|
Iran17695 Posts
On September 22 2013 02:39 EatThePath wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2013 04:28 Popkiller wrote:
MMA is winning games again, there is no problem. :D shoutout to xeris for including pathing as a culprit, if briefly. edit: and I'm glad others are noting it too
I didn't want to go into too much detail because someone else already did jn the article I linked, and his analysis is better than I could have done. Read that article, it's great!
|
On September 22 2013 03:25 lolfail9001 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2013 03:22 Incognoto wrote:On September 22 2013 03:16 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:13 Xiphos wrote:On September 22 2013 03:06 Incognoto wrote:On September 22 2013 02:04 Xiphos wrote:
How to get rid of Deathball?
1. Alter Unit pathing
2. Introduce more harassment-oriented units (BW had Lurkers, higher Storm dmg, Reavers, faster Vulture firing rate, andWratih/Mutalisk micromanagement)
3. High ground advantage so the game become more positional-based to salvage units.
4. Higher AOE dmg, this forces splits, this also helps with the harass elements.
Pretty simplistic conceptual overhaul. Blizzard won't do them btw.
Oh yeah get rid of all macro mechanics, it builds army way too fast. Why harass when I get there, the base will be heavily defended? Better to build my own ball of death, its far more efficient. I don't see deathball in TvZ I see a lot of short battles tho. You see short battles but you see a lot of them, because Terran and Zerg have huge production capacities. TvZ has always arguably been the best match-up to spectate for this reason. It's fast paced with a lot of action -- the antonym of actual deathball match-ups which is usually anything with a Protoss in it. edit: On September 22 2013 02:40 BronzeKnee wrote:On September 21 2013 03:40 Xeris wrote:
One of the biggest problems (game play) is unsolvable. HoTS is definitely a better game than WoL, but the inherent aspects of the game engine can't be overcome by balance or new units, I fear Brood War will always be more exciting to watch than StarCraft 2. And playing the game is utterly boring now too. When I used to que up on ladder (mid/high masters) sometime in 2011, I had no idea what was coming, no matter what race I was up against. If it was Terran, it could be a CC first, it could be any variation of 1-1-1, it could be 2 rax pressure expand, ect... There were so many viable strategies, that Starcraft II was what you made it. With enough effort, you could take any playstyle to the top, from cannon rushing to macro play. That made the game exciting, I had so much to learn. But now, I just need to learn a few builds and do them solidly. That makes it easy, but unfortunately my mechanics, and everyone mechanics have a limit, and then you are stuck. You can't be inventive, you can't make the game what you want it to be. For instance, Terran can't just invent new timings to kill Protoss early like they could in WOL, because the MSC is just too strong against any early attack. Not sure which metagame you were playing in 2011 but towards the latter end of the year, 2 rax pressure was pretty much dead, and after the summer of the 1-1-1, the all-in variant was virtually solved and slowly fell off from the ladder. Like, 80% of openers from Terran in any match-up was the exact same 1 rax fe. I would say that Protoss needs a revamp more than anything. Then work from there. I dare to bet that Terran needs more variety in styles first, before we are talking revamp of toss (not implying toss is well designed)
If you aren't implying that protoss is well designed than you would agree that they do indeed need a revamp.
TvZ was the best match up in terms of playability and spectating (at least until widow mines). You look at Protoss and you see that ZvP is the same shitty match up it was back in WoL. Protoss does some kind of FE into a 2 base all-in and once Zerg figures out how to fend it off, protoss need to look for another kind of all-in or something. This is mostly due to the fact that protoss gateway units are shit compared to the other units they have. They HAVE to be shit or else protoss would be OP with warpgates and forcefields. Thing is, now that means that Protoss as a race is broken as their basic, low-tier units are shit and their higher tier units are ridiculously strong to compensate for that.
Hence first fix Protoss, then work out all three.
This post is hugely over-simplified so you could nit-pick the shit out of it if you wanted to, but that's the gist of it.
|
Russian Federation40190 Posts
On September 22 2013 03:30 rd wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2013 03:28 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:27 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:25 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:22 Incognoto wrote:On September 22 2013 03:16 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:13 Xiphos wrote:On September 22 2013 03:06 Incognoto wrote:On September 22 2013 02:04 Xiphos wrote:
How to get rid of Deathball?
1. Alter Unit pathing
2. Introduce more harassment-oriented units (BW had Lurkers, higher Storm dmg, Reavers, faster Vulture firing rate, andWratih/Mutalisk micromanagement)
3. High ground advantage so the game become more positional-based to salvage units.
4. Higher AOE dmg, this forces splits, this also helps with the harass elements.
Pretty simplistic conceptual overhaul. Blizzard won't do them btw.
Oh yeah get rid of all macro mechanics, it builds army way too fast. Why harass when I get there, the base will be heavily defended? Better to build my own ball of death, its far more efficient. I don't see deathball in TvZ I see a lot of short battles tho. You see short battles but you see a lot of them, because Terran and Zerg have huge production capacities. TvZ has always arguably been the best match-up to spectate for this reason. It's fast paced with a lot of action -- the antonym of actual deathball match-ups which is usually anything with a Protoss in it. edit: On September 22 2013 02:40 BronzeKnee wrote:On September 21 2013 03:40 Xeris wrote:
One of the biggest problems (game play) is unsolvable. HoTS is definitely a better game than WoL, but the inherent aspects of the game engine can't be overcome by balance or new units, I fear Brood War will always be more exciting to watch than StarCraft 2. And playing the game is utterly boring now too. When I used to que up on ladder (mid/high masters) sometime in 2011, I had no idea what was coming, no matter what race I was up against. If it was Terran, it could be a CC first, it could be any variation of 1-1-1, it could be 2 rax pressure expand, ect... There were so many viable strategies, that Starcraft II was what you made it. With enough effort, you could take any playstyle to the top, from cannon rushing to macro play. That made the game exciting, I had so much to learn. But now, I just need to learn a few builds and do them solidly. That makes it easy, but unfortunately my mechanics, and everyone mechanics have a limit, and then you are stuck. You can't be inventive, you can't make the game what you want it to be. For instance, Terran can't just invent new timings to kill Protoss early like they could in WOL, because the MSC is just too strong against any early attack. Not sure which metagame you were playing in 2011 but towards the latter end of the year, 2 rax pressure was pretty much dead, and after the summer of the 1-1-1, the all-in variant was virtually solved and slowly fell off from the ladder. Like, 80% of openers from Terran in any match-up was the exact same 1 rax fe. I would say that Protoss needs a revamp more than anything. Then work from there. I dare to bet that Terran needs more variety in styles first, before we are talking revamp of toss (not implying toss is well designed) A revamp of Toss might provide Terran the opportunity to play with more variety (mech). Only in TvP. Revamp of toss will not affect Terran's mech outside of TvP. TvP is the match-up everyone wants to see mech in the most, or at least the BW fans do, and the way Protoss is designed will never allow mech to be competitive at the highest level.
