Defense, the Defender's Advantage and SC2 - Page 3

Thylacine

Sweden882 Posts

January 20 2012 19:20 GMT

#41

ok, so Huk gave up a bad position, but who is metroSG? And can anyone argue that he played particularly well?

I know him. hes a GM terran on EU and he clicks all upgrades and clicks many other things and got low apm and bad macro + average micro.
Wouldnt say hes good at all.

Mr. Black

United States470 Posts

January 20 2012 19:21 GMT

#42

How many times this week is this thread going to be made?

http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=302136
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=304188

"Units die too fast." "There's no way to hold map control." "Deathballs, waah." "One battle decides every game."

What RTS (besides SC:BW) should be the model here? If you don't like deathballs, don't use them -- spreading out actually works pretty well. PLAY THE GAME BETTER.

Treehead

999 Posts

January 20 2012 19:25 GMT

#43

On January 21 2012 03:04 Mataza wrote:
I´m gonna cite Day[9]:
"The system is never flawed"

(some other stuff)

I might not have said it outright yet, but you seem to be just another balancewhiner.
Have a nice day.

Day[9] was talking about mentality. My mentality is fine in game. I'm not posting this because "this stinks and it's total BS I don't win more". My post really has nothing to do with me or my play (I suck, and I'll admit that as I have in other threads I post in). It more has to do with the game we have, the game as it could be, and how to resolve the differences between the two.

This has NOTHING to do with balance. The game as it is is not built to rely on a moderate defender's advantage - it's built to be "he who attacks with more of the right stuff wins". That's what it seems like now, anyway.

On January 21 2012 03:26 Steel wrote:

Show nested quote +

I would have no problem with protoss not having warpgates if you want (I'm Zerg).

Obviously, QQ, Protoss cannot attack and be aggressive anymore. What you're asking for here is to have a defenders advantage, and still have your (enormous) attackers advantage. All comes at a price. Besides, this lack of defenders advantage only applies in the very early game. As soon as you have sentries, on any map with a ramp or choke, an attacker shouldn't break you. I literally can NEVER attack protoss as Zerg if their army is at their base. Then, when you look at drops, as soon as you spot it you can warp in units to give you time to bring your army back. What do other races do? Just run away and take damage. Warp gates, and the ability to instantly warp in units, is a HUGE attacking AND defending ability. Let's you took a hidden base, have no units there and the terran drops it. If you're on 3 bases, you have enough warpgates to stop the drop cold, maybe losing a couple probes. Now let's look at the zerg perspective: A Terran or Protoss drops my hidden base. I doubt I can get units there in time to stop the drop from killing all my drones and my base, and besides zerglings dont fare too well against zealots, or marines.

So, you have immediate access to several units for defense, and you're saying "this mechanic drastically reduces defender’s advantage." Okay, maybe for 1 base pushes (which you stop losing to pretty quickly). Otherwise, it's a huge advantage.

I'm not saying Protoss isn't good. Obviously they are. If you need evidence, watch any of the 8 protoss who made to to Code S this time around. I'm saying warpin has a weird affect on defender's advantage that hurts matchups both in their favor and against their favor.

On January 21 2012 04:21 Mr. Black wrote:
How many times this week is this thread going to be made?

http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=302136
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=304188

"Units die too fast." "There's no way to hold map control." "Deathballs, waah." "One battle decides every game."

What RTS (besides SC:BW) should be the model here? If you don't like deathballs, don't use them -- spreading out actually works pretty well. PLAY THE GAME BETTER.

Good point. Why would I try to think when I can practice? Those two activities totally fill the same role for me.

Also, making a thread about defense is very much like making threads about unit mechanics or units which have really high dps.

Is your complaint that we're all talking about the same game here, or that we're all thinking critically about said game?

