EPTI like the idea of def advantage, but it seems you'll struggle to give it to zergs, severly lacking in ranged dps units that are good in defence (i.e NOT roaches, Hyrdras only - and Hyrdras suck).
Defense, the Defender's Advantage and SC2 - Page 7
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Arghnews
United Kingdom169 Posts
I like the idea of def advantage, but it seems you'll struggle to give it to zergs, severly lacking in ranged dps units that are good in defence (i.e NOT roaches, Hyrdras only - and Hyrdras suck). | ||
|
Husky
United States3362 Posts
I think 2011 was a great year for StarCraft but I also think a lot of the hype is gone. I firmly believe there is a much larger 'hardcore' fan base now than there was at the end of BW, but I also think a lot of things need to change for StarCraft to have longevity. Just based purely on what I hear from my fans and close friends, there seems to be a little something missing when it comes to the engagements throughout a game. No one really seems to agree or even know what that something is though. One opinion that I've held for a long time (keep in mind my opinions on things change constantly based on the more I learn/more experience I have) is that having units do BONUS damage to certain armor types rather than REDUCED damage vs the other types plays a huge role in how battles unfold in SC2. The deaths of units is ramped upwards which makes for most battles ending in the blink of an eye. Keep in mind, in BW a unit never did more than 100% damage, some times going as low as 50% depending on the armor types. I'm torn on if anything should change or not because I both love BW and SC2 independently. I dunno, tough call! | ||
|
cpomz
United States76 Posts
The OP also notes of the somewhat ease of executing early game aggression rather than defending it (111, marauder/hellion,3-rax, 11/11) - These builds certainly take much less "skill" to execute and its up to the defender to hold it. We should not have static defense buffed - perhaps something like the shield battery or Blizzard will rework high ground, but it should be something that takes skill to execute - if all else fails maps will solve this issue | ||
|
Haiq343
United States2548 Posts
On January 21 2012 12:16 Husky wrote: One opinion that I've held for a long time (keep in mind my opinions on things change constantly based on the more I learn/more experience I have) is that having units do BONUS damage to certain armor types rather than REDUCED damage vs the other types plays a huge role in how battles unfold in SC2. The deaths of units is ramped upwards which makes for most battles ending in the blink of an eye. Keep in mind, in BW a unit never did more than 100% damage, some times going as low as 50% depending on the armor types. I think dps is too high, but this isn't why. The armor type system is exactly the same as BW's, the difference is purely semantic. The #'s may be off (we both feel they are) but there's no real difference between doing bonus damage vs armored and normal to everything else, or reduced damage to everything else and normal damage to armored. | ||
|
Treehead
999 Posts
On January 21 2012 12:16 Husky wrote: Just based purely on what I hear from my fans and close friends, there seems to be a little something missing when it comes to the engagements throughout a game. No one really seems to agree or even know what that something is though. Yeah, I hear that. I like to keep an open mind, because I don't think many of us have a solid idea on what engagements should be, and how exactly they should be different. I just think we had a concept in our head of how it would look and feel and then what we are seeing is that this concept isn't meshing well with the actual game. I think a lot of people would like more defensively oriented games - but maybe they wouldn't. It really all depends on how the engagements feel. I personally think that every idea we throw out there will *sound* wrong to most people, but hopefully something will make it through to the game that *feels* better. Better to watch, and better to play. I will add this, though. Someone made a comment a while back that what I'm describing is something that is close to happening in pro-level TvZ right now (where rushes are obsolete and no one aims for the deathball) - and maybe I'm behind on the times, but isn't TvZ largely considered to be the most entertaining matchup to watch? Just food for thought. | ||
|
ChaosTerran
Austria844 Posts
