|
Northern Ireland26426 Posts
On January 19 2012 07:01 Arghnews wrote:I do agree, SC2 is very fast and that is good in some ways but bad in this. I personally COMPLETELY agree that it would be REALLY nice to be able to actually do some more wc3 micro in battle. That said, I think it would be interesting but not practical if Bliz literally just halved the dmg that everything does. Just to try it. Would be interesting. Haha But you must remember, that SC2 is a macro game. Building another army to replace your first will always trump microing your arse off  Of course, some micro is needed, but that's a given. A shame, but hey, that's what we play.
Of course macro does trump micro hands down, but look at the PvT matchup. Within that, it often comes down to one huge engagement after a handful of skirmishes. If we're going to have a 25 minute game decided in one battle, it should be longer than ten/twenty seconds! Imagine a big elongated battle in the late stages of the GSL, MC and MarineKing microing their little hearts out, both the protagonists getting shot by GOM's reaction cam, a single bead of sweat running down each of their respective faces
I defy anybody to say that that wouldn't be awesome.
|
i think ppl just now figuered out the flaws of SC2 because they get so good in it, at the beginning nobody was "very" good at the game. Chess in the early years had absolutely the same problems as sc2  ^^
|
On January 19 2012 07:08 Tumor wrote:i think ppl just now figuered out the flaws of SC2 because they get so good in it, at the beginning nobody was "very" good at the game. Chess in the early years had absolutely the same problems as sc2 ^^
really? chess? ...I can't imagine chess having balance issues lol
|
On January 19 2012 06:51 BrassMonkey wrote:
If you think spines are bad then you have never played zerg my friend
Spines are literally amazing
see: any good zerg out there
OP isn't wrong when he says that a spine crawler can't kill marine with medivac support.
Spine crawlers are pretty bad.
Rough approximations of how many units you'll barely need to kill a spine
6 marines with stim
3 zealots
5 roaches
The matter of the fact is, focus firing spines with any number of units and they're useless. I do it all the time in my ZvZs.
Maybe you have never played zerg my friend.
|
Northern Ireland26426 Posts
On January 19 2012 07:05 Slaptoast wrote:
I think the biggest factors that make the game uninteresting are;
-Like the OP said, the counter system of armoured/light is too extreme. The fact that situations exist where you get unit X because of unit Y's vulnerability to bonus damage just seems so shallow. Immortals are the guiltiest of these units, as they are so extremely situational but there are only really gimmicks that try to make it a unique unit.
-The full strength of an army can be brought to bear on a small area. It's not just that units clump up it's how even collosus stand over armies, since it's that way by design I dont think it will ever be seen as a 'problem'.
-Large powerful armies are too mobile. This comes back to the last point. If you make powerful units have some setup time or awkward movement (siege tanks/reavers) or spells that force units to reposition (darkswarm) battles become so much more dynamic. Right now all you can hope to do is maximize surface area (or in some cases as toss restrict it) and really there is no thought of action involved in either.
Your last point is actually a great one. I was discussing with a Terran friend how I think the collosus should be changed, for the purposes of this discussion it should be noted that I play Protoss.
My proposed change is really simple, like many of the best fixes that Blizzard have implemented thus far are. The collosus should not have close to it's current movespeed. It's fast enough to keep up with the deathball and has all the gateway units as a buffer regardless of the ability of the player at the keyboard.
If Blizzard aren't going to sort out the ridiculous balling of units, then they need to change movement speeds more radically to make multiple control groups obligatory, rather than as an optional thing. With the collosus, it'll slow down death pushes as you'll have to re-position frequently or have your isolated collosi flanked.
The balling is such a pain, I mean I will perfectly pre-spread my army, but when the time comes to engage I am spending more time trying to spread everything back out the second I order things to attack than anything else.
|
I hope blizzard realizes that this game needs radical change. I want more units and spells to micro! ff storm fungal and emp are all bad spells in my opinion. You cant micro vs any of them. Instead of emp I would put an EMP field which drains shields/energy per second over time so the protoss could micro out of it. Also making ffs have hp but no target priority would create some interesting situations. You could try to do as much damage as possible or kill the ff and run away.
Hunter seeker missile is a good spell in my opinion because if it hits it does massive damage but you can micro out of it so it does not do much dmg.
As to unmicroable units... they are no fun. Roaches thors immortals .etc are unmicroable(in my opinion) and you can't get "more" out of them by microing.
|
On January 18 2012 19:55 iKill wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2012 19:06 bokeevboke wrote:On January 18 2012 18:58 slytown wrote:If you don't like the game, go back to playing BW. Noone's stopping you. You're listing off complete design changes instead of specific issues. I love BW and won't hate you for switching back. I never understood these kind of comments - 'go play BW'. What's wrong with wanting to make the game better? if there is smth good in bw why shouldn't we adopt it. if you have nothing to contribute to discussion just move on pls. Because SC2 and BW are not the same game? If half of the QQers about SC2 had things their way, we'd be playing BW right now with SC2 graphics. 