TvP is match-up where i want to see the mech the least tbh. Because instead of TvDeathball we get to see DeathballvP or even deathball vs deathball (lol).
|
On September 22 2013 03:32 lolfail9001 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2013 03:30 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:28 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:27 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:25 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:22 Incognoto wrote:On September 22 2013 03:16 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:13 Xiphos wrote:On September 22 2013 03:06 Incognoto wrote:On September 22 2013 02:04 Xiphos wrote:
How to get rid of Deathball?
1. Alter Unit pathing
2. Introduce more harassment-oriented units (BW had Lurkers, higher Storm dmg, Reavers, faster Vulture firing rate, andWratih/Mutalisk micromanagement)
3. High ground advantage so the game become more positional-based to salvage units.
4. Higher AOE dmg, this forces splits, this also helps with the harass elements.
Pretty simplistic conceptual overhaul. Blizzard won't do them btw.
Oh yeah get rid of all macro mechanics, it builds army way too fast. Why harass when I get there, the base will be heavily defended? Better to build my own ball of death, its far more efficient. I don't see deathball in TvZ I see a lot of short battles tho. You see short battles but you see a lot of them, because Terran and Zerg have huge production capacities. TvZ has always arguably been the best match-up to spectate for this reason. It's fast paced with a lot of action -- the antonym of actual deathball match-ups which is usually anything with a Protoss in it. edit: On September 22 2013 02:40 BronzeKnee wrote:On September 21 2013 03:40 Xeris wrote:
One of the biggest problems (game play) is unsolvable. HoTS is definitely a better game than WoL, but the inherent aspects of the game engine can't be overcome by balance or new units, I fear Brood War will always be more exciting to watch than StarCraft 2. And playing the game is utterly boring now too. When I used to que up on ladder (mid/high masters) sometime in 2011, I had no idea what was coming, no matter what race I was up against. If it was Terran, it could be a CC first, it could be any variation of 1-1-1, it could be 2 rax pressure expand, ect... There were so many viable strategies, that Starcraft II was what you made it. With enough effort, you could take any playstyle to the top, from cannon rushing to macro play. That made the game exciting, I had so much to learn. But now, I just need to learn a few builds and do them solidly. That makes it easy, but unfortunately my mechanics, and everyone mechanics have a limit, and then you are stuck. You can't be inventive, you can't make the game what you want it to be. For instance, Terran can't just invent new timings to kill Protoss early like they could in WOL, because the MSC is just too strong against any early attack. Not sure which metagame you were playing in 2011 but towards the latter end of the year, 2 rax pressure was pretty much dead, and after the summer of the 1-1-1, the all-in variant was virtually solved and slowly fell off from the ladder. Like, 80% of openers from Terran in any match-up was the exact same 1 rax fe. I would say that Protoss needs a revamp more than anything. Then work from there. I dare to bet that Terran needs more variety in styles first, before we are talking revamp of toss (not implying toss is well designed) A revamp of Toss might provide Terran the opportunity to play with more variety (mech). Only in TvP. Revamp of toss will not affect Terran's mech outside of TvP. TvP is the match-up everyone wants to see mech in the most, or at least the BW fans do, and the way Protoss is designed will never allow mech to be competitive at the highest level. TvP is match-up where i want to see the mech the least tbh. Because instead of TvDeathball we get to see DeathballvP or even deathball vs deathball (lol).
A revamp of Protoss would imply the breaking of Protoss death balls. See BW for details.
|
On September 22 2013 02:07 Assirra wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2013 01:12 ander wrote:
To me, the answer is in this question: If SC2 was NOT released as a successor to BW and had a completely different name, would it be as popular as it is now? I don't really think so. Tbh, i think it would be otherwise. All these comparisons to BW would stop and guess where 99% of the "problems with SC2" come from? I really think it would have been better to release it as a different name. It would have a chance to work its way up on its own and if it failed so be it. Just read all the fixes here, it comes down to a single thing "make it like BW".
but how many people would know about the game in the 1st place if it was called "space wars"? every single person i know who bought sc2 did so simply because the name of the game was "starcraft 2". they never played the beta, never watched previews of the game, etc. they only bought the game for the name
|
On September 22 2013 03:06 Incognoto wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2013 02:04 Xiphos wrote:
How to get rid of Deathball?
1. Alter Unit pathing
2. Introduce more harassment-oriented units (BW had Lurkers, higher Storm dmg, Reavers, faster Vulture firing rate, andWratih/Mutalisk micromanagement)
3. High ground advantage so the game become more positional-based to salvage units.
4. Higher AOE dmg, this forces splits, this also helps with the harass elements.
Pretty simplistic conceptual overhaul. Blizzard won't do them btw.
Oh yeah get rid of all macro mechanics, it builds army way too fast. Why harass when I get there, the base will be heavily defended? Better to build my own ball of death, its far more efficient. I don't see deathball in TvZ
Deathball is a bad word, because too many people get hung up on about the BALL part of it and keep arguing "X isnt a deathball, because it isnt ball-shaped", which is totally unimportant. The term "deathball" is outdated and a bit misleading and the real problem is "critical numbers".
Units are balanced for a certain "state", but once there are a certain number of units on the battlefield - in that automatically maximized unit density of SC2 - you achieve a "higher state" because they can kill approaching units more easily and with less risk than they could do before having such high numbers. This is why having such a second state in a (supposed) strategy game is rather terrible, because you can balance for only one state of existence. For some units balance has been pushed to "critical number state" and many times the casters say something like "unit x is useless unless you have X of them" ... usually connected to one-shotting a certain type of opposing unit.
The existence of critical numbers is a consequence of unlimited unit selection, massive production capability and the "perfect" unit pathing. These are the things that need to be changed in order to get rid of it on the ground and there need to be good AoE damage against critical numbers in the air ... stuff like the Scourge, Corsair and Valkyrie which by themselves are unattractive to build and wont win you the game.
Solutions are just around the corner ... just look at how BW did it, compare it to the state of SC2 and you are fine.
|
On September 22 2013 03:32 lolfail9001 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2013 03:30 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:28 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:27 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:25 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:22 Incognoto wrote:On September 22 2013 03:16 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:13 Xiphos wrote:On September 22 2013 03:06 Incognoto wrote:On September 22 2013 02:04 Xiphos wrote:
How to get rid of Deathball?
