EPTDps and how it interacts with StarCraft 2 - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
kill619
United States212 Posts
| ||
|
boomudead1
United States186 Posts
| ||
|
Badfatpanda
United States9719 Posts
| ||
|
SCVfighting
United States14 Posts
| ||
|
Arachne
South Africa426 Posts
On July 13 2012 01:58 Eventine wrote: Really agree with that point. In addition to the main base choke, many maps now have a secondary choke or ramp at their natural. In addition, many maps are big. It gives defenders a large advantage and makes early pressure difficult. This makes games tend to be more longer and macro oriented and easier to get to deathball. I don't mind having long macro games and I also enjoy early all in pressures. But my fear for these longer games is that not much happens in game for a long period of time. Makes the games not the exciting to watch. I agree a bit with this, but at the same time the toss race is so weak in the early game defensively that they must either invest in an all-in, mass tech, or sentries to defend. And sentries are the cheapest option for the greedy mineral based play. So those chokes are necessary, especially vs zerg, otherwise its basically some guy casting (MTG) Overrun on you. Also, great post  . Loved reading it. It almost makes me want to experiment with speed settings as some guys at the end were saying :D | ||
|
Fiendish
United States210 Posts
| ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
| ||
|
thurst0n
United States611 Posts
On July 13 2012 01:56 Paulio wrote: No? I'm saying that our bodies are not able to respond quickly enough to micro perfectly against the high dps/high focus numbers in lategame armies. I'm pretty sure ya'lls Midi-chlorian count is just simply too low. You need to be more like Anakin. Seriously though. I really like this thread and discussion. I think OP hit everything spot on. Bottom line though it's basically an impossible uphill battle. As far as APM limits though, I think that one is a bit misleading. Yes some people are reaching the apex of APM. But even in major battles I still see pro players spam where they want to a move, or spam where they want to move when 1 click will do exactly the same thing. I still see weak/low energy spell casters not being pulled back, instead they are basically sacrificed. You do a good job of linking every point/thought together. So for example if you don't pull back those 2 infestors, that's like 4 less fungals for the next battle. And it just compounds the longer the game goes. Don't forget about the resources that now have to be used for another infestor instead of possibly being made into a brood lord or whatever else would be more valuable. | ||
|
roronoe
Canada1527 Posts
| ||
|
RavenLoud
Canada1100 Posts
On July 16 2012 12:56 roronoe wrote: This deserves more attention, there's a lot of well thought out points. Yeah, problem is that it's so well thought out and well presented that there's nothing to discuss on. Few people can add more to it other than just saying "Awesome, I think so too". 4 pages for a thread like this is kind of sad though. | ||
|
Tuczniak
1561 Posts
On July 17 2012 03:48 RavenLoud wrote: At the end of the article should be "TLDR: Protoss is OP" Yeah, problem is that it's so well thought out and well presented that there's nothing to discuss on. Few people can add more to it other than just saying "Awesome, I think so too". 4 pages for a thread like this is kind of sad though. And we would be at 100 page now. | ||
|
Harstem
Netherlands263 Posts
| ||
|
Torpedo.Vegas
United States1890 Posts
Would a potential solution be developing abilities that effect and mediate DPS in a small area. Such that while the deathball would be optimal under normal circumstances, a player may opt to spread his units out because the decrease in DPS from one of these concentrated abilities would actually be lower then forcing a spread. I was thinking of abilities akin to EMP, except with a much smaller radius and that in some form effects DPS output without fully locking down or trapping units. Like a small pocket where unit inside fire at 50% the normal rate or something. I would suggest the ability be available to research relatively early on relatively to the unique attributes of each race. Even if the opponent spreads out the attacker with the ability could selectively target specfic groups depending on the key aspects of the enemies counter composition. Just putting it out there. | ||
|
Highwayman
United States181 Posts
The whole idea about too much damage too quickly decreases the importance of micro makes perfect sense and the differences between SC2 and BW are very clear on this especially with how well you laid out the mechanics. The problem is that just as you admit in SC2 as in BW there is a cap to the number of actions that can be done in any given set of time. Both games share this reality. But that reality is handled differently between games. The ease of macro mechanics and unit control means in SC2 more actions or thoughts are spent on macro decisions than in BW. I think the main problem with the game is that the "enhanced speed" of SC2 doesn't scale well with the maps the way BW does with its maps. This is something that has been stated and rehashed over and over by many people and one of the biggest criticisms about the game since beta. The maps have gotten better to a small degree (marketing), but they just don't scale well with the game. They need to be a lot bigger and there needs to be less concentration of resources so that the speed and more macro-focused aspects of the game create more opportunities for strategy and reasoning skills that go way beyond physical/mechanical skill. And therein lies the marketing challenge for Blizzard because to maximize revenues for the game they want to attract the interest of as many people as possible in the early stages so they can make as much money as possible. There isn't an incentive to produce a game with the greatest opportunity for strategy until the game has been sold and casual sales are no longer a factor and the real money is made from the hardcore and competitive scene. Just like with a game like poker, you're going to generate a larger interest in a game when a random player has a decent chance to beat someone much better than them with randomness. Whereas in a game like chess casual players are going to be turned off by the fact that they have no chance of even getting lucky and winning a game and continuing their interest as a result. The flaws of SC2 when you compare to BW when it comes to strategy are actually strengths when you're talking about producing something you have to sell to a large audience. | ||
