EPTStarbow - Page 80
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
StarscreamG1
Portugal1653 Posts
| ||
|
SolidSMD
Belgium408 Posts
Can you give a decent example of when %miss chance is flawed? | ||
|
pure.Wasted
Canada4701 Posts
On January 18 2014 19:28 Brett wrote: I put in an example above, it makes it very clear why miss % is preferable for the defender. I don't know about that specific example personally, I'm not a pro, but of course they make these calculations in their head based upon experience. Of course, sometimes they fuck it up, but how else would they know when they should and shouldn't engage... Assuming pro's have seen their opponent's army and composition, there's nothing mystical about their ability to determine whether or not their own army is capable of winning an engagement it's experience. But there is higher uncertainty when miss % is added from high ground. I didn't say "I doubt there's any pro who will know who wins that engagement." I said there's no pro who would know how many units will survive. There is such a thing as inefficient trading. You can kill the enemy army but lost a few units too many, so there's an opportunity cost attached. Depending on where the battle is taking place (say, the Zerg's third), whether 5 Marines survive or 2 Marines survive can make a HUGE impact on their ability to do immediate economy damage, so it doesn't matter that every pro knows he'll win, it matters by how much. This is the silliest argument I've had all day. If there was as little unpredictability in the game as you suggest, no pro would ever take an unfavorable engagement. Guess what? Pros take unfavorable engagements all the time! They lose armies when they thought they were going to win the game! (And if pros can't predict with good accuracy, obviously shmuck's like you or I can't, either.) Unpredictability! We already have it! It doesn't require luck! | ||
|
bo1b
Australia12814 Posts
On January 18 2014 19:41 pure.Wasted wrote: I didn't say "I doubt there's any pro who will know who wins that engagement." I said there's no pro who would know how many units will survive. There is such a thing as inefficient trading. You can kill the enemy army but lost a few units too many, so there's an opportunity cost attached. Depending on where the battle is taking place (say, the Zerg's third), whether 5 Marines survive or 2 Marines survive can make a HUGE impact on their ability to do immediate economy damage, so it doesn't matter that every pro knows he'll win, it matters by how much. This is the silliest argument I've had all day. If there was as little unpredictability in the game as you suggest, no pro would ever take an unfavorable engagement. Guess what? Pros take unfavorable engagements all the time! They lose armies when they thought they were going to win the game! (And if pros can't predict with good accuracy, obviously shmuck's like you or I can't, either.) Unpredictability! We already have it! It doesn't require luck! The problem is that a defenders advantage is needed for the game, and it isn't really possible to make it without an element of luck. It's a necessary evil, and the developers already said in one of the early pages that they couldn't think of a way atm to make a proper defenders advantage without the miss chance. The other ways scale to well with armor, or not enough. | ||
|
TheBloodyDwarf
Finland7524 Posts
On January 18 2014 19:45 bo1b wrote: The problem is that a defenders advantage is needed for the game, and it isn't really possible to make it without an element of luck. It's a necessary evil, and the developers already said in one of the early pages that they couldn't think of a way atm to make a proper defenders advantage without the miss chance. The other ways scale to well with armor, or not enough. x% less damage when shooting high ground. BAM! | ||
|
Ramiz1989
12124 Posts
| ||
|
Xiphias
Norway2223 Posts
On January 18 2014 19:59 Ramiz1989 wrote: Once again, seems like devs didn't read my post. Can you guys change the Roach projectile animation back into acid saliva? This new flame attack looks pretty bad for Roaches, and when they kill stuff it bursts into flames like when it dies from Hellions/Colossi. :/ It's been noted. Not sure if it will happen though  | ||
|
RaZorwire
Sweden718 Posts
On January 18 2014 19:59 Ramiz1989 wrote: Once again, seems like devs didn't read my post. Can you guys change the Roach projectile animation back into acid saliva? This new flame attack looks pretty bad for Roaches, and when they kill stuff it bursts into flames like when it dies from Hellions/Colossi. :/ Isn't that an improvement, though? | ||
|
asphyxia88
94 Posts
