| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Tobberoth
Sweden6375 Posts
On January 18 2012 22:41 Oreo7 wrote: Damn, are we complaining sc2 is HARDER now? Blizz can't catch a break. I never once said SC2 is harder, I just said it's faster. There are a million reasons why BW is harder than SC2, only being able to pick 12 units as once is one of them, but the speed of the actual damage is hardly one of them. | ||
|
karpo
Sweden1998 Posts
On January 18 2012 22:41 Oreo7 wrote: Damn, are we complaining sc2 is HARDER now? Blizz can't catch a break. Yeah look at HSC where MC's micro in PvP really makes him win fights that look totally lost. There's just so much exaggeration in threads like these, that microing hinders damage is just utter bullshit. | ||
|
Tobberoth
Sweden6375 Posts
On January 18 2012 22:43 Oreo7 wrote: Lategame 5 spines isn't a huge investment at all. Correct. Then again, Lategame 5 spines do basically no good at all, except tank a few shots. | ||
|
Deleted User 109835
629 Posts
| ||
|
Oreo7
United States1647 Posts
On January 18 2012 22:45 Tobberoth wrote: Correct. Then again, Lategame 5 spines do basically no good at all, except tank a few shots. Again this isn't true at all. Watch an TvZ, late game terran actively trying to deny bases with drops, 5 spines stop drops, force terran to escalate attacks etc. Also the MCvP example is a great one! | ||
|
Tobberoth
Sweden6375 Posts
On January 18 2012 22:47 Oreo7 wrote: Again this isn't true at all. Watch an TvZ, late game terran actively trying to deny bases with drops, 5 spines stop drops, force terran to escalate attacks etc. Also the MCvP example is a great one! One dropship of marines is obviously butchered by 5 spines. That makes sense since 5 spines is still more of an investment. However, 2 dropships with both marines and marauders? You'll probably not lose even a single unit, unless all the spines are placed on the side of the base you're coming from. Zergs place spines vs drops to give enough time to get an army there, they are just tanks, you spend money to get enough time to move an army, the spines themselves are completely harmless. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On January 18 2012 18:28 Filter wrote: Immortals are the same story, 1 immortal can easily kill 3 presieged up tanks. How is that reasonable at all? 2v1 tanks should be able to kill an immortal without a loss(but near death), but 1v1 an immortal should mop up a tank. Give immortals a bit faster fire rate and all of a sudden they become viable against marines too. Not sure what you mean by presieged. If you mean unsieged, then 3 tanks kill an immortal with the loss of only one tank. If you mean sieged, the tanks will still just about win given their superior range (even though an immortal being a single target with hardened shield is the hardest counter possible to high damage, slow firing AOE). | ||
|
Roblin
Sweden948 Posts
On January 18 2012 22:43 Oreo7 wrote: Lategame 5 spines isn't a huge investment at all. lategame 5 spines is not a force that the opponent needs to care about, you need a lot more of them to actually get any reaction at all from the opponent. | ||
|
DarKcS
Australia1237 Posts
On January 18 2012 19:17 GeOnoSis wrote: Tobberoth I agree with you, but that's the life of TvZ! Terran doesn't micro, everything is dead. Terran does micro: minimal losses and every zerg unit is dead. You don't watch your mutas for one second, 5-10 (if not even every) are just dead (flying over marines just because terran moved randomly out). One mistake can lead to an instant loss...for BOTH sides. But can you quantify the amount of situations Z or T or P have to be in for one of these auto-lose situations to be in? Does one race have more faults than another? Is that fair? Is it fair Zerg have the least amount of attacking units in the game, and thus less options? I wish Blizz would use the test server to do radical things, like rebalancing lings and other core units, game speed, movement speeds (why did hydras never get a re-buff?) why do they keep touching end game units that never needed to be touched (high templar?) because of single situations but never care about the over-arching balance of the game. Instead it's more like [+1 protoss shields are now 100/100 instead of 125/125 - we think this will greatly improve Protoss, k thx bye - see you in 6 months on the next patch]. | ||
|
trinxified
Canada7774 Posts
AFAIK, non siege tanks are better against immortals. | ||
|
bITt.mAN
