeling units, even though the replicants main use will be to copy siege tanks / cloaked banshees and its basically a combat unit plus a spell unit, still i feel what im trying to get at here is like theres still PLENTY of options when it comes to designing combat units with "unique combat properties" and a "unique combat feel".
I feel the combat units are what make the game so exciting and i really dont think theres too much and i feel theres still tons of room for exploration in the possibilities that are out there in the realm of combat units, maybe 20 combat units per race would be too much but where you are at now with 15 i feel like there is definitely room for improvement in all the races to make each matchup more fun/dynamic
Also another thing to note is when the spells deal damage like fungal or storm the spellish feeling is less because the spell really just feels like its just "the attack" of that unit. I guess at the end of the day what im getting at is sometimes spell mechanics might feel stupid to the viewer. And you dont wanna reach a point where the RTS feels like WoW PvP where its just a bunch of spells going off.
For example of what i mean by "many ideas are possible for fun new combat units and theres many possible ideas for combat units to fill different roles", heres one idea ive been thinking of a unit concept i feel is pretty cool that fills a possible role that maybe the metagame could use or maybe not. either way im just saying Im sure theres thousands of possible ideas for unique cool combat units, and this is one of them, and i feel unique combat units are what make the game fun and i feel going for these kinds of things is more of the right direction RTS expansions should take.
Heres a link to a post where i wrote my idea if u wanna read it (http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/3430805780 ) and im not trying to advertise my idea im just using it as a example im just saying i feel all the areas/options of combat units havnt been explored yet and theres still tons of possibilities out there that can use the combat properties of units to feel cool and not spell properties.
However, finally as my title says i guess at the end of the day this is all just IMO, its all just my opinion.
|
I find that more spells makes games more interesting because it's harder to control them individually, and I find games of them more entertaining with storms/fungals etc..
BTW ctrl+f type in "spellish" 
|
On October 24 2011 11:10 cowsgomoo wrote:I find that more spells makes games more interesting because it's harder to control them individually, and I find games of them more entertaining with storms/fungals etc.. BTW ctrl+f type in "spellish"
Lol that ctrl+f was indeed fun :D . I don't know if I want a lot of spells in the game, but I do know that I won't judge how the game feels until I play it.
|
Well, considering its harder to pull off spells in BW, the skill cap was higher... now that SC2 has a more intelligent AI. It makes sense, in the place of many hot keys, that SC2 competitive scene, relies a bit more on micro... making the skill cap higher... and making pros... pro-er.
I think more spells adds to more micro dances, more skill placed wins... people can't rage when they get out-micro'd.. they can when they get out macro'd and they attacked at the wrong time and they felt it was undeserved... with heavy micro and macro outcomes, the game becomes similar to how it was.
|
I think what makes the spells ok in broodwar and Starcraft 2 is that there is just one or two spells that the matchup hinges on. In broodwar TvZ it was like "Can he get the dark swarm/plague off?" and it created a lot of tension or excitement when a good spell was cast.
|
IMO spells aren't powerfull enough in SC2 and there are a bit too many of them. In BW there were only a few spells, but they were crazy imba if you think about it, which creates lots of exciting moments.
|
OP needs a spellishchecker.
|
Netherlands45349 Posts
vZ there was storm and terran emp/lockdown but it didnt seem to make massive dependence in the matchup enough to make TvP "feel spellish
EMP <->>> Recall/stasis is a huge factor in the TvP matchup in BW.
also there is a difference between spellcasters which result into 2 sided micro(ghosts- High templars) and spellcasters with one-sided micro,(oracle and........mineral patches?).
|
On October 24 2011 11:27 Kipsate wrote:Show nested quote +vZ there was storm and terran emp/lockdown but it didnt seem to make massive dependence in the matchup enough to make TvP "feel spellish EMP <->>> Recall/stasis is a huge factor in the TvP matchup in BW. also there is a difference between spellcasters which result into 2 sided micro(ghosts- High templars) and spellcasters with one-sided micro,(oracle and........mineral patches?).
oh god how could i forget about recall/stasis
i knew i was forgetting something
|
The OP uses "spellish" 28 times.