1. Alter Unit pathing
2. Introduce more harassment-oriented units (BW had Lurkers, higher Storm dmg, Reavers, faster Vulture firing rate, andWratih/Mutalisk micromanagement)
3. High ground advantage so the game become more positional-based to salvage units.
4. Higher AOE dmg, this forces splits, this also helps with the harass elements.
Pretty simplistic conceptual overhaul. Blizzard won't do them btw.
Oh yeah get rid of all macro mechanics, it builds army way too fast. Why harass when I get there, the base will be heavily defended? Better to build my own ball of death, its far more efficient. I don't see deathball in TvZ I see a lot of short battles tho. You see short battles but you see a lot of them, because Terran and Zerg have huge production capacities. TvZ has always arguably been the best match-up to spectate for this reason. It's fast paced with a lot of action -- the antonym of actual deathball match-ups which is usually anything with a Protoss in it. edit: On September 22 2013 02:40 BronzeKnee wrote:On September 21 2013 03:40 Xeris wrote:
One of the biggest problems (game play) is unsolvable. HoTS is definitely a better game than WoL, but the inherent aspects of the game engine can't be overcome by balance or new units, I fear Brood War will always be more exciting to watch than StarCraft 2. And playing the game is utterly boring now too. When I used to que up on ladder (mid/high masters) sometime in 2011, I had no idea what was coming, no matter what race I was up against. If it was Terran, it could be a CC first, it could be any variation of 1-1-1, it could be 2 rax pressure expand, ect... There were so many viable strategies, that Starcraft II was what you made it. With enough effort, you could take any playstyle to the top, from cannon rushing to macro play. That made the game exciting, I had so much to learn. But now, I just need to learn a few builds and do them solidly. That makes it easy, but unfortunately my mechanics, and everyone mechanics have a limit, and then you are stuck. You can't be inventive, you can't make the game what you want it to be. For instance, Terran can't just invent new timings to kill Protoss early like they could in WOL, because the MSC is just too strong against any early attack. Not sure which metagame you were playing in 2011 but towards the latter end of the year, 2 rax pressure was pretty much dead, and after the summer of the 1-1-1, the all-in variant was virtually solved and slowly fell off from the ladder. Like, 80% of openers from Terran in any match-up was the exact same 1 rax fe. I would say that Protoss needs a revamp more than anything. Then work from there. I dare to bet that Terran needs more variety in styles first, before we are talking revamp of toss (not implying toss is well designed) A revamp of Toss might provide Terran the opportunity to play with more variety (mech). Only in TvP. Revamp of toss will not affect Terran's mech outside of TvP. TvP is the match-up everyone wants to see mech in the most, or at least the BW fans do, and the way Protoss is designed will never allow mech to be competitive at the highest level. TvP is match-up where i want to see the mech the least tbh. Because instead of TvDeathball we get to see DeathballvP or even deathball vs deathball (lol).
Mech isn't deathball. Mech is all about carefully positioning your tanks and shit so that they can fuck shit up without getting fucked themselves. It's slow pushing and controlling space and/or areas of the map.
A deathball just moves around and fucks shit up as it moves.
On September 22 2013 03:34 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2013 03:06 Incognoto wrote:On September 22 2013 02:04 Xiphos wrote:
How to get rid of Deathball?
1. Alter Unit pathing
2. Introduce more harassment-oriented units (BW had Lurkers, higher Storm dmg, Reavers, faster Vulture firing rate, andWratih/Mutalisk micromanagement)
3. High ground advantage so the game become more positional-based to salvage units.
4. Higher AOE dmg, this forces splits, this also helps with the harass elements.
Pretty simplistic conceptual overhaul. Blizzard won't do them btw.
Oh yeah get rid of all macro mechanics, it builds army way too fast. Why harass when I get there, the base will be heavily defended? Better to build my own ball of death, its far more efficient. I don't see deathball in TvZ Deathball is a bad word, because too many people get hung up on about the BALL part of it and keep arguing "X isnt a deathball, because it isnt ball-shaped", which is totally unimportant. The term "deathball" is outdated and a bit misleading and the real problem is "critical numbers". Units are balanced for a certain "state", but once there are a certain number of units on the battlefield - in that automatically maximized unit density of SC2 - you achieve a "higher state" because they can kill approaching units more easily and with less risk than they could do before having such high numbers. This is why having such a second state in a (supposed) strategy game is rather terrible, because you can balance for only one state of existence. For some units balance has been pushed to "critical number state" and many times the casters say something like "unit x is useless unless you have X of them" ... usually connected to one-shotting a certain type of opposing unit. The existence of critical numbers is a consequence of unlimited unit selection, massive production capability and the "perfect" unit pathing. These are the things that need to be changed in order to get rid of it on the ground and there need to be good AoE damage against critical numbers in the air ... stuff like the Scourge, Corsair and Valkyrie which by themselves are unattractive to build and wont win you the game. Solutions are just around the corner ... just look at how BW did it, compare it to the state of SC2 and you are fine.
Wow nice post. I think I agree with you
|
Russian Federation40190 Posts
On September 22 2013 03:32 Incognoto wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2013 03:25 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:22 Incognoto wrote:On September 22 2013 03:16 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:13 Xiphos wrote:On September 22 2013 03:06 Incognoto wrote:On September 22 2013 02:04 Xiphos wrote:
How to get rid of Deathball?
1. Alter Unit pathing
2. Introduce more harassment-oriented units (BW had Lurkers, higher Storm dmg, Reavers, faster Vulture firing rate, andWratih/Mutalisk micromanagement)
3. High ground advantage so the game become more positional-based to salvage units.
4. Higher AOE dmg, this forces splits, this also helps with the harass elements.
Pretty simplistic conceptual overhaul. Blizzard won't do them btw.