On January 21 2012 12:17 cpomz wrote: The OP does not suggest that to directly strengthen defender's advantage would be good. In fact it would probably be bad considering bunker rushes/cannon rushes would just get stronger. Rather defenders advantage could be something that you upgrade to (PF is a good example) Think about how difficult it is in PvT to push into a PF with MMM waiting - it damn near impossible unless you have a stupid amount of forces. Of course this doesn't have to be at that level - shield battery would be an amazing addition to protoss early game defense The OP also notes of the somewhat ease of executing early game aggression rather than defending it (111, marauder/hellion,3-rax, 11/11) - These builds certainly take much less "skill" to execute and its up to the defender to hold it. We should not have static defense buffed - perhaps something like the shield battery or Blizzard will rework high ground, but it should be something that takes skill to execute - if all else fails maps will solve this issue What do you know.... marauder hellion definitely isn't easy to pull off, you need alot of micro/stutter stepping/focus firing with this strategy and 11/11 isn't easy either, unless your zerg opponent makes it easy for you.. And 3 rax? Really? When's the last time someone lost to 3 rax all-in? You complain about the ease of terran all-ins, wanna hear some protoss all-ins that are ridiculously powerful yet extremely hard to stop? 1 base immortal all-in vs. 1 rax expo, 6 gate, 2 base collossus rush, warp prism all-ins, etc.. All of these builds require hardly any skill to pull off and are extremely hard to defend, it's not always just terran that has easy builds, protoss has alot easier builds and is arguably much easier to play in a macro game anyway, so is it really surprising that so many terran resort to using all-ins? This is yet another protoss whine thread, where some gold league players share their wisdom and complain about 3 rax and all that stuff. If you seriously think 3 rax is hard to stop then you are just bad. You can even beat a 3 rax all-in by sacking your expo and fast teching to collossi (I think this was the case at HSC where cloud killed the protoss's expo with a 3 rax and then died to collossi because he had no vikings/medivacs). Learn to play. edit: And a PF is hard to attack into in PvT? protoss is probably the one race that has to fear PFs the least because they can either storm the scvs, or kill it with collossi which just so happen to have a higher range than the PF. Hardly any terran will tell you that PFs are good in TvP, they are really good against Zerg, because Lings just get owned by PFs, but they are not problematic in TvP at all. edit: And let me just say this. PFs are the only way for terran to fortify their bases, yes you have bunkers, but you need supply in those bunkers. Protoss and zerg have cannons and spine crawlers to fortify their bases without losing fight supply, so the terran equivalent to that is the PF, if Terran couldn't build Pfs how would you ever fortify your bases vs. ling runbies or zealot warp-ins? Leave 2 bunkers at each base full of units so that your main army is -30 supply when you are maxed? Some people complain and complain all the time but they never really use their brains. But yes, you are of course right, let's take out PFs so that terran has no way of ever fortifying a base, this is something only Zerg and Protoss should be able to do. /FACEPALM | ||
|
Condor Hero
United States2931 Posts
On January 21 2012 12:16 Husky wrote: I dont really take sides on this but I can tell you that a lot of people I know who have stopped watching StarCraft all together have voiced concerns very similar to a lot of the points you have raised. I think 2011 was a great year for StarCraft but I also think a lot of the hype is gone. I firmly believe there is a much larger 'hardcore' fan base now than there was at the end of BW, but I also think a lot of things need to change for StarCraft to have longevity. Just based purely on what I hear from my fans and close friends, there seems to be a little something missing when it comes to the engagements throughout a game. No one really seems to agree or even know what that something is though. One opinion that I've held for a long time (keep in mind my opinions on things change constantly based on the more I learn/more experience I have) is that having units do BONUS damage to certain armor types rather than REDUCED damage vs the other types plays a huge role in how battles unfold in SC2. The deaths of units is ramped upwards which makes for most battles ending in the blink of an eye. Keep in mind, in BW a unit never did more than 100% damage, some times going as low as 50% depending on the armor types. I'm torn on if anything should change or not because I both love BW and SC2 independently. I dunno, tough call! That's a very good point but I think units die faster in Sc2 because of how the unit AI bunches up. Even BW siege tanks take a long time to kill an army because of how spread out a BW army was. | ||
|
napkinlad
United States12 Posts
