EPTEdit : About the early marines+medic push; limited selection won't change much. People will 1a2a instead of 1a. The ball will stille be there. The death ball problem really comes from the clumping mechanism, not the unlimited selection.
StarCraft II Brood War - Page 36
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Diks
Belgium1880 Posts
Edit : About the early marines+medic push; limited selection won't change much. People will 1a2a instead of 1a. The ball will stille be there. The death ball problem really comes from the clumping mechanism, not the unlimited selection. | ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5558 Posts
On January 02 2013 18:33 -Archangel- wrote: What I hate with a passion is no automine. This is a bw feature that is not needed. MBS could also go as it reduces fun of the game. Limited selection has a real case to keep as does no smart casting. I destroyed my friend with mass muta because of no limited selection. No auto-mine means you have to put effort into developing your economy, dedicate your time. That means harassment done by the player who's behind on bases will distract you and make your economy develop slower than you intend, giving the player behind on bases a chance to make a comeback. I think it's an essential part of BW, just like no smart-cast is an essential part because it allows spells to be pretty scary - if used correctly. As for Mutas, I think they should make it so that the stack density gets inversly proportional to the number of Mutas selected once you move past 11 air units (can even add a tooltip explaining this as their passive ability or something, dunno). So if you want to stack more than 11 Mutas, you can, but due to the decreased stack density you will end up with some fringe Mutas that can be more easily picked. | ||
|
purakushi
United States3300 Posts
On January 03 2013 03:54 maybenexttime wrote: As for Mutas, I think they should make it so that the stack density gets inversly proportional to the number of Mutas selected once you move past 11 air units (can even add a tooltip explaining this as their passive ability or something, dunno). So if you want to stack more than 11 Mutas, you can, but due to the decreased stack density you will end up with some fringe Mutas that can be more easily picked. Interesting idea. I prefer complete BW mode (after all, this is supposed to be a replica of BW), but I understand and appreciate the inclusion of the choice to play with SC2 mechanics. If your suggestion was implemented correctly, that would be really cool, even if it may seem awkward. | ||
|
mishimaBeef
Canada2259 Posts
therefore sc2 mechanics != bw mechanics if we want sc2 = bw | ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
Also what is the best way to handle early zealot rushes on close positions? Against Terrans it seems you must go lurkers or die? | ||
|
Rococo
United States331 Posts
On January 03 2013 03:54 maybenexttime wrote: No auto-mine means you have to put effort into developing your economy, dedicate your time. That means harassment done by the player who's behind on bases will distract you and make your economy develop slower than you intend, giving the player behind on bases a chance to make a comeback. This is so often overlooked. The scaling mechanical demands for material leads does a lot to curb snowballing. | ||
|
Gfire
United States1699 Posts
On January 03 2013 05:34 Rococo wrote: This is so often overlooked. The scaling mechanical demands for material leads does a lot to curb snowballing. Yeah, it helps the player who's behind which is probably a good thing to help counteract the exponential growth of economy in sc. Not only does it promote comebacks from mistakes or being outplayed a bit earlier in the game, it also relieves imbalance and luck-based deficits as well. No automine helps with this, when it comes to base count. The player with more bases has a greater requirement to fully utilize all of them. Similarly, limited unit selection makes things harder on the player with a bigger force. Single-building selection also does a similar thing. | ||
|
iNfeRnaL
Germany1908 Posts
SC2BW is cool - but I really don't need it. BW is all I need.  | ||
|
Zenbrez
Canada5973 Posts
On January 03 2013 06:48 iNfeRnaL wrote: But HotS takes a step in another direction. Even your first 6 go mine automatically. Easy easy easy. That's Blizzards way. SC2BW is cool - but I really don't need it. BW is all I need. While I agree that was definitely not a needed change, worker splitting has 0% impact on the way a game plays out. Even if your opponent 6 pools, whether you had the perfect 3 way split, or didn't split at all, it doesn't change much. It's something more psychological. I've once had people on ladder blame their lose on their bad split at the start of the game. People tilt for the weirdest reasons | ||
|
L_Master
United States8017 Posts
On January 03 2013 05:25 -Archangel- wrote: So how do you handle reavers as zerg without mutas? Also what is the best way to handle early zealot rushes on close positions? Against Terrans it seems you must go lurkers or die? Z v Reavers - Are we talking early game reaver, like a one base push? 2 base sair/reaver harass? Or reaver ultilization in the lategame by a protoss with 4+ gas? v 2 Gate Zealot - If you twelve hatched, your pretty much fine provided he didn't do something like 9/9 center gates in which case you're probably going to die. Two hatches of ling production can easily dispatch 2 gate zealot production. The tricky part is getting the balance right. Pump nonstop lings and he'll just go to his ramp (which you won't break) and you'll have no drones because you were pumping lings while he happily built probes. Usually, you will put down at least one sunken, possibly one more depending on the situation and that should go down asap as soon as your nat hatch finishes. General rule of thumb is that you need about 3 lings per zealot. As far as micro, it's all about surrounds. Don't let his zealots fight your lings in a nice line v line fight. Try to flank/surround the zealots. ZvT - Lurkers are generally used, yes. But they don't always have to be, depending on the build. In the case of 2 hatch muta, many Z's opt to just continue muta production, often taking a third base solely for a third gas. Some styles also involved flanking with muta and a large group of lings. As a general rule though, lurkers are good. The standard is to open 3 hatch muta, then as you get your third base start lurker aspect. Muta keep terran busy until that is done, and then 2 lurkers on a ramp make a base pretty much unbreakable to MnM. Generally from that point zergs will get hive going very quickly to get defilers out and use swarm to push terran off their front also to swarm down the ramp and take their 4th. | ||