Really though, spells for the same of spells not to do DPS, I'm indifferent. Dmg spells are what makes shit happen, but lock spells and such are the more interesting ones.
|
In WC3 the spells were "support" and felt exactly like that ; they supported your actual army.
In SC2 the spells are less support and hitting with them becomes a the drastical point of combat.
A missplaced Forcefield and you are dead ; hit with fungal growth and you win the combat.
But in numbers, this "killer spells" are not in big numbers ; but once they are important ; they are "extrem" important.
In SC2 HotS this goes even further ; we get "more" spells on more units ; the "Micro" of this units becomes more and more important, while the actual "Macro" for what SC was really boosted is more and more gone.
With all the "transformer" units the game feels more and more "comical" , way more kidslike than it deserves to be ; but ofcourse Blizzards wants that, selling games to this young generation cant be bad.
Some of the "ideas" are good, but ironically the problems they fix now were simply known during the Beta ; the Mothership was a bad idea and everyone knew it right from the start ; especially as they weakened it like crap and removed the actual "cool" abilities (like Time Bomb which was crazy cool).
God knows why they place the Thor as a "only 1" unit again ; its either so OP that you simply have to build it and roll for the win ; or its not good enough and ends like a gimmick unit nobody needs.
Detektor ability on Zerg is something we needed all the time ; Overseer was a bad idea and even worser executed in its final release form (way cooler as it could actual "infect" buildings to build Infested from it).
The Tempest was meant to be put in SC2 allready, but the Carrier was considered "better" ; totally wrong decision and after 1 year its way more than obvisious to even the most stuporn.
You can talk like this about any upgrade ; they feel extrem important to the problems the game really has (and its totally underused units) ; while it changes the game so much, that it no longer feels like a SC game ; its just Warcraft in Space ; something SC1 was once named to be , and gladly changed to be something on its own before Release.
So SC2 is in fact "Warcraft in Space" ; if you like WC3, you will like this, but SC this is not.
|
I agree. I'm tired of all these gimmicky spell casters. A few is fine but they are adding a ton and there's still 1 expansion left. The coolest units imo are just combat units. Tanks, roaches, zerglings, zealots, archons etc. The casters they are adding look retarded. The zerg one that can pull colossi...wtf is that shit?
|
Dont worry, Terran isnt getting any spellcasters :D
|
Too many plain aoe dps spells definitely takes the fun out of spectating. Late game PvT sometimes feels like it's just a ghost vs templar fight rather than 2 huge armies clashing. To me the best kinds of spells are ones like dark swarm. On its own it does nothing, but when used properly it's a game changer. Nonetheless even if you use it properly your opponent can still maneuver around it to mitigate the spell's effects as much as possible. This creates the human vs human dynamic that makes spectating so appealing.
|
Ares[Effort]
DEMACIA6550 Posts
On October 24 2011 11:14 silentblob wrote:
Well, considering its harder to pull off spells in BW, the skill cap was higher... now that SC2 has a more intelligent AI. It makes sense, in the place of many hot keys, that SC2 competitive scene, relies a bit more on micro... making the skill cap higher... and making pros... pro-er.
I think more spells adds to more micro dances, more skill placed wins... people can't rage when they get out-micro'd.. they can when they get out macro'd and they attacked at the wrong time and they felt it was undeserved... with heavy micro and macro outcomes, the game becomes similar to how it was.
The skill cap wasn't higher because of spells alone.. In most BW games spell casters weren't even created and the game was still insanely micro intensive, it was a combination of everything involving fewer hotkeys, unit's that require micro and no anti micro units. Along with the other 100 things that were harder to do in BW than SC2. SC2 is a much easier game than BW compared in every single way.
|
>In WC3 the spells were "support" and felt exactly like that ; they supported your actual army.
In reign of chaos spellcasters actually were better combatants than your units (aka human mass casters/shaman+witchdoctors/etc) due to piercing/light armor, they dominated heavy melee through damage bonuses and CC/slows and regular melee such as footmen were just plain too weak and died like flies to aoe.
HOTS is going the right way by making more micro units with effects, now if only they were to remove the colossus/make stimpacks grant MOVEspeed but only 5hp loss things would be perfect.
