EPTDepth of Micro - Page 16
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
forsooth
United States3648 Posts
| ||
|
SuperYo1000
United States880 Posts
| ||
|
MarlieChurphy
United States2065 Posts
These turn radius and attack points (aka startup frames) are some of the main reasons why I couldn't stand wc3 which was supposed to be a micro based game. It made no sense to have these clunky limited units in what was supposed to be a uber micro battle. I assume in sc2 editor it's called attack point etc, in the fighting game community these are well known and only the best of players pay attention to this frame data. They are known as: start-up frames, active frames, and recovery frames. (as well as hit stun, block stun, and other connection types (parry,crumple,etc) which freeze the defender for X frames allowing the recovery time of the attacker to subtract some frame data or combo moves together) All moves and attacks have differing frame data and obviously the more powerful and riskier moves have the longer recovery frames, while the more basic light punch type moves have very short frames (usually like a total of 5 or less on all frame types combined). Frame data is very important to esports as it allows the faster more agile/quick thinking players to out maneuver the weaker players. And the more studied and practiced players to take advantage of frame data by setting up frame traps and abusing certain moves versus certain characters. As far as all these changes, they would require a lot of re-tweaking and balancing of damage, attack speeds, accel/deccel of units as well as possibly damage types and unit HP. Something that blizzard probably wouldn't be willing to invest into unless it was necessary to revamp and revitalize the game. I could definitely see a lot of people falling out of the scene in the next couple of years as the game stagnates etc until LoV is going to be coming out. A lot of these suggestions for the betterment of the esport and game life, could be implemented into the beta of LoV, instead of adding all new units etc. It would be a good hook to get a lot of the top BW players into the game as well as rekindle the interest of many who have become disenfranchised by blizzards lack of professional design and polish we have come to expect from a top gaming company. I actually have a really large list of issues with the design of battle.net and other basic features that worked so much better than they do currently. I will make a thread about that to go along with this. And hopefully then, blizzard will attempt to fix some of those soon or at least attempt to fix them in future patches or the next beta. | ||
|
IdrA
United States11541 Posts
On November 01 2013 02:36 SjPhotoGrapher wrote: The game is fine as it is. SC2's micro ceiling has yet to be reached (just take a look at the sc2 bot videos to see what I'm talking about). The reason why BW had most of these micro mechanics is because it's an older game that required multiple key presses to do some actions. SC2's engine is much more updated and effecient so you don't have to do things like move each scv to it's mining location which is tedious and boring and add's no value to the game. the additional micro you're talking about is simply becoming faster and more accurate, doesn't really add much depth or interest as no human is going to be capable of the sc2 bot stuff and pro players are already starting to approach a bit of a ceiling, you're not gonna get marine splitting much more spectacular than you already do. the stuff he's talking about the video opens up additional completely different techniques that add depth to the game. in bw going wraiths tvz wouldntve been a thing if it werent for some of the mechanics he's talking about. whole number of things it could allow for if similar things were implemented in sc2. | ||
|
nukkuj
Finland403 Posts
I hope LotV will bring many of these sick BW tunings to SC2 so we can have more amazing micro moments! | ||
|
mau5mat
Northern Ireland461 Posts
| ||
|
lolfail9001
Russian Federation40190 Posts
On November 01 2013 03:43 nukkuj wrote: I hope LotV will bring many of these sick BW tunings to SC2 so we can have more amazing micro moments! That look just as lame. On November 01 2013 03:54 mau5mat wrote: Would anyone just like to see how the game would look if Blizzard suddenly implemented this (Hell would freeze over) and just let the meta find its own way, similar to how BW wasn't really patched, I really wonder what the game would look like after 6 months to a year if this was implemented. Some race dominates and noone gives a fuck, because all maps are clones of daybreak modified for 4p situations in rare cases. I'd imagine it would be something like that. | ||
|
Elldar
Sweden287 Posts
On November 01 2013 02:01 Sissors wrote: The previous huge breakthroughs like this also weren't huge breakthroughs in the end (like stuff with unit pathing). And did you maybe ever consider that other people have different opinions about what constitutes a better game? I do get you feel superior to everyone with a different opinion, but maybe I am against it because I don't think it will be an improvement to the game, with as pretty much only reason to implement it that it was also that way in BW. I think it is really hard to argue vesicular's point, that it makes little sense that a viking needs a small amount of time to fire. What I consider even making less sense is that all air units should have 0 firing delay because they are air units. Why should it only be for air units and not ground units? Thats a completely arbitrary distinction. Add that the video is basicly that BW was so much better, and that he didn't even comment on how he thinks it would affect balance and the meta game, and I am simply not that impressed. Not saying he didn't spend alot of time on it, especially by trying out different values, but that contrary to the average TL'er apparantly I am not in favor of automatically introducing all of this. I can tell you what a tournament would be with these settings: Imbalanced. It is a huge boost to the kiting ability of some units, especially longer ranged ones. You cannot just do it and expect it to not affect balance. He didn't say that every air unit should have 0 firing delay. He said that every basic air unit should had 0 fire delay and they fire delay should be for special attacks. Did you even understand what he meant with 'hover unit'? Essentially an air unit with ground pathing. The reason why these changes should be made is because it would make the units more responsive to your clicks hence more microable. Making the players able to more freely control their units can not be a bad thing. Opening up more posibilities for players to branch out can not be a bad thing. Not every battle in bw was won with impecceable micro but you could win with micro. Micro often could give you an advantage in bw just go watch the added clips. | ||
|
Technique
Netherlands1542 Posts
| ||
|
Markwerf
Netherlands3728 Posts
