EPTBreadth of Gameplay in SC2 - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
NEW IN-GAME CHANNEL: FRB | ||
|
EonuS
Slovenia186 Posts
| ||
|
y0su
Finland7871 Posts
| ||
|
SiegeFlank
United States410 Posts
| ||
|
MrDudeMan
Canada973 Posts
On March 17 2012 03:55 DrN0 wrote: This is extremely intelligent, knowledgable and well written argument. I find it very hard to disagree with you being a BW player myself. And whilst I agree whole heartedly with what you are saying, I would also like to add that the current core units of any army lack the exciting micro that was so entertaining to BW. However, comparing BW to SC2 right now is not fair, and here is why: Brood war was the greatest game of all time in my opinion, but it was an expansion. The game only truly became great after the second version was released, so I say reserve criticism until HOTS is released, the general style of units being released look like they are trying to make the game more complex and harder to micro I say wait until HOTS has had at least 3 months of competitive play before proposing any game changes. Having said that it really is ridiculous the amount of time Blizzard leave between games. We have been left with an unfinished product for way too long it is only too right for the community to start getting annoyed. Personally I think the best option would be to throw the communities' weight behind an entirely different RTS game, one designed with competitive play in mind, however organising a mass exodus like this is damn near impossible. I hate to say it but we are entirely at Blizzard's mercy at least for a few more years. What other RTS comes close to Starcraft II? Not trying to brag, I just don't know of any other competitive RTS that has the same style. About the OP: Very long and interesting read. And I do agree with it on paper. However do we need to wait for HotS to do this? Why not just start experimenting with it now. Even if it might not have blizzard ladder support, through the community sites we can get a few thousand people to test it out, maybe even some progamers (though unlikely). Also is there any chance you could make all the map pictures in a spoiler box, sorry to nitpick it just slows down scrolling through the text. | ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
On March 17 2012 03:25 Depetrify wrote: Also raise supply cap :D Yes, I think this needs to happen. Armies also need to take up more than one screen. | ||
|
architecture
United States643 Posts
Resource reduction is a reasonable idea. The only issue is that the races may not have been given adequate tools to deal with this. On one hand, T is really strong at low income play, and striking outlying expansions. Good luck holding 3rd/4th if you have to take them early as Z/P against bio. On the other hand, T is also awful at holding outlying expansions late game, since there's no way to convert excess minerals into foodless defense. So, I think there's really two components that need to be looked at. There needs to be a benefit to taking more bases. But there also needs to be ways to create RELIABLE positions that allow you to defend multiple bases. With hosts + semi-swarm, I think Z is headed in the right direction in HotS. What is missing is for TvP to be addressed, ideally with something like mines. | ||
|
Bleak
Turkey3059 Posts
| ||
|
VictorJones
United States235 Posts
| ||
|
Wildmoon
Thailand4189 Posts
| ||
|
VictorJones
United States235 Posts
| ||
|
TheKefka
Croatia11752 Posts
And yea,I agree with the majority of the OP but as well I still think that the majority of sc2 problems comes from just pure bad unit design and the mineral count change won't help solve that core problem. | ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
p4NDemik
United States13896 Posts
| ||
|
Gfire
United States1699 Posts
Am going to read this right now. I just have to say, seeing "Why fewer resources per base are better for the game." on the TL home is one of the best thing's that's ever happened to me. I'll return with more comments. | ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
VictorJones
United States235 Posts
| ||
|
Vertig0
United States196 Posts
I'm willing to contribute a bit to prize pools for pro showmatches on maps designed to showcase this map style, does that seem like a pretty good way to spread excitement for this style around? | ||
|
[F_]aths
Germany3947 Posts
I am only in Silver league so my opinion doesn't really count, but I still would like to have Blizzard making 1- or 2-basing a bit less effective in HotS. | ||
|
figq
12519 Posts
It definitely seemed weird from the beginning of SC2, and the sad conclusion was that Blizzard is pushing for faster simpler games, for reasons that... I believe don't even work. I believe that they would succeed even more if they don't do that. | ||
|
TheKefka
Croatia11752 Posts
On March 17 2012 04:12 [F_]aths wrote: This was an epic read. I am only in Silver league so my opinion doesn't really count, but I still would like to have Blizzard making 1- or 2-basing a bit less effective in HotS. Um,dude,your opinion is worth actually more than you think.Most people that play this game are in lower leagues and blizzard thinks that they can't or don't want to expand their game over more than 2-3 bases when they play. When we had that Browder interview with Kenniget I think his answer to why there aren't larger maps in the map pool and why they implement shitty "rush maps" is because they don't want to overwhelm casual players with big maps or something along those lines. | ||
| ||
