|
On June 18 2012 07:34 maybenexttime wrote:More like "random RTS 2", as blizzard did not want to capture any of StarCraft's beauty. If it didn't look like StarCraft in terms of graphics/unit names, etc. people would have a hard time finding similarities between the two beyond the superficial level.
Does it really matter? I would argue that the jump from WC2 -> WC3 is a 10x bigger gap than BW -> SC2. And WC3 is a great RTS game. (Unless you are talking about nostalgia? I'm not really sure why a sequel needs to mimic its predecessor)
|
On June 18 2012 09:02 Falling wrote:How would a fix to unit clumping be worse? Who would it be worse for? It's better in the top end to limit death balls and it's better for the low end because it's easier to tell what's going on. Certainly the game has been balanced based on unit clumping, but it can be rebalanced when with any one of these expansions. From Dreamhack today. + Show Spoiler +I've got a file of these. It's just really hard to tell what's going on. Even if you don't have healthbars on- and that's just as much an issue at the low level/ casual viewing. Perhaps more so. I don't know if Mods will be the answer as Blizzard exercises a far greater amount of control then they did before. Even with experimenting with low resource maps. In the past, we just did it. Now we have to beg Blizzard to test it out on ladder because that's mostly where people play.
I think a lot of that has to do with how poor the custom game system is in B.NET 2.0.
I think the Arcade patch 1.5 (which is AWESOME btw) will do a lot in giving the modding community more room to test the stuff they want to test. The open games lobby, and rating system will make it much easier for people like me (who really enjoys the 6m 1hyg maps) to find those mods and test them.
As per the clumping issue, I have my own issues with it but I don't think that the deathballs will just go away if you make things clump less tightly together by default. It's an issue that's caused not only by the way units naturally clump together but also by the ability to select an infinite number of units and move them at once, which is also something you could never do in SC1.
But even more than that, we've already seen a huge evolution in the way the game is played from 2 years ago, things are already spreading out, engagements are happening more frequently at the pro level, and the game as a whole is evolving in a beautiful way that makes me very hopeful for its future. I think the devs notice this too.
|
On June 18 2012 09:07 Feartheguru wrote:
Broodlords make ZvP such an awful matchup to watch. Now they're making land broodlords ....
To be fair it isn't JUST Broodlords.
Collosus are just simply right now too effective at wiping out ANYTHING Zerg has available on the ground once they reach a certain number that it essentially forces them into Broodlords/Air units as the game goes on.
The Viper gives Zerg another counter to Collosus and encourages more ground based play, which on the whole opens up the entire match up once it hits late game.
Also the Tempest is going to be fantastic for sniping down broodlords because it deals bonus damage to massive and has range that's superior.
So in HOTS, both races get new counters to the units that are currently stagnating the lategame of the match up. That makes me cheerful.
|
Everyone is like "oh it's easy to remove unit clumping" but it's not that easy. You have to do one of two things:
-Make the hitboxes for every unit artificially large.
-Make the units NOT take the shortest path to their destination.
Those are both terrible choices. Which one would you pick?
|
I would pick the choice where units are now slightly faster, and units like the Siege Tank do slightly more damage to compensate for the fact that it's now easier to break Siege Tank lines, dodge Storms, split Marines, etc.
|
On June 18 2012 09:12 alexanderzero wrote:
Everyone is like "oh it's easy to remove unit clumping" but it's not that easy. You have to do one of two things:
-Make the hitboxes for every unit artificially large.
-Make the units NOT take the shortest path to their destination.
Those are both terrible choices. Which one would you pick?
It's not easy except there are mods/maps that actually do it. It's just not easy for the devs to swallow their pride and try to modify the core gameplay of SC2.
Both are terrible choices if you choose to interject an opinion. How else are you realistically going to do it?
|
On June 18 2012 09:12 alexanderzero wrote:
Everyone is like "oh it's easy to remove unit clumping" but it's not that easy. You have to do one of two things:
-Make the hitboxes for every unit artificially large.
-Make the units NOT take the shortest path to their destination.
Those are both terrible choices. Which one would you pick?