Switzerland3693 Posts
Banshee. It would totally ruin the game if you gave Scouts/Mutas enough to 2-shot Probes, because it makes it too volatile. Or a tank drop for example, it is possible to pull all your SCV's and kill it, it's not Game Over on such a whim. Another problem is unit mobility. I think it would feel a lot less frustrating if the units that are super-specialized at countering one class have restricted mobility. That then means it takes some skill to implement them, some micro is required to roll your opponent. Let's see: reavers being super slow, tanks sieging slowly, oh yea lurkers being fucking underground to attack. This also means these units are great at defense and zoning; using them to be aggressive takes a lot of skill. + Show Spoiler [EDIT: in contrast] + Colossi being able to walk everywhere, Banshees fast with cloak, tanks sieging quickly, infestors sneaking underground... I was watching In_Dove's stream and it was a blast: Ex-Progamer Terran doing the craziest shit, coming back from the most ridiculous setbacks and winning consistently, mainly through phenomenal macro, game-sense and control. By the same virtue he was playing the top Foreign Zerg, and though in one game he opened up by sneaking a vulture (hellion) into the Zerg's base and controlling it well enough to kill all the drones, he couldn't then just go and rofl-stomp his opponent. That was cuz his opponent was really fucking good at using Dark Swarm and Lurkers together. To swarm you need to consume zerglings, pre-empt where you want to control then cast the spell, while moving the lurkers into place and burrowing them. This is really hard, but the two together make an impassible barrier, for as few as 3 units. Although he was outnumbered the whole game, he was still able to hold his own until BattleCruiser tech came out. It shouldn't be about the size of the army, but how you use it. | ||
|
Firesilver
United Kingdom1190 Posts
On January 18 2012 22:58 trinxified wrote: actually one immortal can kill 3 tanks that are in siege mode better than not in siege mode. AFAIK, non siege tanks are better against immortals. It would make sense, both attacks trigger the hardened shield but the high fire speed of the unseiged tank would do more damage overall. | ||
|
shubcraft
Germany145 Posts
My post is not ment to hate you ppl, of course does bw rely on better mechanics and is the "harder" game, but thats just not what average joe wants to see and play today. I still think bw and sc2 have something in common tho, they are, in relation to the time they were released, easy to play but very hard to master. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On January 18 2012 22:58 trinxified wrote: actually one immortal can kill 3 tanks that are in siege mode better than not in siege mode. AFAIK, non siege tanks are better against immortals. I did just say this, yes. Non sieged tanks are much better because of their very quick fire rate (1.04) compared to sieged (3). | ||
|
EternaLLegacy
United States410 Posts
| ||
|
FLuE
United States1012 Posts
The BW expansion totally changed originally SC.. and I played the original SC before BW and it was pretty crappy and imbalanced too. And very buggy. The expansion is what launched SC:BW. I have enough faith in Blizzard that their approach, which they've had a great track record in the past, of just getting a base game out, making their money, and then really completing the game with an expansion will happen again. It is how they work, and it is a profitable business model. We all play a half finished game we plaid $50 for, and then we pay another $30-40 for the "expansions" which actually just complete the game. They get to sit back and see everything that is wrong with the game and let the expansions fix it. I think several of these issues will be greatly helped with the expansion. Also this game isn't Broodwar 2. If they just wanted Broodwar with better graphics that is what we would have gotten. They want this to be a different game, so some of the complaints are essentially what Blizzard wants even if Broodwar players don't like it. | ||
|
EternaLLegacy
United States410 Posts