Less a-moving insta gibbing retardation.
|
why are some of your 'spellish' not quoted and some are?
that said, i kinda like that protoss is the more spellish race, probably should keep it like that
|
i prefer less spellcasters, and less spells. a RTS is more RTS with moves like splitting marines against banes, or surrounding units with lings. moves like fungal or storm are fine to dota games not RTS
|
I agree that the HoTS units feel very cutsie and gimmicky to me. While I think that the battle hellions is a stupid idea, it's actually my favorite "new" unit (not a SC2 version of lurkers, goliaths, etc.), because it actually adds a new element to the general, gritty gameplay that we're used to. The spellcasters will of course change army comps, and drastically change strategies, but it someone doesn't feel as good as alterations of simply ground-to-ground combat.
|
On October 24 2011 12:06 xuanzue wrote:
i prefer less spellcasters, and less spells. a RTS is more RTS with moves like splitting marines against banes, or surrounding units with lings. moves like fungal or storm are fine to dota games not RTS
Nooo imho these "wtf is this shit?" spells are super important. They add a lot of excitement and make interesting games.
|
More spell _wars_ = better imo. That being said, these spells cannot limit micro, they should rather force the opponent to micro or face terrible dmg. This is why FG and ffs suck(and well CS, though it's an ability). This is also why I don't like the viper's pull.
|
The more micro, the better.
No one likes the less "spellish" hard counters over the soft counter with incredible opportunity units.
build this if you opponent does this so you can do this > build this if your opponent has that so you can a-move
|
FF requires mindless micro, split marine requires smart micro, thats my reason to be against more spells
|
Too many small gimmicky spells. I like huge impact spells back in BW, but we can't really have that with how the game works in pathing. But is it really necessary to put in all these spells? I'm not too sure about that.
|
On October 24 2011 11:10 cowsgomoo wrote:
I find that more spells makes games more interesting because it's harder to control them individually, and I find games of them more entertaining with storms/fungals etc..
While true, it also makes the game more difficult to balance. Look at War3, which was even worse off because of all the heroes, and an additional faction.
BTW ctrl+f type in "spellish"
Mind blown.
|
Pathing is too good and attack speed is too high in SC2 for the same skill ceiling to exist in terms of pure unit movement.
It is what it is.
|
On October 24 2011 12:19 Yosen3002 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2011 12:06 xuanzue wrote:
i prefer less spellcasters, and less spells. a RTS is more RTS with moves like splitting marines against banes, or surrounding units with lings. moves like fungal or storm are fine to dota games not RTS Nooo imho these "wtf is this shit?" spells are super important. They add a lot of excitement and make interesting games.
They are super important, but it needs to be something where they aren't happening every 20 seconds.
Then it's less of "omg what is this ish," and more of a, "well, there's carpet storming, as well as dark swarm, and then there's the whiplash spell to pull the colossus over here, and then a fungal growth and NP on the colossus." and it just becomes a stream of spells.
While spells are more micro intensive than, say, marines, or zerglings, or stalkers, i personally feel like they shouldn't be on a ton of units in the game.
I don't mind each race having two, but IMO, they should be strong units, but i'm afraid that SC2 will take a turn towards WC3, where it's all about hero management, and then we're all leveling up our Jim Raynor and Kerrigans to do battle in the middle of the map.
That is definitely not the game i want.
|
It's not about spells or combat units. It's about skill. In bw it took skill to use either. A lot of skill. In SC2 it takes very little skill and that's the problem. That mixed with the fact that battles last milliseconds is very very bad for the game. The hardest part of SC2 is not getting supply blocked and remembering to build things at the right time. The execution itself of battles could be handled well by a platinum player. BW was way different. Sure the macro was hard as hell, but the micro was very very tough as well. I can't tell you how hard it was for protoss to break a terran line of defense. Yet a pro with the same army could do it so skillfully, and it was beautiful. Zealot bombs, and splitting zealots to soak up the tank damage, omg it was awesome. And it wasn't over in a fraction of a second. Units didn't clump up, and the camera was more zoomed in(a fact I think many people forget) so you could see the action clearly, and it lasted. And the skill was VERY visible. They need to figure out a way to bring micro back, but that might require to alter pathing, plus make AI dumber, and bring back overkill, so that's not going to happen lol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