On January 21 2012 03:45 Zombo Joe wrote:
If there were Lurkers, Spider Mines/Better Tanks and Shield Batteries/Reavers we would have all the defender's advantage we need. Blizzard howerver insists on adding gimmicks like Swarm Hosts, Shredders and the Cannon spell.

As of right now the only defenses that provide significant defenders advantage are bunkers with mass repair, forcefields on chokes, spines with mass transfuse. Outside of defending, none of these can be used effectively for attacking. In the late game they also fall flat to deathballs.

Agreed - that makes two ideas I like for adding defensiveness to the game without that we've seen in the past hasn't been gamebreaking - the type that was in WC3 and the type that was in BW.

R3DT1D3

285 Posts

January 20 2012 19:25 GMT

#44

The deathball concept comes up time and time again but I don't know how you avoid it. Terran is the only race that has drops of small units that are incredibly efficient and don't cripple the main army. Zerg pretty much only has ling runbys and Toss can do some small zealot harass if they're close to maxxed but that's very situational.

The sad part is that the current game won't really support change well. The highground mechanic has been beaten to death since beta, warpgate has had too much work put in to be scrapped and rebalanced, and I don't think Blizzard understands how to make defendable areas other than chokes/ramps.

Also, blink stalker + colossus ball with warpgate reinforcements pretty much destroys any defender advantage you mentioned.

eoLithic

Norway221 Posts

January 20 2012 19:26 GMT

#45

I think there`s only one way to find out...Whos deadliest?

BronzeKnee

United States5217 Posts

January 20 2012 19:28 GMT

#46

I also want to add that after watching the game linked, that I believe that was a problem with the map and the ability to scout (I mentioned scouting in my post on page 3), not with SC2 itself. That map favored 1 base play heavily, and it also a really bad map, and it was removed from the ladder.

On January 21 2012 04:25 R3DT1D3 wrote:...and I don't think Blizzard understands how to make defendable areas other than chokes/ramps.

Blizzard has more trick of their sleeve... Collapsible rocks! As if Destructible rocks to block people from playing macro games weren't bad enough...

On January 21 2012 03:30 Omsomsoms wrote:
Edit: Holy shit TheBronzeKnee, Coming of the Horde was my absolute favorite WC3 map :O

Thanks!

Alacast

United States205 Posts

January 20 2012 19:30 GMT

#47

People get so offended when others' express their thoughts and opinions and it baffles me.

There is no harm in speculation, thinking out loud, or exploring various potential causes for what a person sees as being a problem with the game. Furthermore, as many have so astutely pointed out, these threads won't change the game, and are more often than not, a vehicle for discussing strategies and tactics in a roundabout way. It's just the way people think, and if you want to be constructive and informative, try understanding their point of view and responding in kind. If you think the game is just fine, explain why that is rather than just bashing peoples' thought-out and unique posts.

JoeAWESOME

Sweden1080 Posts

January 20 2012 19:32 GMT

#48

Nice writeup. I agree that the defender doesent benefit enough from being the defender.

The matchup were you see most from the defenders advantage is ZvZ? That's just how I feel about it!

Then again. We're all very bad at this game at this moment and if you give Sc2 another year I'm sure that the timings will be more figured out and you'll see the defender benefit more from defending

FeyFey

Germany10114 Posts

January 20 2012 19:33 GMT

#49

IEM has to many breaks, all around IEM there are always the same threads popping up about how bad this game is. If it would be that bad no one would play it. Blizzard didn't really throw out tournaments like crazy to enforce a scene around the game.

I am fine with the defenders advantage now, but i disliked that they nerfed the early game so heavily until the defenders advantage became so enormous, that early aggression is almost deadly if the opponent isn't greedy.

bokeevboke

Singapore1674 Posts

January 20 2012 19:38 GMT

#50

Fully agree. These thoughts were always in my head, but I never could explain it in a good, constructive way. I wish blizzard listened to these and try to make a better game. Right now sc2 is kinda meh.