On January 18 2012 18:44 Tobberoth wrote: It's true. I went back and played some brood war for the first time in a long time, and it amazed me how SLOW it is compared to SC2. Not in the sense that you want to speed it up, but in the sense that you have time to react and micro. Doing a 10/15 gate dragoon pressure vs a terran, it's amazing how the micro feels. You have ample time to react to what dragoon is being damaged and move it back, focus on getting a good concave etc. This isn't really possible in SC2 since units die so ridiculously fast, and units close distances so quickly. In SC2, you're often discouraged from microing at all since it's all about critical firepower for a second or two. Losing just one second firing can leave your army decimated, and then you'll do no damage. UPDATE: What we really need, is a custom map for SC2 which explores this. Similar to SC2BW, but pure SC2 with more BW like balance, trying to implement what you mention in your post: stronger static defenses, more equalized counters, maybe the classic complaint about ball pathing. Just to see how it would actually work out in practice. I was going to do this after finishing part 3 and part 4 of my articles on design, provided I could get some people to help me. Are you offering? | ||
|
Mehukannu
Finland421 Posts
On January 18 2012 23:06 EternaLLegacy wrote: Didn't I just make a big article on this? Yes, and now we also have this one too where people can vent off some steam what they don't like about sc2 design. Like on the one you did. ^.^ | ||
|
Tobberoth
Sweden6375 Posts
On January 18 2012 23:12 EternaLLegacy wrote: I was going to do this after finishing part 3 and part 4 of my articles on design, provided I could get some people to help me. Are you offering? Would love to give it a try, but I have no experience what so ever with the editor. | ||
|
shizna
United Kingdom803 Posts
On January 18 2012 23:01 bITt.mAN wrote: Take the Wraith (in BW TvT): it does 8 damage. That's 8 shots to kill an SCV, 5 for a marine, 19 for a tank (IIRC). That means your opponent can go wraiths (with cloak) and if they hide the tech for long enough and surprise you, you can be set pretty far behind. Yes you need to anticipate it by building academy/armoury, but the point is the entire game ISIN'T over just because he made one type of unit, and that one unit singe-handedly raped your entire civilization. Banshee. It would totally ruin the game if you gave Scouts/Mutas enough to 2-shot Probes, because it makes it too volatile. Or a tank drop for example, it is possible to pull all your SCV's and kill it, it's not Game Over on such a whim. Another problem is unit mobility. I think it would feel a lot less frustrating if the units that are super-specialized at countering one class have restricted mobility. That then means it takes some skill to implement them, some micro is required to roll your opponent. Let's see: reavers being super slow, tanks sieging slowly, oh yea lurkers being fucking underground to attack. This also means these units are great at defense and zoning; using them to be aggressive takes a lot of skill. + Show Spoiler [EDIT: in contrast] + Colossi being able to walk everywhere, Banshees fast with cloak, tanks sieging quickly, infestors sneaking underground... I was watching In_Dove's stream and it was a blast: Ex-Progamer Terran doing the craziest shit, coming back from the most ridiculous setbacks and winning consistently, mainly through phenomenal macro, game-sense and control. By the same virtue he was playing the top Foreign Zerg, and though in one game he opened up by sneaking a vulture (hellion) into the Zerg's base and controlling it well enough to kill all the drones, he couldn't then just go and rofl-stomp his opponent. That was cuz his opponent was really fucking good at using Dark Swarm and Lurkers together. To swarm you need to consume zerglings, pre-empt where you want to control then cast the spell, while moving the lurkers into place and burrowing them. This is really hard, but the two together make an impassible barrier, for as few as 3 units. Although he was outnumbered the whole game, he was still able to hold his own until BattleCruiser tech came out. It shouldn't be about the size of the army, but how you use it. so in broodwar you could not instalose to a reaver drop? | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games summit1g8638 Grubby3140 FrodaN2485 Liquid`RaSZi1741 B2W.Neo803 ceh9601 mouzStarbuck176 ToD108 UpATreeSC39 JuggernautJason9 deth5 |
|
The PiG Daily
Solar vs Cure
herO vs TBD
Replay Cast
Afreeca Starleague
Sharp vs Scan
Rain vs Mong
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Afreeca Starleague
Soulkey vs Ample
JyJ vs sSak
Replay Cast
Afreeca Starleague
hero vs YSC
Larva vs Shine
Kung Fu Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
