EPTIf those type of units were adjusted something like this would be viable. Until then, its kind of pointless.
HotS Highground Mechanic - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Masq
Canada1792 Posts
If those type of units were adjusted something like this would be viable. Until then, its kind of pointless. | ||
|
Emzeeshady
Canada4203 Posts
| ||
|
grush57
Korea (South)2582 Posts
| ||
|
coolcor
520 Posts
On February 02 2013 12:04 KillingVector wrote: Maybe I missed something, but I was under the impression that Blizzard has been ignoring these type of threads. I'm going to play a little bit of devil's advocate, and argue a little against some of the suggestions. First, for a range reduction, my concern is that this affects high range units less than low range units in the sense that the % reduction of their range is less. I would prefer that a high ground advantage have a more flat % effect on ground range units. It keeps the purpose of the strategic terrain clear, instead of adding an element of "if I have the right composition to attack that hill, I can faceroll." Second, the argument that random effects in Sc2 "average out" to something predictable gives me pause. The Law of Large Numbers does not apply here. A game of Sc is not a series of independent trials. Any kind of swing could potentially have great effect on the later stages of the game. This is especially true with my next concern with this argument, the baneling. A couple banelings surviving can have a great effect on the outcome of the fight. A 5 health baneling does as much damage as a full health baneling. Of course, the 5 health baneling has less chance of survival to make its optimal detonation, but I feel like it needs testing to see how large the variance in gameplay could be. I can't think of any argument against a flat damage reduction. Before people start arguing about decimals, remember that they could internally multiply all of the damage/health in the game by N allowing "fractional" values by 1/N. Of course, they would keep the health displays the same (just divide by N). Edit: The other problem with % chance to miss ideas is Sc2's smart fire. I feel like their interaction would severely affect something like marines. They would intentionally spread their fire too thin against stuff on the high ground. The miss chance can be programmed to be psudorandom like wc3 was to make sure it is much more unlikely to get a string of bad or good luck. They can even make each unit miss every other high ground shot predictably after randomly deciding if the first is hit or miss randomly if they wanted. Smart fire does not work like that it happens because each marine or tank deals damage instantly as soon as it fires. The game does not fire two units at the same time so the target dies before any other marine or tank can do an overkill shot. Highground will not change this. Dustin Browder mentioned high ground advantage in this video http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014488/The-Game-Design-of-STARCRAFT during the skill part. He says they fought about stuff like that a lot, using the example of +2 amour on highground, but said "the problem with it is that it prevented a lot of player skill". He then went on to say they worked really hard to make terrain super meaningful without it using examples of melee against ranged units. Arguments about why high ground does not prevent player skill and that terrain is not very meaningful might have the best chance to convince him. Finally, the map editor can add highground mechanics. If a tournament really wanted to they could use a map or two programmed to have highground advantage and balanced around that as a unique feature/gimmick of that map without blizzard doing anything right? BW had a few tournament maps with spells on them so just give high ground a very very subtle visual effect and say it has a spell like guardian shield on it except it gives whatever highground bonus the map maker wants. If it is successful maybe tournament maps can standardize on this feature and that would put a lot of community pressure on blizzard to eventually make ladder maps the same since they say they want to have tournament maps on it. | ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
| ||
|
PineapplePizza
United States749 Posts
On February 02 2013 12:40 jinorazi wrote: this seems to over complicate it...why not just do what bw did :/ The devs don't like the idea of random chance changing the outcome of a fight. I really don't know why they didn't decide to change it to a % damage reduction, if RNG was that much of a problem. I really, REALLY don't know why they felt the need to mess with something that worked, and had been a significant part of player strategy and map design. It's like they watched 5 games of TvP, then said "omg all they do is make tanks" then decided to gut or remove half the shit in the game. | ||
|
coolcor
520 Posts