Once again, seems like devs didn't read my post. Can you guys change the Roach projectile animation back into acid saliva? This new flame attack looks pretty bad for Roaches, and when they kill stuff it bursts into flames like when it dies from Hellions/Colossi. :/ You can blame me for that one. ^^ Since we are using the orange/brown coloured Roach model I decided to try a different approach to its attack. The basic idea was to make the Roach more of a "fire beetle/ant/thingy", kinda like it holds a lot of chemicals inside of it and then spits them out while at the same time setting them on fire. The swarm version of a Firebat/Hellbat I suppose. (I guess Abathur saw potential in a special Roach strain on some volcanic world or something ^^) Regardless, if the flame spit attack proves to be too unpopular I'll either revert back to the acid attack or think of something else. | ||
|
Brett
Australia3822 Posts
On January 18 2014 19:41 pure.Wasted wrote: I didn't say "I doubt there's any pro who will know who wins that engagement." I said there's no pro who would know how many units will survive. There is such a thing as inefficient trading. You can kill the enemy army but lost a few units too many, so there's an opportunity cost attached. Depending on where the battle is taking place (say, the Zerg's third), whether 5 Marines survive or 2 Marines survive can make a HUGE impact on their ability to do immediate economy damage, so it doesn't matter that every pro knows he'll win, it matters by how much. This is the silliest argument I've had all day. If there was as little unpredictability in the game as you suggest, no pro would ever take an unfavorable engagement. Guess what? Pros take unfavorable engagements all the time! They lose armies when they thought they were going to win the game! (And if pros can't predict with good accuracy, obviously shmuck's like you or I can't, either.) Unpredictability! We already have it! It doesn't require luck! Congratulations on ignoring how the unpredictability intersects with the defenders advantage. No wonder you think it's silly. Look at the example I gave for an example of how. Lose the attitude while you're at it. You're getting snarky. | ||
|
[17]Purple
United Kingdom3489 Posts
On January 18 2014 20:15 asphyxia88 wrote: You can blame me for that one. ^^ Since we are using the orange/brown coloured Roach model I decided to try a different approach to its attack. The basic idea was to make the Roach more of a "fire beetle/ant/thingy", kinda like it holds a lot of chemicals inside of it and then spits them out while at the same time setting them on fire. The swarm version of a Firebat/Hellbat I suppose. (I guess Abathur saw potential in a special Roach strain on some volcanic world or something ^^) Regardless, if the flame spit attack proves to be too unpopular I'll either revert back to the acid attack or think of something else. I'd just like to pitch in that I really like the new fire spit attack for the Roach. I've been wondering though why the Roach is the only ground based unit that cannot permanently burrow. | ||
|
Existor
Russian Federation4295 Posts
Also their hydralisks are nice too. But don't add Feral Zerg units to standard zerg swarm. They have different design and average style. You're better use one of roach strains, green one especially is nice, purple is cool too. Recolor one of them into orange and turn acid into green-lime-yellow, so it will be something like yellow'ed (aka Nurgle from Warhammer 40k) acid weapon instead just burning. Fire/burn weapon does not fits for zergs, except Yagdra worm. Better add Nydus destroyer and design it as lava worm. | ||
|
pure.Wasted
Canada4701 Posts
On January 18 2014 19:30 SolidSMD wrote: @pure.wasted Can you give a decent example of when %miss chance is flawed? Flawed in what sense? In the sense that it is luck and luck is bad? Or in the sense that it favors some units over others? I have a feeling that you mean the latter. Imagine two scenarios. In the first, a pack of 10 Marines bumrush a Siege Tank on high ground. In the second, a pack of 5 Marauders does the same. They get hit once on the way there. Marines clump up more so they take more splash damage. It takes JUST over one tank hit to kill a Marine, it takes three tank hits to kill a Marauder. There's a 30% chance that 6 Marines will miss/2 Marauders will miss. Let's say that happens. He gets hit by the Tank again. Marines are already dying left and right, a bunch are in red, still not a single Marauder dead even with target fire. Both attackers want to retreat now. Marines still clumped as shit, take another big hit with lots of splash. Marauders retreat at almost identical speed, take less splash damage. With target fire from the tank, one Marauder dies. How many Marines you think died? Safe bet that it was a lot more than two, right? Especially if the tank is target firing? If more than two Marines died, then the Marauder player came out way ahead because his units were tough enough to survive a bunch of hits and fast enough to still get out. Pretty straight forward, I think. | ||
|
Incognoto
France10239 Posts