Treehead

999 Posts

January 20 2012 19:45 GMT

#51

On January 21 2012 04:30 Alacast wrote:
People get so offended when others' express their thoughts and opinions and it baffles me.

There is no harm in speculation, thinking out loud, or exploring various potential causes for what a person sees as being a problem with the game. Furthermore, as many have so astutely pointed out, these threads won't change the game, and are more often than not, a vehicle for discussing strategies and tactics in a roundabout way. It's just the way people think, and if you want to be constructive and informative, try understanding their point of view and responding in kind. If you think the game is just fine, explain why that is rather than just bashing peoples' thought-out and unique posts.

Some people just only know how to think critically when they're angry at something, so they imagine when I talk about SC2 in any way other than complimentary that I'm really saying "Hey, y'know what sucks? THIS GAME! Y'know what's awesome? ME!" It really doesn't matter how many times you say that this isn't what you mean, until a person is able to think critically about something while also appreciating it, they will not be able to understand that this is what I'm doing. It's how empathy works, and at some point it's something we just have to live with, whether it's frustrating or not.

Thanks for appreciating my post.

kanada

Canada255 Posts

January 20 2012 19:48 GMT

#52

I would agree that this issue needs to be looked into. I am a much more defense oriented player, mostly because I want my games to get to the 3 base play where attacks are happening everywhere and macro becomes such a bigger deal. I hope that it is at least being considered by blizzard. Not to say that they should make the game cater exactly to what i want but i would like it.

LimeNade

United States2125 Posts

January 20 2012 19:49 GMT

#53

zZzZzZz to be honest the problem with the game is people just havent become gosu enough or exploited the game enough to really show its true potential because people have been lazy relying on death balls to win things earlier on in the history of sc2

bgx

Poland6595 Posts

January 20 2012 19:57 GMT

#54

On January 21 2012 04:05 HwangjaeTerran wrote:

Show nested quote +

Hello, this is Lee Young Ho and I fully agree with this statement.

But Lucifer you got nice mine drags :D Was that offense or defense? :D
kekeke

OpticalShot

Canada6330 Posts

January 20 2012 19:58 GMT

#55

Well-constructed post, and in general, I agree. Defender's advantage does not mean early rushes will no longer be viable, nor does it mean you can expand 3 bases instantly with just defensive structures. Defender's advantage means once you gain advantages through positioning (higher ground - cliffs, ridges, ramps) and planning (zone control units, unit composition), you can overcome the incoming attack of similar or even slightly greater forces.

Defender's advantage should allow well-positioned and prepared army of 90 supply to overcome a hasty, over-zealous, spam a-moving attacking army of 120 supply. It means that there will be greater room for multi-tasking; in other words, higher skill ceiling. It means more and more professional players will learn to overcome build-order disadvantages through fantastic multi-tasking and micromanagement. Well, that's at least how I see it.

Bleak

Turkey3059 Posts

January 20 2012 20:01 GMT

#56

Really, really nice writeup. I agree with you.

Mjolnir

912 Posts

January 20 2012 20:02 GMT

#57

On January 21 2012 03:04 Mataza wrote:
I´m gonna cite Day[9]:
"The system is never flawed"

My opinion is that there already is defender´s advantage.
Basically an even bigger defender´s advantage would also mean that it is unreasonable to attack early on. Right now, pressure builds exist because Defenders advantage is not overwhelming. Typical rush builds lose if the first attack isn´t successful(obvious).
Right now, SC2 games begin at about the time where the first feasible oppurtunity for aggression is. If there was no feasible alternative to a greedy start, you could just fast forward this part of gameplay because its always the same(That´s why Blizzard gives you now 6 workers instead of the 4 you got in SC:BW).

Taking your Huk replay, he did not scout for an attack and his army was out of position. All he needed to do was keep a probe or a stalker at his opponents ramp or keep his army in the right spot. But he didn´t.
He *could* have delayed the attack with 5 forcefields or engaged in equal terrain.
Instead he had to crawl down a ramp which is in range of 3 Tanks.