I dunno, seems like B worked pretty swell the first time around, why not again?
|
Damn, I tried reading this thread, but I can see it's become just a place for bitter Brood War fans to come vent about how bad and a joke Starcraft 2 is because it's not Brood War. Apparently no arguments are needed, you can just call it bad, worthless, or whatever, and pretend it's a fact. This is specially amusing because you'd see any Starcraft 2 fan do the same trash talk about Brood War, and they'd meet a nice warning/ban.
|
On June 18 2012 09:28 fer wrote:
Damn, I tried reading this thread, but I can see it's become just a place for bitter Brood War fans to come vent about how bad and a joke Starcraft 2 is because it's not Brood War. Apparently no arguments are needed, you can just call it bad, worthless, or whatever, and pretend it's a fact. This is specially amusing because you'd see any Starcraft 2 fan do the same trash talk about Brood War, and they'd meet a nice warning/ban.
Apparently you don't have to read the thread to make utterly gross generalizations of contrasting opinions. Fairly disingenuous to shrug off any discussion as "BW fans venting about how bad and a joke SC2 is because its not BW."
|
On June 18 2012 08:50 Vindicare605 wrote:
Here's the disagreement.
You feel like the unit clumping in SC2 is a problem that needs to be corrected. While the developers feel it's a part of the game in the same way the pathing in SC1 was. Rather than just split stuff up which they can do, they want to make the game balanced despite it the same way they did with Brood War's pathing 10 years ago.
So while the developers are trying to make what they have work, you're asking them to completely rework a core part of the game in order to make what you envision and want work better.
This would be understandable in most circumstances, except there are a few huge reasons it isn't.
1 - Starcraft is about big armies. BW armies felt bigger because they took up multiple screens. What is currently 'part of the game' in SC2 is single screen hyper concentrated deathballs. That isn't what made BW successful, nor is it as exciting. At times, it can approach the same level of excitement, but it is more rare. The deathball diminishes the variability in positioning that allows for layers of success in engagements.
2 - It's not just about relative spacing. UNITS ACTUALLY CLIP EACH OTHER. This is bad for player micro, and bad for legibility as it makes the game harder to understand because of the layers of information. This is bad for esports beyond just the psychological army size.
Blizzard has no reason to not fix spacing, other than laziness and money. The 'part of the game' response is a cop-out that attempts to ignore the fundamental superiority of actual correct spacing.
|
On June 18 2012 09:32 0neder wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2012 08:50 Vindicare605 wrote:
Here's the disagreement.
You feel like the unit clumping in SC2 is a problem that needs to be corrected. While the developers feel it's a part of the game in the same way the pathing in SC1 was. Rather than just split stuff up which they can do, they want to make the game balanced despite it the same way they did with Brood War's pathing 10 years ago.
So while the developers are trying to make what they have work, you're asking them to completely rework a core part of the game in order to make what you envision and want work better.
This would be understandable in most circumstances, except there are a few huge reasons it isn't. 1 - Starcraft is about big armies. BW armies felt bigger because they took up multiple screens. What is currently 'part of the game' in SC2 is single screen hyper concentrated deathballs. That isn't what made BW successful, nor is it as exciting. At times, it can approach the same level of excitement, but it is more rare. The deathball diminishes the variability in positioning that allows for layers of success in engagements. 2 - It's not just about relative spacing. UNITS ACTUALLY CLIP EACH OTHER. This is bad for player micro, and bad for legibility as it makes the game harder to understand because of the layers of information. This is bad for esports beyond just the psychological army size. Blizzard has no reason to not fix spacing, other than laziness and money. The 'part of the game' response is a cop-out that attempts to ignore the fundamental superiority of actual correct spacing.
To be fair, one of the reasons for it is because the SC2 screen has twice the surface area of a BW screen.
|
On June 18 2012 09:28 fer wrote:
Damn, I tried reading this thread, but I can see it's become just a place for bitter Brood War fans to come vent about how bad and a joke Starcraft 2 is because it's not Brood War.