Oh yeah get rid of all macro mechanics, it builds army way too fast. Why harass when I get there, the base will be heavily defended? Better to build my own ball of death, its far more efficient. I don't see deathball in TvZ I see a lot of short battles tho. You see short battles but you see a lot of them, because Terran and Zerg have huge production capacities. TvZ has always arguably been the best match-up to spectate for this reason. It's fast paced with a lot of action -- the antonym of actual deathball match-ups which is usually anything with a Protoss in it. edit: On September 22 2013 02:40 BronzeKnee wrote:On September 21 2013 03:40 Xeris wrote:
One of the biggest problems (game play) is unsolvable. HoTS is definitely a better game than WoL, but the inherent aspects of the game engine can't be overcome by balance or new units, I fear Brood War will always be more exciting to watch than StarCraft 2. And playing the game is utterly boring now too. When I used to que up on ladder (mid/high masters) sometime in 2011, I had no idea what was coming, no matter what race I was up against. If it was Terran, it could be a CC first, it could be any variation of 1-1-1, it could be 2 rax pressure expand, ect... There were so many viable strategies, that Starcraft II was what you made it. With enough effort, you could take any playstyle to the top, from cannon rushing to macro play. That made the game exciting, I had so much to learn. But now, I just need to learn a few builds and do them solidly. That makes it easy, but unfortunately my mechanics, and everyone mechanics have a limit, and then you are stuck. You can't be inventive, you can't make the game what you want it to be. For instance, Terran can't just invent new timings to kill Protoss early like they could in WOL, because the MSC is just too strong against any early attack. Not sure which metagame you were playing in 2011 but towards the latter end of the year, 2 rax pressure was pretty much dead, and after the summer of the 1-1-1, the all-in variant was virtually solved and slowly fell off from the ladder. Like, 80% of openers from Terran in any match-up was the exact same 1 rax fe. I would say that Protoss needs a revamp more than anything. Then work from there. I dare to bet that Terran needs more variety in styles first, before we are talking revamp of toss (not implying toss is well designed) If you aren't implying that protoss is well designed than you would agree that they do indeed need a revamp. TvZ was the best match up in terms of playability and spectating (at least until widow mines). You look at Protoss and you see that ZvP is the same shitty match up it was back in WoL. Protoss does some kind of FE into a 2 base all-in and once Zerg figures out how to fend it off, protoss need to look for another kind of all-in or something. This is mostly due to the fact that protoss gateway units are shit compared to the other units they have. They HAVE to be shit or else protoss would be OP with warpgates and forcefields. Thing is, now that means that Protoss as a race is broken as their basic, low-tier units are shit and their higher tier units are ridiculously strong to compensate for that. Hence first fix Protoss, then work out all three. This post is hugely over-simplified so you could nit-pick the shit out of it if you wanted to, but that's the gist of it.
PvZ is now best non-mirror, what are you talking about? TvP sucks, yes, but PvZ is one of the most enjoyable MUs for me now (and i play Z). TvZ is just second best non-mirror, or 2nd worst.
|
On September 22 2013 03:34 rysecake wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2013 02:07 Assirra wrote:On September 22 2013 01:12 ander wrote:
To me, the answer is in this question: If SC2 was NOT released as a successor to BW and had a completely different name, would it be as popular as it is now? I don't really think so. Tbh, i think it would be otherwise. All these comparisons to BW would stop and guess where 99% of the "problems with SC2" come from? I really think it would have been better to release it as a different name. It would have a chance to work its way up on its own and if it failed so be it. Just read all the fixes here, it comes down to a single thing "make it like BW". but how many people would know about the game in the 1st place if it was called "space wars"? every single person i know who bought sc2 did so simply because the name of the game was "starcraft 2". they never played the beta, never watched previews of the game, etc. they only bought the game for the name
I would have kept playing BW and I think most of my friends would too.
|
I agree with every thing, great post. I think dreamhacks and mlgs solve the problem of seeing high level competition, I think otherwise it is much better to segregate and push for a TI style event at blizzcon.
|
Russian Federation40190 Posts
On September 22 2013 03:34 Incognoto wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2013 03:32 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:30 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:28 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:27 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:25 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:22 Incognoto wrote:On September 22 2013 03:16 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:13 Xiphos wrote:On September 22 2013 03:06 Incognoto wrote:
[quote]
I don't see deathball in TvZ I see a lot of short battles tho. You see short battles but you see a lot of them, because Terran and Zerg have huge production capacities. TvZ has always arguably been the best match-up to spectate for this reason. It's fast paced with a lot of action -- the antonym of actual deathball match-ups which is usually anything with a Protoss in it. edit: On September 22 2013 02:40 BronzeKnee wrote:On September 21 2013 03:40 Xeris wrote:
One of the biggest problems (game play) is unsolvable. HoTS is definitely a better game than WoL, but the inherent aspects of the game engine can't be overcome by balance or new units, I fear Brood War will always be more exciting to watch than StarCraft 2. And playing the game is utterly boring now too. When I used to que up on ladder (mid/high masters) sometime in 2011, I had no idea what was coming, no matter what race I was up against. If it was Terran, it could be a CC first, it could be any variation of 1-1-1, it could be 2 rax pressure expand, ect... There were so many viable strategies, that Starcraft II was what you made it. With enough effort, you could take any playstyle to the top, from cannon rushing to macro play. That made the game exciting, I had so much to learn. But now, I just need to learn a few builds and do them solidly. That makes it easy, but unfortunately my mechanics, and everyone mechanics have a limit, and then you are stuck. You can't be inventive, you can't make the game what you want it to be. For instance, Terran can't just invent new timings to kill Protoss early like they could in WOL, because the MSC is just too strong against any early attack. Not sure which metagame you were playing in 2011 but towards the latter end of the year, 2 rax pressure was pretty much dead, and after the summer of the 1-1-1, the all-in variant was virtually solved and slowly fell off from the ladder. Like, 80% of openers from Terran in any match-up was the exact same 1 rax fe. I would say that Protoss needs a revamp more than anything. Then work from there. I dare to bet that Terran needs more variety in styles first, before we are talking revamp of toss (not implying toss is well designed) A revamp of Toss might provide Terran the opportunity to play with more variety (mech). Only in TvP. Revamp of toss will not affect Terran's mech outside of TvP. TvP is the match-up everyone wants to see mech in the most, or at least the BW fans do, and the way Protoss is designed will never allow mech to be competitive at the highest level. TvP is match-up where i want to see the mech the least tbh. Because instead of TvDeathball we get to see DeathballvP or even deathball vs deathball (lol). Mech isn't deathball. Mech is all about carefully positioning your tanks and shit so that they can fuck shit up without getting fucked themselves. It's slow pushing and controlling space and/or areas of the map. A deathball just moves around and fucks shit up as it moves.
So the only difference is move speed and deployment time  ?