| ||
|
pure.Wasted
Canada4701 Posts
On January 18 2014 19:45 bo1b wrote: The problem is that a defenders advantage is needed for the game, and it isn't really possible to make it without an element of luck. It's a necessary evil, and the developers already said in one of the early pages that they couldn't think of a way atm to make a proper defenders advantage without the miss chance. The other ways scale to well with armor, or not enough. Miss chance scales well with unit toughness. Tough units can survive bad engagements and GTFO while the GTFOing is still good. Glass cannons that miss their first volley will invariably melt. Miss chance also scales very well with spells, ie. Storm and Plague, which incur zero penalties. So does "attacker deals less damage" (but not "defender deals more damage"!!!! They're not the same thing, they work very differently in practice!) but my point here isn't that "attacker deals less damage" is the best option, it's that even disregarding the fact that miss chance is based on luck, it's still not "fair" to all units!!! Even if those don't work for whatever reason, I still want to keep discussion open about other avenues. I still haven't heard a thing about range increase/decrease for defender/attacker, for instance. | ||
|
Ardias
Russian Federation617 Posts
On January 18 2014 20:24 Incognoto wrote: Any idea of how many people play this game? I tried a few games vs the AI, they were fun, it would be interesting to play this against other people in ranked matches. I especially like the new zerglings, also how larvae work is also interesting. Join "Starbow" chat channel to find people to play. Also, I like new roaches much more than standatrd ones, and their animation too. | ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
On January 18 2014 20:20 pure.Wasted wrote: Flawed in what sense? In the sense that it is luck and luck is bad? Or in the sense that it favors some units over others? I have a feeling that you mean the latter. Imagine two scenarios. In the first, a pack of 10 Marines bumrush a Siege Tank on high ground. In the second, a pack of 5 Marauders does the same. They get hit once on the way there. Marines clump up more so they take more splash damage. It takes JUST over one tank hit to kill a Marine, it takes three tank hits to kill a Marauder. There's a 30% chance that 6 Marines will miss/2 Marauders will miss. Let's say that happens. He gets hit by the Tank again. Marines are already dying left and right, a bunch are in red, still not a single Marauder dead even with target fire. Both attackers want to retreat now. Marines still clumped as shit, take another big hit with lots of splash. Marauders retreat at almost identical speed, take less splash damage. With target fire from the tank, one Marauder dies. How many Marines you think died? Safe bet that it was a lot more than two, right? Especially if the tank is target firing? If more than two Marines died, then the Marauder player came out way ahead because his units were tough enough to survive a bunch of hits and fast enough to still get out. Pretty straight forward, I think. So you are saying certain units are better vs other units? interesting.. | ||
|
pure.Wasted
Canada4701 Posts
On January 18 2014 20:31 The_Red_Viper wrote: So you are saying certain units are better vs other units? interesting.. No, if I wanted to say that, I'd say that "the Terran attacker with Marauders is probably not terribly worried about 2 of his Marauders missing their attacks." High speed, high HP units like the Dragoon and Marauder have escape routes open to them in highground/lowground engagements where an unexpected amount of misses crop up that other units do not, by virtue of either dying too fast or not moving fast enough to get away without dying some more. I don't see how this is a smaller deal than the way attack buffs/nerfs would scale. There is no defender's advantage mechanic that is "unbiased" and affects all units with perfect proportion. I am attempting to dispel the bothersome myth that miss chance is that mechanic. | ||
|
Dingodile
4139 Posts
PvZ early attack (~7min). all stalkers and zealots and zerglings dies (at natural or 3rd) zerg base. There are 25lings in prodction. Protoss can warpin ~5zealots or ~5stalkers (during ~25zergling production). P is going to die if its 5 stalkers, this happens mostly because P thinks Z is buildung roaches. ZvT Lategame. both lost all units due to one fight. Zerg is remaxing pure Ultras (17 ultras for example). T doesnt know if Zerg is remaxing Ultras or is building a BL+Coruptor army. If T is buildung a army for BL+C, he is dead. Or inverted: T is remaxing something and Zerg doesnt know what and builds something wrong. In both cases, the one lost the game due to production time. the time during the production time is sadly too important in sc2. | ||
|
Insoleet
France1806 Posts
| ||
| ||