|
dragonsuper
Liechtenstein222 Posts
1) Hire this guy for the hard work 2) help him with money , tools and testers 3) relaunch sc2bw big time in korea to get a new league , kespa will agree instantly | ||
|
TLRMoomin
United Kingdom5 Posts
| ||
|
Zenbrez
Canada5973 Posts
On January 03 2013 07:43 dragonsuper wrote: Blizzard should do 3 things: 1) Hire this guy for the hard work 2) help him with money , tools and testers 3) relaunch sc2bw big time in korea to get a new league , kespa will agree instantly While I like the mod, would like starcraft in some form to be big in korea, your post is filled with uncertain assumptions. | ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5558 Posts
5 minutes in: "you gotta build on the original or you're gonna fail" Looks like Browder should listen to his own advice sometimes, lol. ;p Shit, wasted my 3000th post on this.  My Tank | ||
|
purakushi
United States3300 Posts
On January 03 2013 07:46 TLRMoomin wrote: Is this new, or is this the custom BW mad that has been on battlenet for along time? This is not new. I do not know how things look on the EU server, but there are some way out of date SC2BW maps on the NA server, because people other than Maverck have republished it themselves (and just leave them there). You will want to make sure the one you are playing is the most up to date. I suppose you can just join channel SC2BW to find players and instructions. Please note that while this map/mod is not yet complete, it is well on its way to being so. Patches are released pretty frequently and the creator takes bug reports and suggestions on the thread. | ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
On January 03 2013 07:46 Zenbrez wrote: While I like the mod, would like starcraft in some form to be big in korea, your post is filled with uncertain assumptions. Third point is kind of wierd. However one need only look at Valve to see the success they have had hiring community members to develop their ideas into stand alone products (Portal, DOTA 2). | ||
|
insanet
Peru439 Posts
On January 02 2013 19:08 Fencar wrote: I personally don't think unlimited selection is such a big deal because AoE is so strong, and unlimited selection makes it harder to spread on demand; you can't go 1-click 2-click 3-click etc to spread, plus the not-AoE units have such limited range compared to the AoE units. I agree,as a BW "elitist", i dont have any problems with MBS or unlimited selection, and even if there is a problem is tooooo early to tell, im glad maverck is taken his time before jumping to conclusions. | ||
|
L_Master
United States8017 Posts
Smartcasting - AOE is damn strong in BW, with smartcasting it would be ridiculously and you could blanket the field with storms way, way to quick for the enemy to react. They would have to move back entire armies instantly, which would either be impossible or require unlimited selection which would make the game more "bally" even if the new pathfinding helps some. Unlimited Selection - Don't really have a problem. It's a disadvantage to use this anyway as you greatly lose flexibility in army control an your units will also ten to bunch more than otherwise. Maybe useful in some situations but overall if you aren't using many control groups you're hurting yourself. MBS - Don't like it. At least if the goal is a BW feel. An undeniable aspect of BW is the strategic aspect of mechanics. Time is a resource, and you have a finite amount of stuff you can do. A good example is PvT lategame. As protoss you'll probably have 20+ gateways you need to macro from, which takes several seconds to click through. A player has to make the decision of "do I macro out of all my gates now, or do I focus on spreading my army, storming, and stasising; and then come back to macro, knowing that doing so will create a delay on reinforcements". With MBS you don't have to do with at all. You can look at the battle and keep microing the entire time while going 4zzzzzzzzzzzzddddddttaa. It really removes an aspect of what I consider to be the strategy of the "real time" aspect of the game. Automine - Same thing as MBS. In one sense it's pointless, but in another it forces the decision of "how do I spend my time". It's really only tedious if viewed from a certain mindset, but in my opinion both lack of MBS and no automine add the the strategic value of deciding how one should best spend their time. | ||
|
TopRamen
United States96 Posts
| ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On January 03 2013 12:50 L_Master wrote: Unlimited Selection - Don't really have a problem. It's a disadvantage to use this anyway as you greatly lose flexibility in army control an your units will also ten to bunch more than otherwise. Maybe useful in some situations but overall if you aren't using many control groups you're hurting yourself. I would extend this even more by saying that "forcing" your players to use a limited unit selection also makes them become better, because it "forces" them to multitask and win without simply getting more stuff than your opponent. It is also in part a requirement to give a defender the advantage, because an established defensive position will have a dense amount of units and probably more than one control groups worth of it ... so it would be foolish to attack with just one control group and straight up. Instead you have to use trickery or good control of several squads to do it. With just 12 units per control group you might not be able to assign ever one of your units to a control group ... and that is GOOD, because it creates a sort of chaos or need to improvise and react to the sitation instantly ... which will prepare players much more for harder situations than simply doing one click to retreat your whole army. Limited unit selection is GOOD! | ||
| ||