If we were playing BW with SC2 graphics, we'd have a perfect game.
|
On January 19 2012 07:19 PH wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2012 19:55 iKill wrote:On January 18 2012 19:06 bokeevboke wrote:On January 18 2012 18:58 slytown wrote:If you don't like the game, go back to playing BW. Noone's stopping you. You're listing off complete design changes instead of specific issues. I love BW and won't hate you for switching back. I never understood these kind of comments - 'go play BW'. What's wrong with wanting to make the game better? if there is smth good in bw why shouldn't we adopt it. if you have nothing to contribute to discussion just move on pls. Because SC2 and BW are not the same game? If half of the QQers about SC2 had things their way, we'd be playing BW right now with SC2 graphics. If we were playing BW with SC2 graphics, we'd have a perfect game.
You realize that already exists, right? It's called SC2BW.
|
Northern Ireland26426 Posts
On January 19 2012 07:19 PH wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2012 19:55 iKill wrote:On January 18 2012 19:06 bokeevboke wrote:On January 18 2012 18:58 slytown wrote:If you don't like the game, go back to playing BW. Noone's stopping you. You're listing off complete design changes instead of specific issues. I love BW and won't hate you for switching back. I never understood these kind of comments - 'go play BW'. What's wrong with wanting to make the game better? if there is smth good in bw why shouldn't we adopt it. if you have nothing to contribute to discussion just move on pls. Because SC2 and BW are not the same game? If half of the QQers about SC2 had things their way, we'd be playing BW right now with SC2 graphics. If we were playing BW with SC2 graphics, we'd have a perfect game.
Bit over the top haha, but if you're a BW fan that's a perfectly fair desire!
BW has more interesting games than SC2, but is too mechanically demanding to go back to. I mean I was pretty young when it came out, dabbled in BGH and have only got into the pro scene with purchasing SC2, but as a purely viewing experience it's superior. However it is genuinely too tough for a new player, the macro is just super hard, intimidatingly so considering a lot of the players still on have been playing for years. Nothing wrong with cherry picking what made Brood War such a great spectacle that it is still shown on TV in Korea (units spacing out for one), while ironing out a few of the issues with the UI.
That said I've lost faith in Blizzard making wholescale changes to the game, which is a shame. Does anybody remember the balls they showed in wholly revising Warcraft 3 when the Frozen Throne came out? What happened to that company?
|
I agree with most of what you said. I really would like to see the game change to allow for more micro and allow the units to be more effective.
I just wanted to add that I think macro mechanics also are a key problem. I think they should be there, but not as big of a focal point. I love the way chrono boost works because it allows you to make more decisions. If you chrono boost warp gates, your attack can come faster than it normally would. Or you could chrono boost workers and your attack comes slower but with a stronger economy behind it. It leaves room for choices that I think lead to unique builds. The other races kinda get shafted. For zerg you have to hit all your injects in a timely manner or you lose - no choices there its just something you do. Terran has a few choices - faster money or vision - which is more interesting than what zergs gets to do, but still its just something that you do and still doesnt really leave much room for a choice to be made. Scan every few minutes and drop mules in between. If your bad or doing an all-in then supply drop.
Not sure if this is really related, but just wanted to throw it out there.
|
I actually like the idea of slowing down the game speed just slightly, not that it's too fast to be played now, but everyone who has played on "normal" speed knows it feels so slow, but!! You get a more done and die less to random stuff. Imagine a speed between the two, the people with sick sick apm would do 3-4 pronged attacks instead of 2 and the early ling/roach vs hellion micro battle would be something both sides would want to take serious. It's very true that when sc2 feels most hopeless is when you hit the unforgiving things in a match, .5 sec too late, or a wrong click and your army is gone or all your workers are gone. Anyway love to see how the game played out on normal speed in a tournament with pro players.
|
I feel like the biggest difference is that SC2 is about positioning the army (deathball) while other successful RTS games (BW, CoH, etc) are more about positioning the individual units. The fact that many pros keep the majority of their army on one or two hotkeys exacerbates this point.
Units like Colossus or Immortals are the biggest offenders of this off the top of my head. If they are in range, it's only about how many you have rather than how you use them (barring special AoE cases like EMP). It would be incredible if it was about how you used EACH one rather than how many you had in your ball. Hard counters can work if they are specialized late game units but when you have such quick access they become boring and binary.
