|
On March 21 2013 02:09 TheDwf wrote:Giantt on Broodlords/Infestors post-Queen patch one month after the Queen patch: Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 01:40 Giantt wrote:
The problem of most Terran players in my opinion is that they refuse to change their mindset.
They go for "old strategies" - bio, tank marine, mech, variations of the mentioned, and drill with it until the game is decided by battle. Very rarely and very few players ever think about transitioning to starport or they do after the game has already been decided. They have little experience in these situations and fail most of the time - thats normal, dont cry about it. It takes practice to be good at it. There are already a few players that are good at it but majority are shouting about imbalance.
MVP just showed today that it is doable vs Vortix and Nerchio. It would take some months for the rest of the terrans to learn. ( Source.) TLDR: Terrans don't adapt. Give it time. Mvp beating euro Zergs proves that game is fine. Giantt on Broodlords/Infestors post-Queen patch sevens months after the Queen patch: Show nested quote +Zergs are boxed in to playing infestor only builds because of stupidly weak hydras and mutas working only if your opponent fell asleep - of course that eventually most will figure out how to use them to their maximum potential and it would seem imbalanced - after all it took 2 years of practice. Let Terrans and Protoss players sweat a while figuring out solutions. I play on EU GM level and can tell you that the top Terrans have figured it out. For Protoss I think the issue is non-existent - players need to change their mindset away from the "before broodlord push - fingers crossed it works" to more balanced style of pokes, harrasment with macro and tech behind. ( Source.) TLDR: Terrans and Protoss don't adapt. Give it time. Giantt on the Widow mine one week after HotS release: Show nested quote +On March 21 2013 01:47 Giantt wrote:
Widow mine is the most obviously OP thing that has ever been in the game since WoL Beta's end.
The fact that it can kill overseers is ridiculous - no way to deal with widow mines on more than 1 screen at a time because Z has to move the overseer one inch at a time or risk losing it. Given the current cost of overseers simply seeing widow mines makes Z burn 200-300 gas just to see.
The widow mine is too efficient vs everything.
Imo it should either have big damage on 1 target and really small splash dmg and radius or the opposite but not both as it does now. TLDR: Widow Mine is the most ridiculous thing in the universe. Several months after the Queen/Overlord patch, when European Zergs are allowed to play several levels above their real skill, everything is still fine; we need time, we need more time. Yet suddenly, when something problematic occurs for your race, you already know, one week after release, that Zergs adapted perfectly and are playing flawlessly against it, which of course means the thing is completely broken. Strong credibility you have there, my friend.
lol nice one. but: although widow mines arent superimba (just a bit too strong) they havent been out since 1 week but tested since 5 months in beta (with say 2 months on the highest level).
|
On March 20 2013 16:41 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2013 13:57 starslayer wrote:On March 20 2013 13:43 Empirimancer wrote:
What would be the point of making afterburners an upgrade? So the drops will start a bit later and the terran will have a bit less money for fighting units. It won't make the drops easier to deal with.
well like i said maybe have it as an upgrade and armory so its later in the game and the other players will have more stuff to defend. i understand that the burners are good at every point in the game but i think that being able to hit your opponent with them so early give the terran a huge advantage that the other play cant catch up and making it harder to defend later.so in theory yes it should make it easier because of the investment until late game but idk we will see. The point is that they STILL have to defend against it with units and can not leave their base OR they leave their base with fewer units than they could have to defend against a drop that might never come ... in several spots, so you have to leave quite a lot. It is bad design of Blizzard and really obvious, but I think I should thank them for giving proof for one of my criticisms about the game design. SC2 simply has become TOO FAST and TOO MUCH ABOUT MOBILITY that strategy is no longer a part of the game. Just good macro and massive production are need and then you have to be LUCKY ... As some people have already pointed out to me when I replied that they should build cannons to defend against doom drops, there is no way to defend against it in the game, so you have to gamble. Leave your units to defend and risk losing a battle in the mid-field OR take them and risk being dropped and losing for sure. The Terran has the choice between dropping and not dropping. That LUCK being part of the game is ok since it applies to both races, right? Not really since it is supposed to be a STRATEGY game with the BETTER player winning and not the lucky guy. Nerfing the Medivac boost will only mask the real problem and that is the overpowering importance of mobility in the game. There simply is too much of it ... The other problem is that there are too many units in a far too concentrated area and they are too easily controlled. + Show Spoiler +Preemptive reply to the idiots ... who will claim that I want to turn SC2 into BW with my comments:
There isnt only "BW settings" and "SC2 settings" to choose from, but rather a bazillion options between them. BW had its problems, but that doesnt mean SC2 is perfect. SC2 designers clearly went too far into the "more more more and easier" direction ...