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
Multiply every unit in the game's hit points by 10 and don't change DPS at all, and the game will play out drastically different. | ||
|
cmcnutt34
United States43 Posts
example of DPS = TvP - Stalkers vs Dragoons, BW Zealots vs SC2 zealots, Vultures vs Hellions, and BW tanks vs SC2 tanks. Dragoons had longer range and slower DPS. Siege tanks had longer range and slower dps as well. Zealots had no charge, but speed so there was obviously more time to get to the tanks (not to mention spidermines). Vultures instead of hellions. This made things much different because the rate at which damage was dealt was alot less constant. This is somewhat the reason for quick battles in TvP. Unit movement AI- http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=223889 That article pretty much explains it all, but our units move in a ball. Which is rather.....non brood warish. Unit Size - Let's face it. Early/mid game units are puny. Marine is smaller, zergling is MUCH smaller, zealot as well, and it trends with the rest of the units. In combination with the Death Ball AI it is, splash damage is a nightmare. Reaver, SC1 siege tanks, and defiler would be real hell in this game. | ||
|
Arghnews
United Kingdom169 Posts
However, the making the defender's advantage better may just hurt zerg, who are the least cost effective when it comes to attacking a greedy toss/terran's entrenched position. I think the solution would be slowing it all down, so you are ABLE to effectively micro 3 drops at once, and perhaps decrease dmg abit. | ||
|
Rustedlotus
12 Posts
HOWEVER i don't think its there yet, HOTS and LOTV have still to come out, so there is alot of waiting for just a finished product  . Now on to the response to the OP, I loved the analysis of the "high density dps" groups, honestly i'm surprised more people haven't taken the mathematical approach to the deathball problem. hell one could even go further and analyze the things like the gradient of the dps/density function in a particular engagement **maybe i'll do that one day** and the proposal of "less dps+slower gameplay+other smaller factors" could really work to change the game in a positive way. But from a game perspective, what can we expect blizzard to do? The discussion so far has tried to understand the key elements of dps/time in bw; but if sc2 is going to be its own game, then it needs to find its own different solution. I'm going to use a metaphor for this next bit; in chess, each type of piece has its own type of movement, one piece has them all (figuratively) the queen. however, at the start of the game the queen is "landlocked" for lack of a better term, and cant really control the board. Tying this into modern sc2, the deathball is a "queen" it has a combination of high dps/high reward units that can kill almost anything. Games in chess would be really boring if the only things that happened were 2 queens smashing together, thankfully there are units that can evade queens, like the knight. The knight is possibly the most important unit in chess, it has 2 unique abilities, it can jump, and it moves in a non-linear fashion. a good player can evade a queen all day with a knight, and simultaneously threaten the king (check). The knight in chess represents either a unit or a mechanism that allows for this sort of play, in sc2 the game needs more "knights" Day[9] once explained this concept using the frisbee as his model; the point i'm trying to get across is that logically sc2 will need an effective way to encourage different forms of play besides deathballing. It appears that in HOTS dustin browder (i really dislike him) may have had an epiphany and started trying to include units to make this sort of play possible. what i'd like to see from the community though is alittle theorycrafting, what do you guys think would be an effective way of encouraging alternative play? to through a few examples: 1) make the game more complicated 2) more units (like way more, thus subsequent complication) 3) different maps 4) give existing units more evasive qualities (i know that was mentioned earlier, so props to that guy, honestly tho what would the game look like if there were more viable air units? or if more units could attack burrowed?) or what about physical evasion, allowing certain units to "dodge" attacks (this is a micro incentive to gain effectiveness) 5) increased overall unit efficiency 6) An ability/unit that can control the speed of other units, what if the widow mine was cloaked even when attached, and just slowed all enemy units in an area; or a unit/ability similar to statsis? also in the same category: confusion effects, what if a spell could cause a zergling pack to lose its "good" pathing, and have terrible terrible pathing? 7) more terrain options, where the fog of war limited vision in different ways than it does now these are just a few ideas i had on the subject, naturally though i wouldn't want the game to become more similar to wc3 or other hero based games, but i think for the game to gain back some of its brilliant strategic flair, while still being its own game, It needs to open up and become a more diverse as a whole. | ||
|
Qwyn
United States2781 Posts
2. Nope. 3. Over time. 4. FG is ensnare - reduce instant punishment effects. 5. NO. 6. Nope. 7. Good as it is now. It's an issue of AOE, too efficient unit pathing, and disproportionate supply costs. | ||
|
H2OSno
United States127 Posts
I just have a question... What would YOU do to change this dynamic of SC2? | ||
| ||