On September 22 2013 03:33 rd wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2013 03:32 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:30 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:28 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:27 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:25 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:22 Incognoto wrote:On September 22 2013 03:16 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:13 Xiphos wrote:On September 22 2013 03:06 Incognoto wrote:
[quote]
I don't see deathball in TvZ I see a lot of short battles tho. You see short battles but you see a lot of them, because Terran and Zerg have huge production capacities. TvZ has always arguably been the best match-up to spectate for this reason. It's fast paced with a lot of action -- the antonym of actual deathball match-ups which is usually anything with a Protoss in it. edit: On September 22 2013 02:40 BronzeKnee wrote:On September 21 2013 03:40 Xeris wrote:
One of the biggest problems (game play) is unsolvable. HoTS is definitely a better game than WoL, but the inherent aspects of the game engine can't be overcome by balance or new units, I fear Brood War will always be more exciting to watch than StarCraft 2. And playing the game is utterly boring now too. When I used to que up on ladder (mid/high masters) sometime in 2011, I had no idea what was coming, no matter what race I was up against. If it was Terran, it could be a CC first, it could be any variation of 1-1-1, it could be 2 rax pressure expand, ect... There were so many viable strategies, that Starcraft II was what you made it. With enough effort, you could take any playstyle to the top, from cannon rushing to macro play. That made the game exciting, I had so much to learn. But now, I just need to learn a few builds and do them solidly. That makes it easy, but unfortunately my mechanics, and everyone mechanics have a limit, and then you are stuck. You can't be inventive, you can't make the game what you want it to be. For instance, Terran can't just invent new timings to kill Protoss early like they could in WOL, because the MSC is just too strong against any early attack. Not sure which metagame you were playing in 2011 but towards the latter end of the year, 2 rax pressure was pretty much dead, and after the summer of the 1-1-1, the all-in variant was virtually solved and slowly fell off from the ladder. Like, 80% of openers from Terran in any match-up was the exact same 1 rax fe. I would say that Protoss needs a revamp more than anything. Then work from there. I dare to bet that Terran needs more variety in styles first, before we are talking revamp of toss (not implying toss is well designed) A revamp of Toss might provide Terran the opportunity to play with more variety (mech). Only in TvP. Revamp of toss will not affect Terran's mech outside of TvP. TvP is the match-up everyone wants to see mech in the most, or at least the BW fans do, and the way Protoss is designed will never allow mech to be competitive at the highest level. TvP is match-up where i want to see the mech the least tbh. Because instead of TvDeathball we get to see DeathballvP or even deathball vs deathball (lol). A revamp of Protoss would imply the breaking of Protoss death balls. See BW for details.
Hence DeathballvP instead of TvDeathball
|
So the only difference is move speed and deployment time?
Yes that difference is so ridiculously fundamental it does indeed make a difference. You can catch a mech army out of position, you can't do so with a deathball.
Also having more time to prepare for a push and take advantage of immobility is also a very huge advantage.
|
On September 22 2013 03:36 lolfail9001 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2013 03:34 Incognoto wrote:On September 22 2013 03:32 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:30 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:28 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:27 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:25 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:22 Incognoto wrote:On September 22 2013 03:16 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:13 Xiphos wrote:
[quote]
I see a lot of short battles tho. You see short battles but you see a lot of them, because Terran and Zerg have huge production capacities. TvZ has always arguably been the best match-up to spectate for this reason. It's fast paced with a lot of action -- the antonym of actual deathball match-ups which is usually anything with a Protoss in it. edit: On September 22 2013 02:40 BronzeKnee wrote:
[quote]
And playing the game is utterly boring now too. When I used to que up on ladder (mid/high masters) sometime in 2011, I had no idea what was coming, no matter what race I was up against. If it was Terran, it could be a CC first, it could be any variation of 1-1-1, it could be 2 rax pressure expand, ect... There were so many viable strategies, that Starcraft II was what you made it. With enough effort, you could take any playstyle to the top, from cannon rushing to macro play. That made the game exciting, I had so much to learn. But now, I just need to learn a few builds and do them solidly. That makes it easy, but unfortunately my mechanics, and everyone mechanics have a limit, and then you are stuck. You can't be inventive, you can't make the game what you want it to be. For instance, Terran can't just invent new timings to kill Protoss early like they could in WOL, because the MSC is just too strong against any early attack. Not sure which metagame you were playing in 2011 but towards the latter end of the year, 2 rax pressure was pretty much dead, and after the summer of the 1-1-1, the all-in variant was virtually solved and slowly fell off from the ladder. Like, 80% of openers from Terran in any match-up was the exact same 1 rax fe. I would say that Protoss needs a revamp more than anything. Then work from there. I dare to bet that Terran needs more variety in styles first, before we are talking revamp of toss (not implying toss is well designed) A revamp of Toss might provide Terran the opportunity to play with more variety (mech). Only in TvP. Revamp of toss will not affect Terran's mech outside of TvP. TvP is the match-up everyone wants to see mech in the most, or at least the BW fans do, and the way Protoss is designed will never allow mech to be competitive at the highest level. TvP is match-up where i want to see the mech the least tbh. Because instead of TvDeathball we get to see DeathballvP or even deathball vs deathball (lol). Mech isn't deathball. Mech is all about carefully positioning your tanks and shit so that they can fuck shit up without getting fucked themselves. It's slow pushing and controlling space and/or areas of the map. A deathball just moves around and fucks shit up as it moves. So the only difference is move speed and deployment time ? Show nested quote +On September 22 2013 03:33 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:32 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:30 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:28 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:27 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:25 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:22 Incognoto wrote:On September 22 2013 03:16 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:13 Xiphos wrote:
[quote]
I see a lot of short battles tho. You see short battles but you see a lot of them, because Terran and Zerg have huge production capacities. TvZ has always arguably been the best match-up to spectate for this reason. It's fast paced with a lot of action -- the antonym of actual deathball match-ups which is usually anything with a Protoss in it. edit: On September 22 2013 02:40 BronzeKnee wrote:
[quote]
And playing the game is utterly boring now too. When I used to que up on ladder (mid/high masters) sometime in 2011, I had no idea what was coming, no matter what race I was up against. If it was Terran, it could be a CC first, it could be any variation of 1-1-1, it could be 2 rax pressure expand, ect... There were so many viable strategies, that Starcraft II was what you made it. With enough effort, you could take any playstyle to the top, from cannon rushing to macro play. That made the game exciting, I had so much to learn. But now, I just need to learn a few builds and do them solidly. That makes it easy, but unfortunately my mechanics, and everyone mechanics have a limit, and then you are stuck. You can't be inventive, you can't make the game what you want it to be. For instance, Terran can't just invent new timings to kill Protoss early like they could in WOL, because the MSC is just too strong against any early attack. Not sure which metagame you were playing in 2011 but towards the latter end of the year, 2 rax pressure was pretty much dead, and after the summer of the 1-1-1, the all-in variant was virtually solved and slowly fell off from the ladder. Like, 80% of openers from Terran in any match-up was the exact same 1 rax fe. I would say that Protoss needs a revamp more than anything. Then work from there. I dare to bet that Terran needs more variety in styles first, before we are talking revamp of toss (not implying toss is well designed) A revamp of Toss might provide Terran the opportunity to play with more variety (mech). Only in TvP. Revamp of toss will not affect Terran's mech outside of TvP. TvP is the match-up everyone wants to see mech in the most, or at least the BW fans do, and the way Protoss is designed will never allow mech to be competitive at the highest level. TvP is match-up where i want to see the mech the least tbh. Because instead of TvDeathball we get to see DeathballvP or even deathball vs deathball (lol). A revamp of Protoss would imply the breaking of Protoss death balls. See BW for details. Hence DeathballvP instead of TvDeathball
Because mech isn't actually a ball. It's more like a line. So it'd actually be PvDeathlineofcreepingdeath. The only thing mech and the Protoss "deathball" have in common is that they're both defensive strategies that initially turtle. But they're vastly different in application and how they're dealt with. It's pretty sad how little you know of it, even if this is a different game.