Some things are fantastic and should have been in sc2 like the lock on turret for siege tanks. It just looks better, feels how a tank should behave and has fun gameplay applications like them being slightly better on the retreat. Some other things though I'm not so sure, i'm not really a fan of having too much tricks for micro like patrol attacking or that sort of stuff. It's just very counterintuitive and doesn't improve the game at all imo. Sure the top notch players might prefer it but for the lower end spectators or players it's just utter frustation. As for units being more microable it can be great though it can also offset the balance and make the game look silly. Generally i'm in favor for more microable units but if it comes through somewhat silly tricks (in my eyes then) like patrol attacking or having to do a move command quickly to move on it becomes cumbersome to me, i think a attack and then shift move should do the same as just attacking and clicking fast for example. In case of vikings I think giving them more micro, ie kite potential wouldn't work, it breaks a unit with such long range and decent speed I think. In general I think much of the BW responsiveness of air units just looks weird, it makes sort of sense on hoovering or helicopters like units but on a unit with wings it just doesn't. Mutalisks and banshee's could have the micro potential and the looks of it, vikings not I think. | ||
|
Taguchi
Greece1575 Posts
sc2 felt wrong when i first played it, so wrong that i never bothered to really get into it, apart from just watching tourneys amazing job of quantifying what people couldnt properly express before whoever's not played broodwar, you wont have to hear 'you just dont get it' anymore, just watch this video and its all before your eyes | ||
|
Sogetsu
514 Posts
But that will never happen and they will say "Yeah we put the guys to test it for a few weeks before and nothing changed for real so the game keeps the same, now we have a new name for a unit that doesn't need it but the one which absolutely changed its mechanics will remain the same, be happy" | ||
|
Rhythmic
Russian Federation14 Posts
On November 01 2013 04:33 Sogetsu wrote: I am kinda sad with all this sort of information, because it is like saying "Blizz here you need to fix the game, THIS are the exact problems and easy way to adress them, could you try?" But that will never happen and they will say "Yeah we put the guys to test it for a few weeks before and nothing changed for real so the game keeps the same, now we have a new name for a unit that doesn't need it but the one which absolutely changed its mechanics will remain the same, be happy" No,they will just make another unit faster. | ||
|
TrOn_sc2
Germany91 Posts
| ||
|
Staboteur
Canada1873 Posts
On November 01 2013 04:25 Markwerf wrote: Hmm good video though it would be nice to have a sort of summary or timestamps. Some things are fantastic and should have been in sc2 like the lock on turret for siege tanks. It just looks better, feels how a tank should behave and has fun gameplay applications like them being slightly better on the retreat. Some other things though I'm not so sure, i'm not really a fan of having too much tricks for micro like patrol attacking or that sort of stuff. It's just very counterintuitive and doesn't improve the game at all imo. Sure the top notch players might prefer it but for the lower end spectators or players it's just utter frustation. As for units being more microable it can be great though it can also offset the balance and make the game look silly. Generally i'm in favor for more microable units but if it comes through somewhat silly tricks (in my eyes then) like patrol attacking or having to do a move command quickly to move on it becomes cumbersome to me, i think a attack and then shift move should do the same as just attacking and clicking fast for example. In case of vikings I think giving them more micro, ie kite potential wouldn't work, it breaks a unit with such long range and decent speed I think. In general I think much of the BW responsiveness of air units just looks weird, it makes sort of sense on hoovering or helicopters like units but on a unit with wings it just doesn't. Mutalisks and banshee's could have the micro potential and the looks of it, vikings not I think. Complex micro wouldn't be frustrating for lower-end players, they just wouldn't do it. If they're getting beat specifically by complex micro then the player they're playing against has a tangible advantage over them (I.E. being able to perform this micro) which is just as frustrating as other tangible advantages, such as good army positioning, better macro, being able to build colossus (:D) etc | ||
|
NukeD
Croatia1612 Posts
On November 01 2013 03:56 lolfail9001 wrote: That look just as lame. Some race dominates and noone gives a fuck, because all maps are clones of daybreak modified for 4p situations in rare cases. I'd imagine it would be something like that. How are you still allowed to post on TL is beyond me. | ||
Waxangel
United States33697 Posts
| ||
|
GizmoPT
Portugal3040 Posts
On November 01 2013 05:22 Waxangel wrote: I like how your icon is the dumbest fucking unit in brood war that takes the most coaxing and effort to get to work effectively i like how your icon is a snorlax o.o | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
Excalibur_Z
United States12252 Posts
If I were to guess, I'd say that SC2 was developed according to a more rigid structure. Fixed sprints, segmented teams, all working toward one collective vision. All of the wacky engine quirks of BW would instead be elegantly handled. Now, there's a dilemma here because a lot of these elements contribute to why we love BW. Now that this video is out there, Blizzard has to make the bizarre decision of whether to knowingly emulate bugs (or workarounds, as the case may be) from the BW engine. It's a very strange position to be. You've brought up this stuff a number of times. I have to imagine conversations internally went like this: "Air units automatically decelerate when they fire" "It's by design, everything works that way" "But it would widen the potential skill gap" "Okay, well... let's put that especially on the Phoenix but make it auto-fire." It's almost like they'll make partial concessions but only if the end result is intuitive. Example: Patrol-micro. When this was discovered in BW it was game-changing because it made Scourge and Zerglings so much weaker. It's not obvious at all why this would be the case, and tons of research went into why Patrol was the more responsive control method. Blizzard will never (and should never) put Patrol-micro into SC2 because of how unintuitive it is. For things like independently-managed turrets and the high-priority separation radius, you have a stronger argument. These are things that makes sense, even though they carry a potential balance impact. Good post, and I hope something comes from it. I have no problem with implementing a number of these suggestions, but I also respect the development side and how they might not want to arbitrarily poke holes in their engine. | ||
| ||