BW wasnt boring to watch and only the limited technology at the time did prevent it from becoming a big eSports hit in the west. We have better technology to watch now, but that doesnt mean it makes sense to make the game ever faster and faster and bigger and bigger armies.
People are still ok with the obvious scale discrepancies between the units - which are there for gameplay reasons (because you wouldnt notice Marines / Zerglings on a map scale for Battlecruisers) - so why shouldnt a 12 unit selection limit be acceptable for gameplay reason? People who claim that unlimited unit selection is "necessary" because "technology has advanced" are just too lazy to learn controlling multiple groups.
BUMP for great justice. Couldn't agree more
|
I guess I must have imagined all those cool games I just watched where the better player won.
|
On March 21 2013 04:05 Umpteen wrote:
I guess I must have imagined all those cool games I just watched where the better player won.
The game (SC2) has been about luck all the time. You had to be lucky to look at your Marines when the Banelings started rolling in, you had to be lucky to not move your bio blob forward too much to be split by forcefields, you had to be lucky to catch that doom drop of the Terrans ...
Sure enough you can make up for that with skill and experience, BUT ONLY IF YOU ARE A PROFESSIONAL. Everyone else gets to roll the dice because the game is too fast at killing stuff due to too many units on the battlefield in too small an area. In BW you had drops as well, but there was enough time to react for everyone and the same is true for anything else you can come up with in a game between players of equal skill, but in SC2 the massive numbers and super tight formation simply kills that and replaces it with LUCK.
Since there are more non-pros playing the game than there are pros it is safe to say that it is a game more about luck than strategy.
|
Vatican City State582 Posts
On March 21 2013 04:16 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2013 04:05 Umpteen wrote:
I guess I must have imagined all those cool games I just watched where the better player won. The game (SC2) has been about luck all the time. You had to be lucky to look at your Marines when the Banelings started rolling in, you had to be lucky to not move your bio blob forward too much to be split by forcefields, you had to be lucky to catch that doom drop of the Terrans ... Sure enough you can make up for that with skill and experience, BUT ONLY IF YOU ARE A PROFESSIONAL. Everyone else gets to roll the dice because the game is too fast at killing stuff due to too many units on the battlefield in too small an area. In BW you had drops as well, but there was enough time to react for everyone and the same is true for anything else you can come up with in a game between players of equal skill, but in SC2 the massive numbers and super tight formation simply kills that and replaces it with LUCK. Since there are more non-pros playing the game than there are pros it is safe to say that it is a game more about luck than strategy.
yup, scouting is over-rated
|
On March 20 2013 23:47 Daswollvieh wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2013 18:40 mostevil wrote:
Personally I'd like to see medivac boost just send them forwards and lock the direction of the medivac while active. Would mean using it randomly to get places faster has a risk and theres an element of skill and timing in using it well. It would also make it more viable for escape and less for attack as the medivacs would overshoot the drop unless activated at the perfect range.
Energy use is the easier change though, which is how blizzard usually does these things.
That has the oposite effect, in that a low energy medivac can't escape, whereas a high energy one is less vulnerable to feedback. Seems less cool all round to me. Another possibility that would play a little more intuitively than forcing a straight line would be to make load/unload impossible while afterburners are on. That way, it would be a way to get in/out, would have to be timed for perfect use and would give the enemy some time to react.
I think this is a great change, just make it so medivacs can't load/unload while boosting
|
On March 21 2013 02:58 Giantt wrote:
The issue with the infestor appeared 1+ year after the unit remained unchanged(and nerfed in terms of neural parasite). It was created not by the unit itself but by the way Zerg players learned to use it - in every situation with nearly perfect efficiency.