This thread is not about sc2 vs brood war. I never even played brood war yet I agree with a lot of things said in this thread. The unit clumping can be fixed in the editor in mere minutes and there is no reason not to. You don't have to look at brood war to realize that.
|
On June 18 2012 09:36 SarcasmMonster wrote:
To be fair, one of the reasons for it is because the SC2 screen has twice the surface area of a BW screen.
Twice is an exaggeration and the asymmetrical viewing window is another sc2 shortcoming, but don't get me started on that. =)
On June 18 2012 09:28 fer wrote:
Damn, I tried reading this thread, but I can see it's become just a place for bitter Brood War fans to come vent about how bad and a joke Starcraft 2 is because it's not Brood War. Apparently no arguments are needed, you can just call it bad, worthless, or whatever, and pretend it's a fact. This is specially amusing because you'd see any Starcraft 2 fan do the same trash talk about Brood War, and they'd meet a nice warning/ban.
fer,
I never called SC2 bad. Or worthless. Or a joke. I said it had fundamental flaws as a result of bad game design and stubbornness that could be easily remedied. Most top players who played BW would agree, it's just that they don't want to get on blizzard's bad side or negatively impact their career.
I'm giving the same specific constructive criticism that the community has been giving for two years. It died down for a while, but now with the expansion we have another chance to positively impact the game. Thus, the discussion rises to the forefront again.
I'm not bitter. I loved BW for a few years, but I have a family and a job and important things to do in life. But, I am passionate about Starcraft, I'm a designer, and I along with many others in the community see how it could be improved to be even better than it is currently and be a more long-term esport. I don't want esports to be several-year flings, I want a pseudo-permanent game that will last a decade or more. I don't care about esports if the games are as exciting as BW. Thus, my affection for SC2 is manifested in my passionate critique and specific suggestions as to how it can be more exciting to a broader audience and for us players and more hardcore fans as well.
This is not unprecedented. In a matter of 2-3 months, Valve/Hidden Path have dramatically improved Counter-Strike:Global Offensive from where it was before. How did they do this? They listened to the pros, REALLY understood what made CS special to begin with, and began making necessary tweaks IMMEDIATELY. This isn't that hard. Blizzard could do the same, and hopefully Sigaty babysits Browder more in the expansions to make sure he doesn't screw SC2 up more.
|
In China, there is a game streaming site on Sina.com (the biggest websites there is for news, and pretty much everything) kinda like Afreeca for SK or Twitch. Funny how Age of Empire 3 is the number one all time played game and not StarCraft 2
|
On June 18 2012 09:40 0neder wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2012 09:36 SarcasmMonster wrote:On June 18 2012 09:32 0neder wrote:On June 18 2012 08:50 Vindicare605 wrote:
Here's the disagreement.
You feel like the unit clumping in SC2 is a problem that needs to be corrected. While the developers feel it's a part of the game in the same way the pathing in SC1 was. Rather than just split stuff up which they can do, they want to make the game balanced despite it the same way they did with Brood War's pathing 10 years ago.
So while the developers are trying to make what they have work, you're asking them to completely rework a core part of the game in order to make what you envision and want work better.
This would be understandable in most circumstances, except there are a few huge reasons it isn't. 1 - Starcraft is about big armies. BW armies felt bigger because they took up multiple screens. What is currently 'part of the game' in SC2 is single screen hyper concentrated deathballs. That isn't what made BW successful, nor is it as exciting. At times, it can approach the same level of excitement, but it is more rare. The deathball diminishes the variability in positioning that allows for layers of success in engagements. 2 - It's not just about relative spacing. UNITS ACTUALLY CLIP EACH OTHER. This is bad for player micro, and bad for legibility as it makes the game harder to understand because of the layers of information. This is bad for esports beyond just the psychological army size. Blizzard has no reason to not fix spacing, other than laziness and money. The 'part of the game' response is a cop-out that attempts to ignore the fundamental superiority of actual correct spacing. To be fair, one of the reasons for it is because the SC2 screen has twice the surface area of a BW screen. Twice is an exaggeration and the asymmetrical viewing window is another sc2 shortcoming, but don't get me started on that. =)
I don't think it's an exaggeration (or the exaggeration is very minor). 40% more width and 40% more height is enough to double the surface area. Especially when the observer removes the HUD, you get a huge part of the map on the screen at one time.
|
I guess no one read my suggestion to slightly increase movement speed across the board and along with that, increase AoE?
|
On June 18 2012 09:44 SarcasmMonster wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2012 09:40 0neder wrote:On June 18 2012 09:36 SarcasmMonster wrote:On June 18 2012 09:32 0neder wrote:On June 18 2012 08:50 Vindicare605 wrote:
Here's the disagreement.