|
Russian Federation40190 Posts
On September 22 2013 03:42 Incognoto wrote:Yes that difference is so ridiculously fundamental it does indeed make a difference. You can catch a mech army out of position, you can't do so with a deathball. Also having more time to prepare for a push and take advantage of immobility is also a very huge advantage.
You can catch deathball out of position, but that implies existence of such positions on maps and that is another question.
Average speed of mech army between deployments > average speed of deathball if we imply that average speed of composition is speed of it's slowest part.On September 22 2013 03:45 rd wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2013 03:36 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:34 Incognoto wrote:On September 22 2013 03:32 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:30 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:28 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:27 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:25 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:22 Incognoto wrote:On September 22 2013 03:16 rd wrote:
[quote]
You see short battles but you see a lot of them, because Terran and Zerg have huge production capacities. TvZ has always arguably been the best match-up to spectate for this reason. It's fast paced with a lot of action -- the antonym of actual deathball match-ups which is usually anything with a Protoss in it.
edit:
[quote]
Not sure which metagame you were playing in 2011 but towards the latter end of the year, 2 rax pressure was pretty much dead, and after the summer of the 1-1-1, the all-in variant was virtually solved and slowly fell off from the ladder. Like, 80% of openers from Terran in any match-up was the exact same 1 rax fe. I would say that Protoss needs a revamp more than anything. Then work from there. I dare to bet that Terran needs more variety in styles first, before we are talking revamp of toss (not implying toss is well designed) A revamp of Toss might provide Terran the opportunity to play with more variety (mech). Only in TvP. Revamp of toss will not affect Terran's mech outside of TvP. TvP is the match-up everyone wants to see mech in the most, or at least the BW fans do, and the way Protoss is designed will never allow mech to be competitive at the highest level. TvP is match-up where i want to see the mech the least tbh. Because instead of TvDeathball we get to see DeathballvP or even deathball vs deathball (lol). Mech isn't deathball. Mech is all about carefully positioning your tanks and shit so that they can fuck shit up without getting fucked themselves. It's slow pushing and controlling space and/or areas of the map. A deathball just moves around and fucks shit up as it moves. So the only difference is move speed and deployment time ? On September 22 2013 03:33 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:32 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:30 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:28 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:27 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:25 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:22 Incognoto wrote:On September 22 2013 03:16 rd wrote:
[quote]
You see short battles but you see a lot of them, because Terran and Zerg have huge production capacities. TvZ has always arguably been the best match-up to spectate for this reason. It's fast paced with a lot of action -- the antonym of actual deathball match-ups which is usually anything with a Protoss in it.
edit:
[quote]
Not sure which metagame you were playing in 2011 but towards the latter end of the year, 2 rax pressure was pretty much dead, and after the summer of the 1-1-1, the all-in variant was virtually solved and slowly fell off from the ladder. Like, 80% of openers from Terran in any match-up was the exact same 1 rax fe. I would say that Protoss needs a revamp more than anything. Then work from there. I dare to bet that Terran needs more variety in styles first, before we are talking revamp of toss (not implying toss is well designed) A revamp of Toss might provide Terran the opportunity to play with more variety (mech). Only in TvP. Revamp of toss will not affect Terran's mech outside of TvP. TvP is the match-up everyone wants to see mech in the most, or at least the BW fans do, and the way Protoss is designed will never allow mech to be competitive at the highest level. TvP is match-up where i want to see the mech the least tbh. Because instead of TvDeathball we get to see DeathballvP or even deathball vs deathball (lol). A revamp of Protoss would imply the breaking of Protoss death balls. See BW for details. Hence DeathballvP instead of TvDeathball Because mech isn't actually a ball. It's more like a line. So it'd actually be PvDeathlineofcreepingdeath. The only thing mech and the Protoss "deathball" have in common is that they're both defensive strategies that initially turtle. But they're vastly different in application and how they're dealt with. It's pretty sad how little you know of it, even if this is a different game.
Agree, since i was fed up with seeing 2 mech games in my life: one of encounters between Flash vs Best (do not recall map sadly) and one of encounters between Bogus and Soulkey (ground zero). They both were frustrating to watch tbh, even if that implied great skill of winner. And yes, i am aware that mech is deathball without a ball, but with line. Also, application for both is simple: kill you enemy.
|
It's nice we have examined issues with SC2 so many times in such depth and passion, suggestions and so.. But is there actually ANY chance something is going to happen/change?
|
On September 22 2013 03:45 lolfail9001 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2013 03:42 Incognoto wrote:So the only difference is move speed and deployment time? Yes that difference is so ridiculously fundamental it does indeed make a difference. You can catch a mech army out of position, you can't do so with a deathball. Also having more time to prepare for a push and take advantage of immobility is also a very huge advantage. You can catch deathball out of position, but that implies existence of such positions on maps and that is another question. Average speed of mech army between deployments > average speed of deathball if we imply that average speed of composition is speed of it's slowest part. Show nested quote +On September 22 2013 03:45 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:36 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:34 Incognoto wrote:On September 22 2013 03:32 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:30 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:28 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:27 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:25 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:22 Incognoto wrote:
[quote]
I would say that Protoss needs a revamp more than anything. Then work from there.
I dare to bet that Terran needs more variety in styles first, before we are talking revamp of toss (not implying toss is well designed) A revamp of Toss might provide Terran the opportunity to play with more variety (mech). Only in TvP. Revamp of toss will not affect Terran's mech outside of TvP. TvP is the match-up everyone wants to see mech in the most, or at least the BW fans do, and the way Protoss is designed will never allow mech to be competitive at the highest level. TvP is match-up where i want to see the mech the least tbh. Because instead of TvDeathball we get to see DeathballvP or even deathball vs deathball (lol). Mech isn't deathball. Mech is all about carefully positioning your tanks and shit so that they can fuck shit up without getting fucked themselves. It's slow pushing and controlling space and/or areas of the map. A deathball just moves around and fucks shit up as it moves. So the only difference is move speed and deployment time ? On September 22 2013 03:33 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:32 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:30 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:28 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:27 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:25 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:22 Incognoto wrote:
[quote]
I would say that Protoss needs a revamp more than anything. Then work from there.