Day9's Frisbee and baseball talk was relevant to this although it seemed to assume that hard counter/limited units at any stage are bad with I disagree with.
|
On January 19 2012 07:09 snively wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2012 07:08 Tumor wrote:i think ppl just now figuered out the flaws of SC2 because they get so good in it, at the beginning nobody was "very" good at the game. Chess in the early years had absolutely the same problems as sc2 ^^ really? chess? ...I can't imagine chess having balance issues lol
It wasn't balance as much as design flaws though. I'm sure that chess must've had problems with it that evolved over time.
|
On January 19 2012 07:24 Wombat_NI wrote:
That said I've lost faith in Blizzard making wholescale changes to the game, which is a shame. Does anybody remember the balls they showed in wholly revising Warcraft 3 when the Frozen Throne came out? What happened to that company?
I dunno brother. I dunno. I miss them though. Wherever they are, I hope that eSport heaven's suiting them well.
|
Vatican City State582 Posts
On January 18 2012 18:28 Filter wrote:
I bet 75%+ of the games I watch or play in end very, very decisively with a big engagement going to one player or the other. Very few games are decided with slow, sweeping gameplay where each player deals and receives multiple blows. This is because of four factors that I'm really started to get fed up with in the game and I'm going to list them off here.
or just watch players like Thorzain, morrow, dimaga...etc.
|
While I like the stalker unit, I also feel that there have to be some extreme counters to it otherwise everyone would just go mass blink stalker in every single matchup. It's already the most standard build in PvP, the most common and strongest unit composition in PvZ (with small deviations and mixes to complement it, or just as a 2 base all-in), and a very strong all-in for PvT. It's a good thing that players can mix them into compositions and they have a lot of utility, but they need to also be a liability in some situations.
|
People should remember that in threads like these, balance=/=design. Just because something has a design flaw doesn't mean it's imbalanced. The OP is not talking about balance, he's talking about what he thinks are bad design flaws in the game. Design flaws are what lead to boring games and we as players and viewers just want to make sure that this doesn't happen.
Edit: Also its not BW vs SC 2 for the sake of being BW vs SC 2. Its BW vs SC 2 because many people feel BW has some designs that SC 2 could adopt and/or improve upon. If BW were a badly designed game then people wouldn't be talking about it anymore; because SC 2 beats BW in all the other aspects (graphics, game engine etc).
|
This same exact thread pops up every 2-3 weeks. It's actually unbelievable. SC2 v. BW, gogogogogo!
I disagree wholeheartedly with the OP. Watch some of the GSL January games -- there are a bunch in there that are just gems (I won't spoil anything), but that have engagements going on all over the map for extended periods of time.
|
On January 19 2012 07:24 EternaLLegacy wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2012 07:19 PH wrote:On January 18 2012 19:55 iKill wrote:On January 18 2012 19:06 bokeevboke wrote:On January 18 2012 18:58 slytown wrote:If you don't like the game, go back to playing BW. Noone's stopping you. You're listing off complete design changes instead of specific issues. I love BW and won't hate you for switching back. I never understood these kind of comments - 'go play BW'. What's wrong with wanting to make the game better? if there is smth good in bw why shouldn't we adopt it. if you have nothing to contribute to discussion just move on pls. Because SC2 and BW are not the same game? If half of the QQers about SC2 had things their way, we'd be playing BW right now with SC2 graphics. If we were playing BW with SC2 graphics, we'd have a perfect game. You realize that already exists, right? It's called SC2BW.
its a far cry to bw. i've played it awhile ago, maybe it improved a lot by now but it was very buggy and the unit proportions were off, couldn't even block chokes. plus, you can't really play with how custom games work.
i just think those who played bw for years have little more say on what is good/bad with sc2 (i'm not talking about "oh i used to play when i was a kid"), and people are just brushing it off like they're whining, when they're only trying to make the game better through discussion/awareness.
i mean, i think everyone agrees the old b.net system was better for custom games, we're complaining, we want the older system back or make the current one better.(its my personal opinion that blizzard did this on purpose to decrease popularity of custom games to keep AutoMM active). this complaint is no different with sc2 gameplay. there's something wrong, something needs to be said, and its being said. no need to brush off, treating it like cries. the complaints are valid.
the shredder being added fucking boggles my mind on what they're doing to the game (hard unit counter, not micro-countered, like spider mines). this unit is up there with mothership in my eyes, units that dont belong. this is the type of thing that prevents me to believe "blizzard is doing their best to live up to its predecessor".
|
i wonder why terran has been dominating code s since the release of sc2 though
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