On February 02 2013 12:50 Ooshmagoosh wrote: The devs don't like the idea of random chance changing the outcome of a fight. I really don't know why they didn't decide to change it to a % damage reduction, if RNG was that much of a problem. I really, REALLY don't know why they felt the need to mess with something that worked, and had been a significant part of player strategy and map design. It's like they watched 5 games of TvP, then said "omg all they do is make tanks" then decided to gut or remove half the shit in the game. I just linked to a video where Dustin Browder tells you why they don't have any high ground advantage. They discussed it a lot and decided it prevented a lot of player skill. But they worked for weeks on the sizes of the units to make sure terrain is meaningful when zealots try to attack up a ramp instead. | ||
|
IndyO
390 Posts
| ||
|
Grobyc
Canada18410 Posts
| ||
|
Gfire
United States1699 Posts
Lack of defenders advantage = you have to have a strong force sitting at your base to defend Defenders advantage = you can defend even if some of your forces are out on the map In which case it's the lack of defender's advantage that causes turtling. (and removes player skill) | ||
|
sunglasseson
United States145 Posts
On February 02 2013 12:23 sitromit wrote: So more turtling? No thank you. this is the new generation response to improving the game. he doesnt mean high ground must work like this he means that positional advantage is a skill that is lacking in the game. sc2 is so bad skill wise compared to brood war. its very often that build orders crush and the current best race cleans house. its common that a far better player loses to a far worse simply because the race vs race dynamic in sc2 is so horribly imbalanced and since control is so easy, it magnifys the problems. in broodwar protoss was an easier race to macro but just because he can make an army doesnt mean he can use it as well as say another much better zerg/terran could and he gets crushed. in sc2 its VERY easy to max and VERY easy to control said max army so there needs to be some way for the better play to trounce the lesser one | ||
|
RParks42
United States77 Posts
| ||
|
YyapSsap
New Zealand1511 Posts
| ||
|
Emzeeshady
Canada4203 Posts
| ||
|
-Kyo-
Japan1926 Posts
Re-read(or read in the first place in case you didnt) my post because I'm quite sure half of the pro players out there would be willing to tell you how horrible PvP and ZvZ are. Sure some players are able to optimize, and play the mirrors much better than others, but that definitely doesn't mean that they're good MUs. To make this less of a veiled complaint on balance and more towards the skill aspect we started with, simply compare the mirrors of PvP and ZvZ from BW to SC2. Which can you say honestly takes more skill? From there, apply the ways the MUs can be played due to the maps and core game mechanics such as high ground and I just don't see much of a contrasting argument. Sure the game is made its own way and meant to be played in its own way. That doesn't refute that it shouldn't be improved however. | ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
i think all the skills are there, but the game doesnt allow it to be displayed in a more brighter way, as in player consistency in short and long term. | ||
|
KillingVector
United States96 Posts
On February 02 2013 12:38 coolcor wrote: The miss chance can be programmed to be psudorandom like wc3 was to make sure it is much more unlikely to get a string of bad or good luck. They can even make each unit miss every other high ground shot predictably after randomly deciding if the first is hit or miss randomly if they wanted. Smart fire does not work like that it happens because each marine or tank deals damage instantly as soon as it fires. The game does not fire two units at the same time so the target dies before any other marine or tank can do an overkill shot. Highground will not change this. Dustin Browder mentioned high ground advantage in this video http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014488/The-Game-Design-of-STARCRAFT during the skill part. He says they fought about stuff like that a lot, using the example of +2 amour on highground, but said "the problem with it is that it prevented a lot of player skill". He then went on to say they worked really hard to make terrain super meaningful without it using examples of melee against ranged units. Arguments about why high ground does not prevent player skill and that terrain is not very meaningful might have the best chance to convince him. Finally, the map editor can add highground mechanics. If a tournament really wanted to they could use a map or two programmed to have highground advantage and balanced around that as a unique feature/gimmick of that map without blizzard doing anything right? BW had a few tournament maps with spells on them so just give high ground a very very subtle visual effect and say it has a spell like guardian shield on it except it gives whatever highground bonus the map maker wants. If it is successful maybe tournament maps can standardize on this feature and that would put a lot of community pressure on blizzard to eventually make ladder maps the same since they say they want to have tournament maps on it. For some reason I assumed the game calculated which units the marines target and then assign damage, but what you said makes a lot more sense. Good to know that smart fire won't be an issue. I wasn't aware the map editor can add high ground mechanics. I heard that someone made a mod to add it, but I wasn't aware of it actually being in the editor itself. | ||
|
EnumaAvalon
Philippines3613 Posts
| ||
|
TheSwamp
United States1497 Posts
| ||
|
Emzeeshady
Canada4203 Posts
| ||
| ||