I dare to bet that Terran needs more variety in styles first, before we are talking revamp of toss (not implying toss is well designed) A revamp of Toss might provide Terran the opportunity to play with more variety (mech). Only in TvP. Revamp of toss will not affect Terran's mech outside of TvP. TvP is the match-up everyone wants to see mech in the most, or at least the BW fans do, and the way Protoss is designed will never allow mech to be competitive at the highest level. TvP is match-up where i want to see the mech the least tbh. Because instead of TvDeathball we get to see DeathballvP or even deathball vs deathball (lol). A revamp of Protoss would imply the breaking of Protoss death balls. See BW for details. Hence DeathballvP instead of TvDeathball Because mech isn't actually a ball. It's more like a line. So it'd actually be PvDeathlineofcreepingdeath. The only thing mech and the Protoss "deathball" have in common is that they're both defensive strategies that initially turtle. But they're vastly different in application and how they're dealt with. It's pretty sad how little you know of it, even if this is a different game. Agree, since i was fed up with seeing 2 mech games in my life: one of encounters between Flash vs Best (do not recall map sadly) and one of encounters between Bogus and Soulkey (ground zero). They both were frustrating to watch tbh, even if that implied great skill of winner. And yes, i am aware that mech is deathball without a ball, but with line. Also, application for both is simple: kill you enemy.
By your definition anything is a death ball. It's rather unfortunate you embrace ignorance and summarily dismiss something rather than looking into it at all and just assume your irrational whims are correct. But this is why the game isn't designed around irrational whims (or at least not anymore).
On September 22 2013 03:48 Everlong wrote:
It's nice we have examined issues with SC2 so many times in such depth and passion, suggestions and so.. But is there actually ANY chance something is going to happen/change?
I would say so, yes. The Diablo III team just removed the auction house after a LOT of community feedback (and by feedback I mean bitching, moaning, and quitting), which is a huge, huge admittance of a fundamental mistake, and they're going to be forced to redesign itemization entirely. They're independent teams, but Blizzard has recently seemed to move in a direction where they're much more receptive to complaints about their games that follow up with a decline in players.
|
On September 22 2013 03:34 Incognoto wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2013 03:32 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:30 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:28 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:27 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:25 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:22 Incognoto wrote:On September 22 2013 03:16 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:13 Xiphos wrote:On September 22 2013 03:06 Incognoto wrote:
[quote]
I don't see deathball in TvZ I see a lot of short battles tho. You see short battles but you see a lot of them, because Terran and Zerg have huge production capacities. TvZ has always arguably been the best match-up to spectate for this reason. It's fast paced with a lot of action -- the antonym of actual deathball match-ups which is usually anything with a Protoss in it. edit: On September 22 2013 02:40 BronzeKnee wrote:On September 21 2013 03:40 Xeris wrote:
One of the biggest problems (game play) is unsolvable. HoTS is definitely a better game than WoL, but the inherent aspects of the game engine can't be overcome by balance or new units, I fear Brood War will always be more exciting to watch than StarCraft 2. And playing the game is utterly boring now too. When I used to que up on ladder (mid/high masters) sometime in 2011, I had no idea what was coming, no matter what race I was up against. If it was Terran, it could be a CC first, it could be any variation of 1-1-1, it could be 2 rax pressure expand, ect... There were so many viable strategies, that Starcraft II was what you made it. With enough effort, you could take any playstyle to the top, from cannon rushing to macro play. That made the game exciting, I had so much to learn. But now, I just need to learn a few builds and do them solidly. That makes it easy, but unfortunately my mechanics, and everyone mechanics have a limit, and then you are stuck. You can't be inventive, you can't make the game what you want it to be. For instance, Terran can't just invent new timings to kill Protoss early like they could in WOL, because the MSC is just too strong against any early attack. Not sure which metagame you were playing in 2011 but towards the latter end of the year, 2 rax pressure was pretty much dead, and after the summer of the 1-1-1, the all-in variant was virtually solved and slowly fell off from the ladder. Like, 80% of openers from Terran in any match-up was the exact same 1 rax fe. I would say that Protoss needs a revamp more than anything. Then work from there. I dare to bet that Terran needs more variety in styles first, before we are talking revamp of toss (not implying toss is well designed) A revamp of Toss might provide Terran the opportunity to play with more variety (mech). Only in TvP. Revamp of toss will not affect Terran's mech outside of TvP. TvP is the match-up everyone wants to see mech in the most, or at least the BW fans do, and the way Protoss is designed will never allow mech to be competitive at the highest level. TvP is match-up where i want to see the mech the least tbh. Because instead of TvDeathball we get to see DeathballvP or even deathball vs deathball (lol). Mech isn't deathball. Mech is all about carefully positioning your tanks and shit so that they can fuck shit up without getting fucked themselves. It's slow pushing and controlling space and/or areas of the map. A deathball just moves around and fucks shit up as it moves. Show nested quote +On September 22 2013 03:34 Rabiator wrote:On September 22 2013 03:06 Incognoto wrote:On September 22 2013 02:04 Xiphos wrote:
How to get rid of Deathball?
1. Alter Unit pathing
2. Introduce more harassment-oriented units (BW had Lurkers, higher Storm dmg, Reavers, faster Vulture firing rate, andWratih/Mutalisk micromanagement)
3. High ground advantage so the game become more positional-based to salvage units.
4. Higher AOE dmg, this forces splits, this also helps with the harass elements.
Pretty simplistic conceptual overhaul. Blizzard won't do them btw.
Oh yeah get rid of all macro mechanics, it builds army way too fast. Why harass when I get there, the base will be heavily defended? Better to build my own ball of death, its far more efficient. I don't see deathball in TvZ Deathball is a bad word, because too many people get hung up on about the BALL part of it and keep arguing "X isnt a deathball, because it isnt ball-shaped", which is totally unimportant. The term "deathball" is outdated and a bit misleading and the real problem is "critical numbers". Units are balanced for a certain "state", but once there are a certain number of units on the battlefield - in that automatically maximized unit density of SC2 - you achieve a "higher state" because they can kill approaching units more easily and with less risk than they could do before having such high numbers. This is why having such a second state in a (supposed) strategy game is rather terrible, because you can balance for only one state of existence. For some units balance has been pushed to "critical number state" and many times the casters say something like "unit x is useless unless you have X of them" ... usually connected to one-shotting a certain type of opposing unit. The existence of critical numbers is a consequence of unlimited unit selection, massive production capability and the "perfect" unit pathing. These are the things that need to be changed in order to get rid of it on the ground and there need to be good AoE damage against critical numbers in the air ... stuff like the Scourge, Corsair and Valkyrie which by themselves are unattractive to build and wont win you the game. Solutions are just around the corner ... just look at how BW did it, compare it to the state of SC2 and you are fine. Wow nice post. I think I agree with you
So you are saying that as a protoss you can amove across the map against ghost/viking and win?
|
On September 22 2013 03:48 Everlong wrote:
It's nice we have examined issues with SC2 so many times in such depth and passion, suggestions and so.. But is there actually ANY chance something is going to happen/change?