The case with WM on the other hand appears now - only a month-two so since the last major patch - when only a few people are near mastering WM control and tactics and most of what you see is mediocre usage that yields great results. The issue is only going to become more and more obvious as more and more Terrans improve their skills with the new unit.
The problem with the BL/infestor comp appeared immediately after the queen buffs. It wasn't so much the infestor as it much the early game buffs combined with the best possible lategame army. Your response, "let protoss and terran players sweat".
Well, after a year of a broken zerg strategy going unchecked, I think its time for you guys to sweat a bit.
|
please delete i didnt mean to post. sorry 
|
On March 20 2013 16:41 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2013 13:57 starslayer wrote:On March 20 2013 13:43 Empirimancer wrote:
What would be the point of making afterburners an upgrade? So the drops will start a bit later and the terran will have a bit less money for fighting units. It won't make the drops easier to deal with.
well like i said maybe have it as an upgrade and armory so its later in the game and the other players will have more stuff to defend. i understand that the burners are good at every point in the game but i think that being able to hit your opponent with them so early give the terran a huge advantage that the other play cant catch up and making it harder to defend later.so in theory yes it should make it easier because of the investment until late game but idk we will see. The point is that they STILL have to defend against it with units and can not leave their base OR they leave their base with fewer units than they could have to defend against a drop that might never come ... in several spots, so you have to leave quite a lot. It is bad design of Blizzard and really obvious, but I think I should thank them for giving proof for one of my criticisms about the game design. SC2 simply has become TOO FAST and TOO MUCH ABOUT MOBILITY that strategy is no longer a part of the game. Just good macro and massive production are need and then you have to be LUCKY ... As some people have already pointed out to me when I replied that they should build cannons to defend against doom drops, there is no way to defend against it in the game, so you have to gamble. Leave your units to defend and risk losing a battle in the mid-field OR take them and risk being dropped and losing for sure. The Terran has the choice between dropping and not dropping. That LUCK being part of the game is ok since it applies to both races, right? Not really since it is supposed to be a STRATEGY game with the BETTER player winning and not the lucky guy. Nerfing the Medivac boost will only mask the real problem and that is the overpowering importance of mobility in the game. There simply is too much of it ... The other problem is that there are too many units in a far too concentrated area and they are too easily controlled. + Show Spoiler +Preemptive reply to the idiots ... who will claim that I want to turn SC2 into BW with my comments:
There isnt only "BW settings" and "SC2 settings" to choose from, but rather a bazillion options between them. BW had its problems, but that doesnt mean SC2 is perfect. SC2 designers clearly went too far into the "more more more and easier" direction ...
BW wasnt boring to watch and only the limited technology at the time did prevent it from becoming a big eSports hit in the west. We have better technology to watch now, but that doesnt mean it makes sense to make the game ever faster and faster and bigger and bigger armies.
People are still ok with the obvious scale discrepancies between the units - which are there for gameplay reasons (because you wouldnt notice Marines / Zerglings on a map scale for Battlecruisers) - so why shouldnt a 12 unit selection limit be acceptable for gameplay reason? People who claim that unlimited unit selection is "necessary" because "technology has advanced" are just too lazy to learn controlling multiple groups.
+1
User was warned for this post
|
I feel like medivacs speed boost should cost 25 energy.
Medivacs are like the only unit in the game with energy that have a spell cost no energy.
|
On March 21 2013 04:16 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2013 04:05 Umpteen wrote:
I guess I must have imagined all those cool games I just watched where the better player won. The game (SC2) has been about luck all the time. You had to be lucky to look at your Marines when the Banelings started rolling in, you had to be lucky to not move your bio blob forward too much to be split by forcefields, you had to be lucky to catch that doom drop of the Terrans ... Sure enough you can make up for that with skill and experience, BUT ONLY IF YOU ARE A PROFESSIONAL. Everyone else gets to roll the dice because the game is too fast at killing stuff due to too many units on the battlefield in too small an area. In BW you had drops as well, but there was enough time to react for everyone and the same is true for anything else you can come up with in a game between players of equal skill, but in SC2 the massive numbers and super tight formation simply kills that and replaces it with LUCK. Since there are more non-pros playing the game than there are pros it is safe to say that it is a game more about luck than strategy.
Your overdoing it Rabiator, I understand what your saying even though i don't agree with most of it.
But dude it's not that those banelings could teleport on your marines. You can watch the minimap, have a marine in front etc.
|
On March 21 2013 04:54 Bagi wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2013 02:58 Giantt wrote:
The issue with the infestor appeared 1+ year after the unit remained unchanged(and nerfed in terms of neural parasite). It was created not by the unit itself but by the way Zerg players learned to use it - in every situation with nearly perfect efficiency.
The case with WM on the other hand appears now - only a month-two so since the last major patch - when only a few people are near mastering WM control and tactics and most of what you see is mediocre usage that yields great results. The issue is only going to become more and more obvious as more and more Terrans improve their skills with the new unit.
The problem with the BL/infestor comp appeared immediately after the queen buffs. It wasn't so much the infestor as it much the early game buffs combined with the best possible lategame army. Your response, "let protoss and terran players sweat". Well, after a year of a broken zerg strategy going unchecked, I think its time for you guys to sweat a bit.
No it didn't appeared after the queen buff, it was used way before. Its just cause zerg didn't get killed before they reached the composition that it became apparent.
|
On March 21 2013 05:23 Assirra wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2013 04:54 Bagi wrote:On March 21 2013 02:58 Giantt wrote:
The issue with the infestor appeared 1+ year after the unit remained unchanged(and nerfed in terms of neural parasite). It was created not by the unit itself but by the way Zerg players learned to use it - in every situation with nearly perfect efficiency.
The case with WM on the other hand appears now - only a month-two so since the last major patch - when only a few people are near mastering WM control and tactics and most of what you see is mediocre usage that yields great results. The issue is only going to become more and more obvious as more and more Terrans improve their skills with the new unit.
The problem with the BL/infestor comp appeared immediately after the queen buffs. It wasn't so much the infestor as it much the early game buffs combined with the best possible lategame army. Your response, "let protoss and terran players sweat". Well, after a year of a broken zerg strategy going unchecked, I think its time for you guys to sweat a bit. No it didn't appeared after the queen buff, it was used way before. Its just cause zerg didn't get killed before they reached the composition that it became apparent.
I never said the comp didn't appear before it, but its what really made it into a huge problem. The problem was that a ridiculously strong early game and a ridiculously strong lategame meant that there was only a small window in the midgame where the zerg was vulnerable. The whole metagame (2-2 mech timings, immortal sentry all-ins) started to revolve around that window.
Before the queen buff terrans could significantly delay the 3rd and get a much better econ compared to the zerg. Many games were also outright won with early pressure builds.
|
|
|
On March 21 2013 05:34 Bagi wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2013 05:23 Assirra wrote:On March 21 2013 04:54 Bagi wrote:On March 21 2013 02:58 Giantt wrote:
The issue with the infestor appeared 1+ year after the unit remained unchanged(and nerfed in terms of neural parasite). It was created not by the unit itself but by the way Zerg players learned to use it - in every situation with nearly perfect efficiency.
The case with WM on the other hand appears now - only a month-two so since the last major patch - when only a few people are near mastering WM control and tactics and most of what you see is mediocre usage that yields great results. The issue is only going to become more and more obvious as more and more Terrans improve their skills with the new unit.
The problem with the BL/infestor comp appeared immediately after the queen buffs. It wasn't so much the infestor as it much the early game buffs combined with the best possible lategame army. Your response, "let protoss and terran players sweat". Well, after a year of a broken zerg strategy going unchecked, I think its time for you guys to sweat a bit. No it didn't appeared after the queen buff, it was used way before. Its just cause zerg didn't get killed before they reached the composition that it became apparent. I never said the comp didn't appear before it, but its what really made it into a huge problem. The problem was that a ridiculously strong early game and a ridiculously strong lategame meant that there was only a small window in the midgame where the zerg was vulnerable. The whole metagame (2-2 mech timings, immortal sentry all-ins) started to revolve around that window. Before the queen buff terrans could significantly delay the 3rd and get a much better econ compared to the zerg. Many games were also outright won with early pressure builds.
Either way, we shouldn't ask the game to be broken for anybody or for a race to "sweat." By the end of WoL, we had some REALLY good evidence that Zerg was too strong, especially in ZvT. A bunch of tournament results, pro feedback, specific games, etc. Right now, we have 1 tournament of Korean Terrans beating foreigners... There is no sweating, just a gigantic question mark on the state of balance for everybody.
|
On March 20 2013 16:41 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2013 13:57 starslayer wrote:On March 20 2013 13:43 Empirimancer wrote:
What would be the point of making afterburners an upgrade? So the drops will start a bit later and the terran will have a bit less money for fighting units. It won't make the drops easier to deal with.
well like i said maybe have it as an upgrade and armory so its later in the game and the other players will have more stuff to defend. i understand that the burners are good at every point in the game but i think that being able to hit your opponent with them so early give the terran a huge advantage that the other play cant catch up and making it harder to defend later.so in theory yes it should make it easier because of the investment until late game but idk we will see. The point is that they STILL have to defend against it with units and can not leave their base OR they leave their base with fewer units than they could have to defend against a drop that might never come ... in several spots, so you have to leave quite a lot. It is bad design of Blizzard and really obvious, but I think I should thank them for giving proof for one of my criticisms about the game design. SC2 simply has become TOO FAST and TOO MUCH ABOUT MOBILITY that strategy is no longer a part of the game. Just good macro and massive production are need and then you have to be LUCKY ... As some people have already pointed out to me when I replied that they should build cannons to defend against doom drops, there is no way to defend against it in the game, so you have to gamble. Leave your units to defend and risk losing a battle in the mid-field OR take them and risk being dropped and losing for sure. The Terran has the choice between dropping and not dropping. That LUCK being part of the game is ok since it applies to both races, right? Not really since it is supposed to be a STRATEGY game with the BETTER player winning and not the lucky guy. Nerfing the Medivac boost will only mask the real problem and that is the overpowering importance of mobility in the game. There simply is too much of it ... The other problem is that there are too many units in a far too concentrated area and they are too easily controlled. + Show Spoiler +Preemptive reply to the idiots ... who will claim that I want to turn SC2 into BW with my comments:
There isnt only "BW settings" and "SC2 settings" to choose from, but rather a bazillion options between them. BW had its problems, but that doesnt mean SC2 is perfect. SC2 designers clearly went too far into the "more more more and easier" direction ...
BW wasnt boring to watch and only the limited technology at the time did prevent it from becoming a big eSports hit in the west. We have better technology to watch now, but that doesnt mean it makes sense to make the game ever faster and faster and bigger and bigger armies.
People are still ok with the obvious scale discrepancies between the units - which are there for gameplay reasons (because you wouldnt notice Marines / Zerglings on a map scale for Battlecruisers) - so why shouldnt a 12 unit selection limit be acceptable for gameplay reason? People who claim that unlimited unit selection is "necessary" because "technology has advanced" are just too lazy to learn controlling multiple groups.
Rab you've been on the money in this thread but this post is gold. I understand how Blizz wanted to speed up the pace of the game but the ultra-mobility has definitely hurt strategic and unit depth.
If everyone is special... then no one is special.
I think Coach Park's quote pretty much ends the mock fight about whether or not the medivac needs a tweak.
|
On March 21 2013 02:09 TheDwf wrote:Giantt on Broodlords/Infestors post-Queen patch one month after the Queen patch: Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 01:40 Giantt wrote:
The problem of most Terran players in my opinion is that they refuse to change their mindset.
They go for "old strategies" - bio, tank marine, mech, variations of the mentioned, and drill with it until the game is decided by battle. Very rarely and very few players ever think about transitioning to starport or they do after the game has already been decided. They have little experience in these situations and fail most of the time - thats normal, dont cry about it. It takes practice to be good at it. There are already a few players that are good at it but majority are shouting about imbalance.
MVP just showed today that it is doable vs Vortix and Nerchio. It would take some months for the rest of the terrans to learn. ( Source.) TLDR: Terrans don't adapt. Give it time. Mvp beating euro Zergs proves that game is fine. Giantt on Broodlords/Infestors post-Queen patch sevens months after the Queen patch: Show nested quote +Zergs are boxed in to playing infestor only builds because of stupidly weak hydras and mutas working only if your opponent fell asleep - of course that eventually most will figure out how to use them to their maximum potential and it would seem imbalanced - after all it took 2 years of practice. Let Terrans and Protoss players sweat a while figuring out solutions. I play on EU GM level and can tell you that the top Terrans have figured it out. For Protoss I think the issue is non-existent - players need to change their mindset away from the "before broodlord push - fingers crossed it works" to more balanced style of pokes, harrasment with macro and tech behind. ( Source.) TLDR: Terrans and Protoss don't adapt. Give it time. Giantt on the Widow mine one week after HotS release: Show nested quote +On March 21 2013 01:47 Giantt wrote:
Widow mine is the most obviously OP thing that has ever been in the game since WoL Beta's end.
The fact that it can kill overseers is ridiculous - no way to deal with widow mines on more than 1 screen at a time because Z has to move the overseer one inch at a time or risk losing it. Given the current cost of overseers simply seeing widow mines makes Z burn 200-300 gas just to see.
The widow mine is too efficient vs everything.
Imo it should either have big damage on 1 target and really small splash dmg and radius or the opposite but not both as it does now. TLDR: Widow Mine is the most ridiculous thing in the universe. Several months after the Queen/Overlord patch, when European Zergs are allowed to play several levels above their real skill, everything is still fine; we need time, we need more time. Yet suddenly, when something problematic occurs for your race, you already know, one week after release, that Zergs adapted perfectly and are playing flawlessly against it, which of course means the thing is completely broken. Strong credibility you have there, my friend.
Ahhhh this made my day. This is what every single balance thread is--people being hypocritical depending on if they feel advantaged or disadvantaged. Masters kids struggle with adapting, and will eventually figure it out after pros do, while whining the whole way though. Give pros time to figure it out; this Giantt kid's original advice is pretty good.
|
On March 21 2013 06:22 Sabu113 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2013 16:41 Rabiator wrote:On March 20 2013 13:57 starslayer wrote:On March 20 2013 13:43 Empirimancer wrote:
What would be the point of making afterburners an upgrade? So the drops will start a bit later and the terran will have a bit less money for fighting units. It won't make the drops easier to deal with.
well like i said maybe have it as an upgrade and armory so its later in the game and the other players will have more stuff to defend. i understand that the burners are good at every point in the game but i think that being able to hit your opponent with them so early give the terran a huge advantage that the other play cant catch up and making it harder to defend later.so in theory yes it should make it easier because of the investment until late game but idk we will see. The point is that they STILL have to defend against it with units and can not leave their base OR they leave their base with fewer units than they could have to defend against a drop that might never come ... in several spots, so you have to leave quite a lot. It is bad design of Blizzard and really obvious, but I think I should thank them for giving proof for one of my criticisms about the game design. SC2 simply has become TOO FAST and TOO MUCH ABOUT MOBILITY that strategy is no longer a part of the game. Just good macro and massive production are need and then you have to be LUCKY ... As some people have already pointed out to me when I replied that they should build cannons to defend against doom drops, there is no way to defend against it in the game, so you have to gamble. Leave your units to defend and risk losing a battle in the mid-field OR take them and risk being dropped and losing for sure. The Terran has the choice between dropping and not dropping. That LUCK being part of the game is ok since it applies to both races, right? Not really since it is supposed to be a STRATEGY game with the BETTER player winning and not the lucky guy. Nerfing the Medivac boost will only mask the real problem and that is the overpowering importance of mobility in the game. There simply is too much of it ... The other problem is that there are too many units in a far too concentrated area and they are too easily controlled. + Show Spoiler +Preemptive reply to the idiots ... who will claim that I want to turn SC2 into BW with my comments:
There isnt only "BW settings" and "SC2 settings" to choose from, but rather a bazillion options between them. BW had its problems, but that doesnt mean SC2 is perfect. SC2 designers clearly went too far into the "more more more and easier" direction ...
BW wasnt boring to watch and only the limited technology at the time did prevent it from becoming a big eSports hit in the west. We have better technology to watch now, but that doesnt mean it makes sense to make the game ever faster and faster and bigger and bigger armies.
People are still ok with the obvious scale discrepancies between the units - which are there for gameplay reasons (because you wouldnt notice Marines / Zerglings on a map scale for Battlecruisers) - so why shouldnt a 12 unit selection limit be acceptable for gameplay reason? People who claim that unlimited unit selection is "necessary" because "technology has advanced" are just too lazy to learn controlling multiple groups. Rab you've been on the money in this thread but this post is gold. I understand how Blizz wanted to speed up the pace of the game but the ultra-mobility has definitely hurt strategic and unit depth. If everyone is special... then no one is special. I think Coach Park's quote pretty much ends the mock fight about whether or not the medivac needs a tweak.
Or maybe the lack of Terrans on EG-TL influences his opinion just as much as playing a race does...
|
On March 21 2013 06:29 aksfjh wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2013 06:22 Sabu113 wrote:On March 20 2013 16:41 Rabiator wrote:On March 20 2013 13:57 starslayer wrote:On March 20 2013 13:43 Empirimancer wrote:
What would be the point of making afterburners an upgrade? So the drops will start a bit later and the terran will have a bit less money for fighting units. It won't make the drops easier to deal with.
well like i said maybe have it as an upgrade and armory so its later in the game and the other players will have more stuff to defend. i understand that the burners are good at every point in the game but i think that being able to hit your opponent with them so early give the terran a huge advantage that the other play cant catch up and making it harder to defend later.so in theory yes it should make it easier because of the investment until late game but idk we will see. The point is that they STILL have to defend against it with units and can not leave their base OR they leave their base with fewer units than they could have to defend against a drop that might never come ... in several spots, so you have to leave quite a lot. It is bad design of Blizzard and really obvious, but I think I should thank them for giving proof for one of my criticisms about the game design. SC2 simply has become TOO FAST and TOO MUCH ABOUT MOBILITY that strategy is no longer a part of the game. Just good macro and massive production are need and then you have to be LUCKY ... As some people have already pointed out to me when I replied that they should build cannons to defend against doom drops, there is no way to defend against it in the game, so you have to gamble. Leave your units to defend and risk losing a battle in the mid-field OR take them and risk being dropped and losing for sure. The Terran has the choice between dropping and not dropping. That LUCK being part of the game is ok since it applies to both races, right? Not really since it is supposed to be a STRATEGY game with the BETTER player winning and not the lucky guy. Nerfing the Medivac boost will only mask the real problem and that is the overpowering importance of mobility in the game. There simply is too much of it ... The other problem is that there are too many units in a far too concentrated area and they are too easily controlled. + Show Spoiler +Preemptive reply to the idiots ... who will claim that I want to turn SC2 into BW with my comments:
There isnt only "BW settings" and "SC2 settings" to choose from, but rather a bazillion options between them. BW had its problems, but that doesnt mean SC2 is perfect. SC2 designers clearly went too far into the "more more more and easier" direction ...
BW wasnt boring to watch and only the limited technology at the time did prevent it from becoming a big eSports hit in the west. We have better technology to watch now, but that doesnt mean it makes sense to make the game ever faster and faster and bigger and bigger armies.
People are still ok with the obvious scale discrepancies between the units - which are there for gameplay reasons (because you wouldnt notice Marines / Zerglings on a map scale for Battlecruisers) - so why shouldnt a 12 unit selection limit be acceptable for gameplay reason? People who claim that unlimited unit selection is "necessary" because "technology has advanced" are just too lazy to learn controlling multiple groups. Rab you've been on the money in this thread but this post is gold. I understand how Blizz wanted to speed up the pace of the game but the ultra-mobility has definitely hurt strategic and unit depth. If everyone is special... then no one is special. I think Coach Park's quote pretty much ends the mock fight about whether or not the medivac needs a tweak. Or maybe the lack of Terrans on EG-TL influences his opinion just as much as playing a race does...
Nah, I think Coach Park is pretty much on the ball with this one. Keep the boost awesome, just don't make it endless(ie, cool down based). Make it so there are a limited number of boosts for a given time and it will be better for everyone.
As for units in SC2 being more mobile the BW, I don't know about that. Speed vultures and shuttles were pretty quick if you compair how fast they went to how big the screen was(before the era of wide screens).
|
On March 21 2013 06:35 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2013 06:29 aksfjh wrote:On March 21 2013 06:22 Sabu113 wrote:On March 20 2013 16:41 Rabiator wrote:On March 20 2013 13:57 starslayer wrote:On March 20 2013 13:43 Empirimancer wrote:
What would be the point of making afterburners an upgrade? So the drops will start a bit later and the terran will have a bit less money for fighting units. It won't make the drops easier to deal with.
well like i said maybe have it as an upgrade and armory so its later in the game and the other players will have more stuff to defend. i understand that the burners are good at every point in the game but i think that being able to hit your opponent with them so early give the terran a huge advantage that the other play cant catch up and making it harder to defend later.so in theory yes it should make it easier because of the investment until late game but idk we will see. The point is that they STILL have to defend against it with units and can not leave their base OR they leave their base with fewer units than they could have to defend against a drop that might never come ... in several spots, so you have to leave quite a lot. It is bad design of Blizzard and really obvious, but I think I should thank them for giving proof for one of my criticisms about the game design. SC2 simply has become TOO FAST and TOO MUCH ABOUT MOBILITY that strategy is no longer a part of the game. Just good macro and massive production are need and then you have to be LUCKY ... As some people have already pointed out to me when I replied that they should build cannons to defend against doom drops, there is no way to defend against it in the game, so you have to gamble. Leave your units to defend and risk losing a battle in the mid-field OR take them and risk being dropped and losing for sure. The Terran has the choice between dropping and not dropping. That LUCK being part of the game is ok since it applies to both races, right? Not really since it is supposed to be a STRATEGY game with the BETTER player winning and not the lucky guy. Nerfing the Medivac boost will only mask the real problem and that is the overpowering importance of mobility in the game. There simply is too much of it ... The other problem is that there are too many units in a far too concentrated area and they are too easily controlled. + Show Spoiler +Preemptive reply to the idiots ... who will claim that I want to turn SC2 into BW with my comments:
There isnt only "BW settings" and "SC2 settings" to choose from, but rather a bazillion options between them. BW had its problems, but that doesnt mean SC2 is perfect. SC2 designers clearly went too far into the "more more more and easier" direction ...
BW wasnt boring to watch and only the limited technology at the time did prevent it from becoming a big eSports hit in the west. We have better technology to watch now, but that doesnt mean it makes sense to make the game ever faster and faster and bigger and bigger armies.
People are still ok with the obvious scale discrepancies between the units - which are there for gameplay reasons (because you wouldnt notice Marines / Zerglings on a map scale for Battlecruisers) - so why shouldnt a 12 unit selection limit be acceptable for gameplay reason? People who claim that unlimited unit selection is "necessary" because "technology has advanced" are just too lazy to learn controlling multiple groups. Rab you've been on the money in this thread but this post is gold. I understand how Blizz wanted to speed up the pace of the game but the ultra-mobility has definitely hurt strategic and unit depth. If everyone is special... then no one is special. I think Coach Park's quote pretty much ends the mock fight about whether or not the medivac needs a tweak. Or maybe the lack of Terrans on EG-TL influences his opinion just as much as playing a race does... Nah, I think Coach Park is pretty much on the ball with this one. Keep the boost awesome, just don't make it endless(ie, cool down based). Make it so there are a limited number of boosts for a given time and it will be better for everyone. As for units in SC2 being more mobile the BW, I don't know about that. Speed vultures and shuttles were pretty quick if you compair how fast they went to how big the screen was(before the era of wide screens).
Well, you and Park were on the same page in the first place, and you both have similar slants. There's not anything wrong with that, I just wish people would see that instead of "OMG pure unbiased opinions from a coach!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