Tl;dr:
The issue isn´t as big as you make it be. Huk lost in this game because of mistakes, like lack of scouting.
Remember that Blizzard already announced changes do that end for HotS(summons a cannon on building).
I might not have said it outright yet, but you seem to be just another balancewhiner.
Have a nice day.

God. What a way to end your post.

First off, Day9 isn't fucking Jesus. He has to talk positively about the game because it's his income. Can you imagine if Day9 started saying things like "Holy shit, is that ever OP!" it'd look bad, and it'd be bad for his business. His entire job is predicated on him being "the guy who always has an answer" and he is the unofficial spokesperson for the game, I'd say. He has to be unbiased - but I shit you not, if you could sit down with him for a drink "off-the-record" he'd probably have a few choice words about certain units/strats.

Second, the replay in question is just one example out of tonnes. You may be right, scouting might have been a problem - but I can cite you other examples where it wasn't a problem, and the defender just gets sodomized all the same. I don't see it a problem for people to point out issues in the game. We all want it to be better. It's lunacy to think this game is fine - it's not. This game is nowhere near as deep as BW (enter "but this isn't brood war" squeals here).

Third, OP wrote a really good, well-thought post, and you reduce him to a "balancewhiner." Seriously? That's pretty weak.

Hdizz

Canada93 Posts

January 20 2012 20:03 GMT

#58

I couldn't disagree more with the op

Mjolnir

912 Posts

January 20 2012 20:07 GMT

#59

Spreading out against a deathball makes it stronger. Unless you're being facetious and you're suggesting the offensive player spreads out their deathball for the sake of courtesy - then why bother playing to win.

Also, SC:BW should be the model here. It's the best RTS of all time and the precursor to SC2. It is also leagues better than SC2 in terms of balance, strategy and tactics - and was so when it was the same age SC2 is now. God forbid anyone suggest that here, though.

Jazzman88

Canada2228 Posts

January 20 2012 20:10 GMT

#60

I think that your point about maps being a primary culprit of this is going largely unnoticed. Take a look back at some of the BW maps: multiple high and low ground areas with tangled pathways leading to bases and the ability to hide units behind scenery. I think we will need more variety in our map terrains: right now, it's largely this: double high main, single high natural, third/fourth/etc. low ground, flat middle with 1-4 watchtowers, and anywhere from 0-8 chokepoints of varying size without extra terrain variations, you can argue that some maps deviate slightly from this (Antiga, Tal'Darim, etc.), but in general, the maps are focused on a set characteristic of bases with little terrain/environmental benefits comparatively speaking.

In addition, the techniques of zoning I think are going to ramp up HUGELY in HotS. The Viper, Shredder, Swarm Host, and Oracle are all going to be absolutely key in gaining control of certain areas and pushing back forces. In addition, Recall/Arc Cannon on the Nexus as well as Ultralisk Burrow Charge, Burrow-move Banelings, Battle Hellion mode, etc. are all going to impact the viability of simply 'smashing armies together'.

I don't think we want to overthink the defender's advantage situation in too much detail. Chess is a great example of how not attempting to improve the defender didn't actually decrease the viability of defense. The last major rule change in terms of pieces was the addition of a couple of things: Queens now moving anywhere, and Bishops gaining the ability to hit multiple squares. Also, en passant was added, which is in fact a 'nerf' to defense, since you can no longer block forward pawns from pawn reinforcement if your opponent doesn't let you. The amount of attacking traps and minefields you can lay for the defender is astounding, yet, even today, the first move advantage that White gets still does not creep up over 55% (I think - it's not exact, so don't quote me on that number). Chess is as complex and strategically rich today as it has ever been, without fundamental changes to give defenders an advantage.

Prev 1 2 3 4 5 9 10 11 Next All

Please or register to reply.

Defense, the Defender's Advantage and SC2 - Page 3

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming