|
There will obviously be balance shifts when gameplay values are changed. Nobody is claiming otherwise. This thread is about the effect these changes have on the clarity and spectator-friendliness of SC2. |
On July 04 2012 06:19 ptrpb wrote:Show nested quote +On July 04 2012 06:09 Stratos_speAr wrote:On July 04 2012 05:55 ptrpb wrote:On July 04 2012 05:40 0neder wrote:This, along with dynamic spacing (sticky units instead of 'slippery' units that push each other around, would make SC2 SOOO much better. On July 04 2012 05:37 ptrpb wrote:
it's ugly is an opinion, personally i dont have any problem with it, i don't find it ugly and i don't know anyone who plays that does
as for clumping not being a core mechanic
think about how much the game has to change if this would to be implemented
banelings, colossi, tanks, ghosts, ravens, infestors, high templars. all of these units get affected because of aoe changes
then you think about how much it takes away from concave creation, splitting micro, and effective micromanagement
it's killing a part of SC2 that makes it what it is
frankly i find it disgusting that the OP admits that he doesn't watch SC2 currently, isn't a high level player, and is trying to push this for reasons coming from aesthetics.
You can't just reject this if you don't understand both games. You're just making stuff up. It is a fact that Starcraft has always been about big armies. This change makes an army of identical supply feel almost twice as big as SC2's current state. That is a fact, as well as an aesthetic principle. Additionally, this means that all splash can get buffed again, map design will be much more forgiving and open, and there will be more variance in splash damage effectiveness, which is very good. I can reject this having played both games to understand what I like about both wanting to change one of SC2's core principles concerning unit movement literally means that you do not like SC2 and you would rather play a different game. it would be like changing the initial set up of a chess board because you feel that rooks don't get enough flexibility in movement. besides what happens to all of the people who like this clumping mechanic? are we supposed to support this because you want to play a different game? all I've seen typed is opinion after opinion on what would make SC2 better in their opinion. well in that case here's mine. sc2 movement mechanics are fine as they are, play a different game if you disagree. No, they aren't. They're complete shit, easy to change, and the change would undoubtedly improve the game, from both a player's and spectator's perspective. We are trying to change it because we do like SC2. the change would undoubtedly improve the game eh? how do you figure that? because it worked well for BW right? like i said, what about people who like the clumping and have gotten used to playing with it? it's a big fuck you to them.
What about people that like WoL? Hots is a big fuck you to them. If you like your army clumped you can still do so, it just takes an extra 1 click. If there are players that want their army clumped, and players that don't, what's a bigger fuck you to them all? Forcing clumped units every time you move? Or allowing both clumped and non clumped units? You can't use the argument that things would change and that hurts people who don't want things to change. Things will change anyways with Hots, so that argument goes both ways and is out the window. You can discuss why it would be bad, that's a better way to discuss it. And an even better way, would be to find a pal, play a match, and then post the replay along with your opinion on why it's terrible. That's probably the best way to do it because I think we're past theorycrafting now. We need evidence.
|
On July 04 2012 06:30 pzea469 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 04 2012 06:19 ptrpb wrote:On July 04 2012 06:09 Stratos_speAr wrote:On July 04 2012 05:55 ptrpb wrote:On July 04 2012 05:40 0neder wrote:This, along with dynamic spacing (sticky units instead of 'slippery' units that push each other around, would make SC2 SOOO much better. On July 04 2012 05:37 ptrpb wrote:
it's ugly is an opinion, personally i dont have any problem with it, i don't find it ugly and i don't know anyone who plays that does
as for clumping not being a core mechanic
think about how much the game has to change if this would to be implemented
banelings, colossi, tanks, ghosts, ravens, infestors, high templars. all of these units get affected because of aoe changes
then you think about how much it takes away from concave creation, splitting micro, and effective micromanagement
it's killing a part of SC2 that makes it what it is
frankly i find it disgusting that the OP admits that he doesn't watch SC2 currently, isn't a high level player, and is trying to push this for reasons coming from aesthetics.
You can't just reject this if you don't understand both games. You're just making stuff up. It is a fact that Starcraft has always been about big armies. This change makes an army of identical supply feel almost twice as big as SC2's current state. That is a fact, as well as an aesthetic principle. Additionally, this means that all splash can get buffed again, map design will be much more forgiving and open, and there will be more variance in splash damage effectiveness, which is very good. I can reject this having played both games to understand what I like about both wanting to change one of SC2's core principles concerning unit movement literally means that you do not like SC2 and you would rather play a different game. it would be like changing the initial set up of a chess board because you feel that rooks don't get enough flexibility in movement. besides what happens to all of the people who like this clumping mechanic? are we supposed to support this because you want to play a different game? all I've seen typed is opinion after opinion on what would make SC2 better in their opinion. well in that case here's mine. sc2 movement mechanics are fine as they are, play a different game if you disagree. No, they aren't. They're complete shit, easy to change, and the change would undoubtedly improve the game, from both a player's and spectator's perspective. We are trying to change it because we do like SC2. the change would undoubtedly improve the game eh? how do you figure that? because it worked well for BW right? like i said, what about people who like the clumping and have gotten used to playing with it? it's a big fuck you to them. What about people that like WoL? Hots is a big fuck you to them. If you like your army clumped you can still do so, it just takes an extra 1 click. If there are players that want their army clumped, and players that don't, what's a bigger fuck you to them all? Forcing clumped units every time you move? Or allowing both clumped and non clumped units? You can't use the argument that things would change and that hurts people who don't want things to change. Things will change anyways with Hots, so that argument goes both ways and is out the window. You can discuss why it would be bad, that's a better way to discuss it. And an even better way, would be to find a pal, play a match, and then post the replay along with your opinion on why it's terrible. That's probably the best way to do it.
if you don't like your army clumped, it's a few more clicks
your argument falls on itself a bit.
as for people who like WoL, they can still play WoL when Hots gets released lol. it's not like this where you change how a game fundamentally functions and you claim "irrelevant" when i call you out on it.
i've already told you why it's bad but obviously i'm wasting my time with this shit, all you people want to see is
I SUPPORT IT, YES I WANT BW TO COME INTO SC2, PLEASE TAKE MY INDIVIDUALITY
|
On July 04 2012 06:30 pzea469 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 04 2012 06:19 ptrpb wrote:On July 04 2012 06:09 Stratos_speAr wrote:On July 04 2012 05:55 ptrpb wrote:On July 04 2012 05:40 0neder wrote:This, along with dynamic spacing (sticky units instead of 'slippery' units that push each other around, would make SC2 SOOO much better. On July 04 2012 05:37 ptrpb wrote:
it's ugly is an opinion, personally i dont have any problem with it, i don't find it ugly and i don't know anyone who plays that does
as for clumping not being a core mechanic
think about how much the game has to change if this would to be implemented
banelings, colossi, tanks, ghosts, ravens, infestors, high templars. all of these units get affected because of aoe changes
then you think about how much it takes away from concave creation, splitting micro, and effective micromanagement
it's killing a part of SC2 that makes it what it is
frankly i find it disgusting that the OP admits that he doesn't watch SC2 currently, isn't a high level player, and is trying to push this for reasons coming from aesthetics.
You can't just reject this if you don't understand both games. You're just making stuff up. It is a fact that Starcraft has always been about big armies. This change makes an army of identical supply feel almost twice as big as SC2's current state. That is a fact, as well as an aesthetic principle. Additionally, this means that all splash can get buffed again, map design will be much more forgiving and open, and there will be more variance in splash damage effectiveness, which is very good. I can reject this having played both games to understand what I like about both wanting to change one of SC2's core principles concerning unit movement literally means that you do not like SC2 and you would rather play a different game. it would be like changing the initial set up of a chess board because you feel that rooks don't get enough flexibility in movement. besides what happens to all of the people who like this clumping mechanic? are we supposed to support this because you want to play a different game? all I've seen typed is opinion after opinion on what would make SC2 better in their opinion. well in that case here's mine. sc2 movement mechanics are fine as they are, play a different game if you disagree. No, they aren't. They're complete shit, easy to change, and the change would undoubtedly improve the game, from both a player's and spectator's perspective. We are trying to change it because we do like SC2. the change would undoubtedly improve the game eh? how do you figure that? because it worked well for BW right? like i said, what about people who like the clumping and have gotten used to playing with it? it's a big fuck you to them. What about people that like WoL? Hots is a big fuck you to them. If you like your army clumped you can still do so, it just takes an extra 1 click. If there are players that want their army clumped, and players that don't, what's a bigger fuck you to them all? Forcing clumped units every time you move? Or allowing both clumped and non clumped units? You can't use the argument that things would change and that hurts people who don't want things to change. Things will change anyways with Hots, so that argument goes both ways and is out the window. You can discuss why it would be bad, that's a better way to discuss it. And an even better way, would be to find a pal, play a match, and then post the replay along with your opinion on why it's terrible. That's probably the best way to do it because I think we're past theorycrafting now. We need evidence.
banelings?...tanks?....storm/fungal?
EVERYTHING would be changed. it should only be worth discussing if theres a good amount of proof that shows if it would be good. and hots doesnt have a direct change on mechanics as this would, so you cant relate the two for your argument
|
On July 04 2012 06:41 tarodotoxin wrote:Show nested quote +On July 04 2012 06:30 pzea469 wrote:On July 04 2012 06:19 ptrpb wrote:On July 04 2012 06:09 Stratos_speAr wrote:On July 04 2012 05:55 ptrpb wrote:On July 04 2012 05:40 0neder wrote:This, along with dynamic spacing (sticky units instead of 'slippery' units that push each other around, would make SC2 SOOO much better. On July 04 2012 05:37 ptrpb wrote:
it's ugly is an opinion, personally i dont have any problem with it, i don't find it ugly and i don't know anyone who plays that does
as for clumping not being a core mechanic
think about how much the game has to change if this would to be implemented
banelings, colossi, tanks, ghosts, ravens, infestors, high templars. all of these units get affected because of aoe changes
then you think about how much it takes away from concave creation, splitting micro, and effective micromanagement
it's killing a part of SC2 that makes it what it is
frankly i find it disgusting that the OP admits that he doesn't watch SC2 currently, isn't a high level player, and is trying to push this for reasons coming from aesthetics.
You can't just reject this if you don't understand both games. You're just making stuff up. It is a fact that Starcraft has always been about big armies. This change makes an army of identical supply feel almost twice as big as SC2's current state. That is a fact, as well as an aesthetic principle. Additionally, this means that all splash can get buffed again, map design will be much more forgiving and open, and there will be more variance in splash damage effectiveness, which is very good. I can reject this having played both games to understand what I like about both wanting to change one of SC2's core principles concerning unit movement literally means that you do not like SC2 and you would rather play a different game. it would be like changing the initial set up of a chess board because you feel that rooks don't get enough flexibility in movement. besides what happens to all of the people who like this clumping mechanic? are we supposed to support this because you want to play a different game? all I've seen typed is opinion after opinion on what would make SC2 better in their opinion. well in that case here's mine. sc2 movement mechanics are fine as they are, play a different game if you disagree. No, they aren't. They're complete shit, easy to change, and the change would undoubtedly improve the game, from both a player's and spectator's perspective. We are trying to change it because we do like SC2. the change would undoubtedly improve the game eh? how do you figure that? because it worked well for BW right? like i said, what about people who like the clumping and have gotten used to playing with it? it's a big fuck you to them. What about people that like WoL? Hots is a big fuck you to them. If you like your army clumped you can still do so, it just takes an extra 1 click. If there are players that want their army clumped, and players that don't, what's a bigger fuck you to them all? Forcing clumped units every time you move? Or allowing both clumped and non clumped units? You can't use the argument that things would change and that hurts people who don't want things to change. Things will change anyways with Hots, so that argument goes both ways and is out the window. You can discuss why it would be bad, that's a better way to discuss it. And an even better way, would be to find a pal, play a match, and then post the replay along with your opinion on why it's terrible. That's probably the best way to do it because I think we're past theorycrafting now. We need evidence. banelings?...tanks?....storm/fungal? EVERYTHING would be changed. it should only be worth discussing if theres a good amount of proof that shows if it would be good. and hots doesnt have a direct change on mechanics as this would, so you cant relate the two for your argument
His argument was that things would change and that's bad for those who don't want change. I'm simply saying that things are going to change anyways. This is a different type of change as adding and removing units, true, but the argument still applies. Anyways, this isn't gonna go anywhere like this. Before stating strong opinions either way about how much it would affect the game, play a match and upload the replay. Right now, the only thing people can really give an opinion on is whether the movement in that video looks better or not. As far as it affecting gameplay and balance, we need games. I'm uploading a match right now, and though I'm not the best qualified person to be testing it, it's gotta start somewhere. Should be up in about 300 minutes...... :/
|
I've been testing it out and it's actually not as terrible as some people are making it seem. It doesn't really take anything away from default, because you can still clump easily with one click, rather, it adds an element to the game. Army travel does seem a lot smoother and flows more naturally, like when you're moving across the map to attack. With Daybreak, there are chokes and such that fuck up movement so armies are still going to clump up eventually, just less often and at a slower rate.
These are just my opinions about this modification. I'm still testing. I could be wrong.
I do think that it makes things a lot easier for attacks though, specifically terran pushes. You can 1a move against the opponent without messing up your formation and having to position and spread your units out again. Saves so much time that even slower pushes start to become pretty fast. MMM or marine tank control becomes much easier to manage considering most of the micro is just kiting, keeping units alive. Units enter the fight in a perfect spread already so the player can immediately focus on keeping their army alive instead of making sure they're getting the best surface area contact for effective dps.
With zerg, I don't feel much of a change except in late game if you go broods, which spread out better, but even then that's not as big of an impact as non-stacked vikings. Fungal becomes less effective. I've got to say it's worse for zerg.
Protoss...meh... forcefield still fucks everything up and the main army continues to be best in a ball.
Overall, I feel terran benefits most from this change.
|
I like it, i would love a "keep formation" button in game.
|
On July 04 2012 07:19 -Kira wrote:
I like it, i would love a "keep formation" button in game.
Well thats the neat thing. You don't need such a button because if you don't put effort in it it will play out exactly as you know it. Test it yourself.
|
Add in F(ormation) movement toggle.
Selected units will either move or attack move to the destination while trying to remain in their current formation. (Wouldn't reform formation after going up a ramp and would change formation if destination is between units in the formation.)
|
sorry, i don't like it at all... i want my units to clump up and have to spread them manually in the battle... that's what makes marine micro so awesome... this is just "hey look, i can have all my marines split 2minutes before the actual fight happens" ... great, who cares... please don't take micro out of the game. thank you.
|
On July 04 2012 07:26 dNa wrote:
sorry, i don't like it at all... i want my units to clump up and have to spread them manually in the battle... that's what makes marine micro so awesome... this is just "hey look, i can have all my marines split 2minutes before the actual fight happens" ... great, who cares... please don't take micro out of the game. thank you.
Please read the comments in the thread before you just make assumptions out of thin air.
It wouldn't remove the micro because AOE radius/damage would most likely be buffed along with it which would make it so that you still have to split the same amount when you are already spread and even more if you choose to stay clumped all the time still.
|
On July 04 2012 07:15 scph wrote:
I've been testing it out and it's actually not as terrible as some people are making it seem. It doesn't really take anything away from default, because you can still clump easily with one click, rather, it adds an element to the game. Army travel does seem a lot smoother and flows more naturally, like when you're moving across the map to attack. With Daybreak, there are chokes and such that fuck up movement so armies are still going to clump up eventually, just less often and at a slower rate.
These are just my opinions about this modification. I'm still testing. I could be wrong.
I do think that it makes things a lot easier for attacks though, specifically terran pushes. You can 1a move against the opponent without messing up your formation and having to position and spread your units out again. Saves so much time that even slower pushes start to become pretty fast. MMM or marine tank control becomes much easier to manage considering most of the micro is just kiting, keeping units alive. Units enter the fight in a perfect spread already so the player can immediately focus on keeping their army alive instead of making sure they're getting the best surface area contact for effective dps.
With zerg, I don't feel much of a change except in late game if you go broods, which spread out better, but even then that's not as big of an impact as non-stacked vikings. Fungal becomes less effective. I've got to say it's worse for zerg.
Protoss...meh... forcefield still fucks everything up and the main army continues to be best in a ball.
Overall, I feel terran benefits most from this change.
I don't think terran would benefit much more then the other races. Sure it would make it easier against AoE for bioballs (AoE would need some buffing). But it would also make it so that Protoss and Zerg balls take less damage from AoE. And also Marine/Marauder balls are most efficient clumped up as tightly as possible against everything that isn't AoE say pure speedlings or Gateway units.
I want to see a game between two pros trying this out so bad :3.
Also all you people saying this will take micro out of the game?! I think the opposite.
|
I love it, I always felt there is something about clumping or collision size that was 'off' in SC2. I hope Blizzard considers this for HOTS, there is no other time to put it in.
I can appreciate those who prefer the current system, but disagree with the argument that this would reduce micro. If anything it would increase it significantly. You can't just organize your army a certain way and then use it forever - for one thing your army is going to want to face a different direction all the time, and secondly it's not like maps are a flat plain without any map artifacts.
|
i had my doubts about it because i thought it would remove more micro but i think it actually adds more and makes battles more dynamic. It would be better if the aoe radius was bigger and maps as well obviously. Still obviously there would have to be some rebalancing and that would require a lot of work from blizzard. Would love to see an online tournament try it out :p the playhem type tournaments.
|
to all the protoss and zerg players bitching that this would make it too easy for terran, just think about it...
your banelings wont clump and die to 2 siege tank shots
your mutas wont get fucked by thors
your infestors wont clump and become useless after being emp'd
your 10 broodlords wont die to 3 archons in less than 5 seconds.
and for toss players:
your army wont lose over half its health after being emp'd by 2 ghosts because you attack moved your army and looked away.
the only benefits for terran the i see is:
less storm dodging
less splitting for tanks in tvt
less splitting for banelings
nothing else will really change.
just think a little bit before you decide to toss aside an idea (no pun intended)
|
This should be combined with the sticky (not slippery/pushy" spacing.
And let's be honest. If you're casual enough to not have any issues with SC2, this won't be an issue for you anyway. It's a win-win, unless you're passionately in favor of turtle until 14 minute max death balls with almost no comebacks and sparse back and forth.
|
I have to say that visually it looks very nice and looks much more natural. How it feels during play is another story, but this is certainly a nice change
|
Whether or not this is more OP for a certain race, I feel that this takes too much skill out of the game. There's a reason why positioning is so vital in RTS games and making them all clump up makes it all the more balanced.
|
On July 04 2012 07:38 LgNKami wrote:
to all the protoss and zerg players bitching that this would make it too easy for terran, just think about it...
your banelings wont clump and die to 2 siege tank shots
your mutas wont get fucked by thors
your infestors wont clump and become useless after being emp'd
your 10 broodlords wont die to 3 archons in less than 5 seconds.
and for toss players:
your army wont lose over half its health after being emp'd by 2 ghosts because you attack moved your army and looked away.
the only benefits for terran the i see is:
less storm dodging
less splitting for tanks in tvt
less splitting for banelings
nothing else will really change.
just think a little bit before you decide to toss aside an idea (no pun intended)
You managed to summarize why this would make the game more ezmode 
|
On July 03 2012 21:18 Qwyn wrote:
I support this.
Why? B/c improving pathing in this way will allow AOE damage to be increased. And increasing AOE damage is, as far as I can see, the only way to prevent the deathball.
Units which control space have to be implemented in the game in order to get out of the shithole SCII is in now.
The siege tank was nerfed into the ground b/c of the pathing engine. A small change like this will make AOE damage increases more tolerable. If they are more tolerable, then Blizzard might be willing to implement them.
If Blizzard does not make a change like this to the pathing engine, then increasing AOE damage will have much harsher effects.
An extremely high level of maintainence is required to continually de-clump your army, and if high AOE damage units are implemented in the current system to fix the deathball issue, then the de-clump APM sink will be too high for most players.
With the suggested pathing system, there is no reason that one cannot clump their units - simply click into the middle of the ball. But along with this change should also come AOE damage increases, meaning that clumping would be less desirable.
It's much too difficult to continually de-clump your units after every single fucking move command, hence why AOE is nerfed so much. This de-clump requirement actually prevents more movement around the map, as players have less incentive to move (every time you do, you have to spend time fucking de-clumping!). Hence why players move out in one big attack (that and the lack of high AOE, space controlling units).
And we need high damage AOE to bring an end to the deathball issue. Changing the pathing system will make the road less painful in the longhaul.
For this reasoning I support. Would also like to add that there would effectively be more micro in the game because players would be rewarded more for creating complex unit formations that help in the battle as the units would not automatically move out of formation. You still would have to have exceptional mouse control in order to pull off any decent positioning in a real game, and it would just improve the overall look to spectators, while being painful in the short run.
Please an attempt during HOTS beta would be perfect.
|
On July 04 2012 07:55 zezamer wrote:Show nested quote +On July 04 2012 07:38 LgNKami wrote:
to all the protoss and zerg players bitching that this would make it too easy for terran, just think about it...
your banelings wont clump and die to 2 siege tank shots
your mutas wont get fucked by thors
your infestors wont clump and become useless after being emp'd
your 10 broodlords wont die to 3 archons in less than 5 seconds.
and for toss players:
your army wont lose over half its health after being emp'd by 2 ghosts because you attack moved your army and looked away.
the only benefits for terran the i see is:
less storm dodging
less splitting for tanks in tvt
less splitting for banelings
nothing else will really change.
just think a little bit before you decide to toss aside an idea (no pun intended) You managed to summarize why this would make the game more ezmode
He didn't as that's not what would happen with a radius increase on AOE damage
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