No, not really. Blizzard doesn't seem to be that kind of company but honestly it's not like there aren't other good games out there worth trying. If you want to get the message through then you need to do so with negative repercussions to the developer or else they won't do shit. Their goal is to make money, if they keep making money while doing a piss poor job at things then they won't stop doing shitty work.
So negative feedback is either massive whine on social networks such as Reddit, TL, less viewers for tournaments, etc, or it's shittier sales. I already know I won't be getting Lotv.
Edit: well I might if I day9/artosis manage to keep the game interesting.
|
4713 Posts
On September 22 2013 03:51 rd wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2013 03:45 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:42 Incognoto wrote:So the only difference is move speed and deployment time? Yes that difference is so ridiculously fundamental it does indeed make a difference. You can catch a mech army out of position, you can't do so with a deathball. Also having more time to prepare for a push and take advantage of immobility is also a very huge advantage. You can catch deathball out of position, but that implies existence of such positions on maps and that is another question. Average speed of mech army between deployments > average speed of deathball if we imply that average speed of composition is speed of it's slowest part. On September 22 2013 03:45 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:36 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:34 Incognoto wrote:On September 22 2013 03:32 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:30 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:28 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:27 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:25 lolfail9001 wrote:
[quote]
I dare to bet that Terran needs more variety in styles first, before we are talking revamp of toss (not implying toss is well designed) A revamp of Toss might provide Terran the opportunity to play with more variety (mech). Only in TvP. Revamp of toss will not affect Terran's mech outside of TvP. TvP is the match-up everyone wants to see mech in the most, or at least the BW fans do, and the way Protoss is designed will never allow mech to be competitive at the highest level. TvP is match-up where i want to see the mech the least tbh. Because instead of TvDeathball we get to see DeathballvP or even deathball vs deathball (lol). Mech isn't deathball. Mech is all about carefully positioning your tanks and shit so that they can fuck shit up without getting fucked themselves. It's slow pushing and controlling space and/or areas of the map. A deathball just moves around and fucks shit up as it moves. So the only difference is move speed and deployment time ? On September 22 2013 03:33 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:32 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:30 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:28 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 22 2013 03:27 rd wrote:On September 22 2013 03:25 lolfail9001 wrote:
[quote]
I dare to bet that Terran needs more variety in styles first, before we are talking revamp of toss (not implying toss is well designed) A revamp of Toss might provide Terran the opportunity to play with more variety (mech). Only in TvP. Revamp of toss will not affect Terran's mech outside of TvP. TvP is the match-up everyone wants to see mech in the most, or at least the BW fans do, and the way Protoss is designed will never allow mech to be competitive at the highest level. TvP is match-up where i want to see the mech the least tbh. Because instead of TvDeathball we get to see DeathballvP or even deathball vs deathball (lol). A revamp of Protoss would imply the breaking of Protoss death balls. See BW for details. Hence DeathballvP instead of TvDeathball Because mech isn't actually a ball. It's more like a line. So it'd actually be PvDeathlineofcreepingdeath. The only thing mech and the Protoss "deathball" have in common is that they're both defensive strategies that initially turtle. But they're vastly different in application and how they're dealt with. It's pretty sad how little you know of it, even if this is a different game. Agree, since i was fed up with seeing 2 mech games in my life: one of encounters between Flash vs Best (do not recall map sadly) and one of encounters between Bogus and Soulkey (ground zero). They both were frustrating to watch tbh, even if that implied great skill of winner. And yes, i am aware that mech is deathball without a ball, but with line. Also, application for both is simple: kill you enemy. By your definition anything is a death ball. It's rather unfortunate you embrace ignorance and summarily dismiss something rather than looking into it at all and just assuming your irrational whims are correct. But this is why the game isn't designed around irrational whims (or at least not anymore). Show nested quote +On September 22 2013 03:48 Everlong wrote:
It's nice we have examined issues with SC2 so many times in such depth and passion, suggestions and so.. But is there actually ANY chance something is going to happen/change? I would say so, yes. The Diablo III team just removed the auction house after a LOT of community feedback (and by feedback I mean bitching, moaning, and quitting), which is a huge, huge admittance of a fundamental mistake, and they're going to be forced to redesign itemization entirely. They're independent teams, but Blizzard has recently seemed to move in a direction where they're much more receptive to complaints about their games that follow up with a decline in players.
There is a big difference though. The AH isn't an integral part of the gameplay in D3, if you added or removed it would have little to no impact on the game. Where as the redesigns of the protoss race that people are suggesting or changing the pathing or combat in SC2, is orders of magnitude harder because it is ingrained into the game by now. As much as I hate to say this, I don't think it is realistic to expect a redesign of SC2 on such a large scale, at this point it would be much better to consolidate the lessons learned and make a better SC3.
The only type of games where I saw changes to core design issues was in MMOs like WoW, where from BC to WoTLK to Cataclysm they kept revamping, classes, redesigning broken concepts, buffing weakened ones, adding in fun elements and so forth, but WoW is a fundamentally different game from SC2, and its success literally dependent on such patches to keep the game fresh and interesting. Plus, with the game being subscription based, it was much easier to gauge how healthy or sick its ecosystem as people would immediately vote with their money if they continued to like it or not.
You don't have that in SC2, the dwindling player base on Bnet is a thing that happens with all games after release as a certain number of players leave and the core stays, how do you differentiate from people leaving after they played the campaign, or leaving because they lost interest after 1 year because PvZ was an abomination?
|
Russian Federation40190 Posts
On September 22 2013 03:54 Incognoto wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2013 03:48 Everlong wrote:
It's nice we have examined issues with SC2 so many times in such depth and passion, suggestions and so.. But is there actually ANY chance something is going to happen/change? Edit: well I might if I day9/artosis manage to keep the game interesting.
Only stupid person or a blind fan will buy a game (or expansion for it) without seeing what it's like first. So with this edit you pretty much join 95% of people who may buy LotV.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2121
1569
32
35
0
EPT