and imo, TVT is really the most exciting match for me to watch just because of siege tank lines. the most memorable game for me will always be GSL FINALS AUGUST : IMMVP versus oGsTOP set 1. the best and most exciting game ive ever witnessed in sc2. i hate to bring it up and we all know it already but they only want our money and couldnt give a damn about sc2 as a competitive e-sport. | ||
|
napkinlad
United States12 Posts
| ||
|
TranceKuja
United States154 Posts
| ||
|
napkinlad
United States12 Posts
Relive the moment! | ||
|
akalarry
United States1978 Posts
| ||
|
tdt
United States3179 Posts
I disagree with U on WG mechanic. Like I said 4 gate is garbage vs T & Z these days while still working fine vs Toss. WG is not the issue. If it were T&Z would fall to 4gating at rate Protoss does. They don't. It's virtually no defenders advantage. Take WG away and it will be just the same rushes and proxies PvP. | ||
|
Malkavian183
Turkey227 Posts
If you compare Risk to SC2 then you are comparing a one dimensional mechanic two a three or more dimensional one. In SC2 defender has advantage if he scouts, continues to improve his economy and makes enough units to defend. This is by no means a flawed logic. All-ins are supposed to work like this. If you take this and give an advantage to defender i think the essense of strategy, scouting and reacting will be lost. Of course this sometimes leads to build order wins or losses but that is just natural. Anyway, I don't think defender should have an advantage just because he is the defender. Scouting, being aware and being able to react is a part of this game and your biggest mistake is to compare apples and oranges. But good write up, keep analysing! | ||
|
Mehukannu
Finland421 Posts
On January 21 2012 13:41 Condor Hero wrote: That's a very good point but I think units die faster in Sc2 because of how the unit AI bunches up. Even BW siege tanks take a long time to kill an army because of how spread out a BW army was. Not just the spread but also the fact that you had 10 tanks shooting one unit where 7 of them wasted a shot for no gain. | ||
|
mEtRoSG
Germany192 Posts
| ||
|
shizna
United Kingdom803 Posts
imagine a game of boxing, except you only get half a point score from the early rounds. it would lead to more defensive and conservative play. in almost every competitive sport/video game - defensive play is BORRRRRRRRRING. tl;dr your idea would make the game more boring. | ||
|
shizna
United Kingdom803 Posts
On January 21 2012 12:16 Husky wrote: I dont really take sides on this but I can tell you that a lot of people I know who have stopped watching StarCraft all together have voiced concerns very similar to a lot of the points you have raised. I think 2011 was a great year for StarCraft but I also think a lot of the hype is gone. I firmly believe there is a much larger 'hardcore' fan base now than there was at the end of BW, but I also think a lot of things need to change for StarCraft to have longevity. Just based purely on what I hear from my fans and close friends, there seems to be a little something missing when it comes to the engagements throughout a game. No one really seems to agree or even know what that something is though. One opinion that I've held for a long time (keep in mind my opinions on things change constantly based on the more I learn/more experience I have) is that having units do BONUS damage to certain armor types rather than REDUCED damage vs the other types plays a huge role in how battles unfold in SC2. The deaths of units is ramped upwards which makes for most battles ending in the blink of an eye. Keep in mind, in BW a unit never did more than 100% damage, some times going as low as 50% depending on the armor types. I'm torn on if anything should change or not because I both love BW and SC2 independently. I dunno, tough call! that doesn't really make much sense. you could just as well say that marauder does 100% damage versus armoured or 'large' units and only does 50% damage versus other unit types. also, i kinda disagree that the 'hype' has gone. we still get 40-60k stream viewers for the popular tournaments, that's as high as it's ever been. not to mention there's plenty of pro's who stream their practice/ladder games and often have >3000 viewers. that's as good as it's ever been as well. the problem with sc2 imo is some things don't feel 'right'. such as protoss being so fragile in early game with the sentry, warp mechanic creating a silly PvP early game or zerg not being able to fight cost effectively against a turtle in an entire game (before safe broodlords). but i'm hopeful that HOTS will change all of these awkward parts for the better (the changes are godlike imo). | ||
|
BurningSera
Ireland19621 Posts
is pretty simple, just ask yourself, 'who can turtle well?' if you are thinking about 'hmmm....when x race is turtling it is very very very annoying' then you know they still need to work on the defence mechanism. | ||
|
Benkestok
Denmark63 Posts
| ||
| ||