You feel like the unit clumping in SC2 is a problem that needs to be corrected. While the developers feel it's a part of the game in the same way the pathing in SC1 was. Rather than just split stuff up which they can do, they want to make the game balanced despite it the same way they did with Brood War's pathing 10 years ago.
So while the developers are trying to make what they have work, you're asking them to completely rework a core part of the game in order to make what you envision and want work better.
This would be understandable in most circumstances, except there are a few huge reasons it isn't. 1 - Starcraft is about big armies. BW armies felt bigger because they took up multiple screens. What is currently 'part of the game' in SC2 is single screen hyper concentrated deathballs. That isn't what made BW successful, nor is it as exciting. At times, it can approach the same level of excitement, but it is more rare. The deathball diminishes the variability in positioning that allows for layers of success in engagements. 2 - It's not just about relative spacing. UNITS ACTUALLY CLIP EACH OTHER. This is bad for player micro, and bad for legibility as it makes the game harder to understand because of the layers of information. This is bad for esports beyond just the psychological army size. Blizzard has no reason to not fix spacing, other than laziness and money. The 'part of the game' response is a cop-out that attempts to ignore the fundamental superiority of actual correct spacing. To be fair, one of the reasons for it is because the SC2 screen has twice the surface area of a BW screen. Twice is an exaggeration and the asymmetrical viewing window is another sc2 shortcoming, but don't get me started on that. =) I don't think it's an exaggeration (or the exaggeration is very minor). 40% more width and 40% more height is enough to double the surface area. Especially when the observer removes the HUD, you get a huge part of the map on the screen at one time.
Are you talking pixel count? I'm confused, let's talk percent of aspect ratio. Given that, I'd say it's no more than 30% wider. Is the SC2 camera zoomed out further? At any rate, screen proportion alone is not the cause of this.
|
On June 18 2012 09:47 Fencer710 wrote:
I guess no one read my suggestion to slightly increase movement speed across the board and along with that, increase AoE?
A decent proposal. However, SC2 is already pretty fast and on the border of confusion for a casual spectator. This also wouldn't address the psychologically small army size issue.
|
On June 18 2012 09:32 0neder wrote:
Blizzard has no reason to not fix spacing, other than laziness and money. The 'part of the game' response is a cop-out that attempts to ignore the fundamental superiority of actual correct spacing.
It can't be laziness, since it's been demonstrated before that a minor change in the editor solves the spacing issue.
Blizzard actually prefers it this way, possibly because it's easier for the casual demographic to play with. 
|
Look guys here is the problems that most are having in StarCraft 2: Unit Clumping
Easy solution would be to increase AoE dmg so that you have the incentive of actually splitting your Units!
In Brood War, you can easily clump up your units as well due to archaic AI like Hydralisks are stuck together when moving to one location or Lurkers need to be spread out INDIVIDUALLY and same with tanks to prevent being stormed or hit by Stasis. In BW, there is just as much unit spreading needed. That's because Psionic Storm, Siege Tanks and all those area of effect spells dealt SOOO much more damage to their enemies (Vultures Mines are Area of Effect too).
This is where the argument of instroducing Lurkers instead of Swarm Host comes in. Swarm Hosts merely send out minions out of them. Still doesn't give me any reason for Terran to split as they can just clump up as one blob to fend off against it. You want to see players to do the most inhumane move possible, you want to add the Lurkers where one spine hit can annilate your entire force. Players will have to move their units one by one and that is APM taxing.
But I know that SC2 is meant to target onto a casual fanbase so I doubt they will attempt introducing harder mechanics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/jUsCy.png)
