On November 09 2014 01:36 LaLuSh wrote: God they didn't change how mining works. Just mineral nodes.
So disappointing.
Did you think they would? I doubt even the current pros would have wanted them to change it after playing sc2 for so long.
If they're willing to change nodes from 1500 to a 1000 and starting workers to 12, then yes; the answer is they already made changes of roughly the same scale. Why wouldn't I expect them to?
There's no reason they couldn't make proper economy changes and stop with these patented half-measures of theirs.
Supposedly, in the new maps there will be 6 mineral patches per base instead of 8; we did not see this during the showmatches because they played on old maps.
On November 09 2014 01:36 LaLuSh wrote: God they didn't change how mining works. Just mineral nodes.
So disappointing.
Did you think they would? I doubt even the current pros would have wanted them to change it after playing sc2 for so long.
If they're willing to change nodes from 1500 to a 1000 and starting workers to 12, then yes; the answer is they already made changes of roughly the same scale. Why wouldn't I expect them to?
There's no reason they couldn't make proper economy changes and stop with these patented half-measures of theirs.
Yeah sigh, quite disappointing. I see what they are *trying* to do, but come on, this is just lazy and silly.
Even though it is not optimal (no BW wandering workers), I would have preferred 4-6 starting workers, increased mining time, and 7-8 minerals per trip. Super easy to do in the editor.
On November 09 2014 01:36 LaLuSh wrote: God they didn't change how mining works. Just mineral nodes.
So disappointing.
Did you think they would? I doubt even the current pros would have wanted them to change it after playing sc2 for so long.
If they're willing to change nodes from 1500 to a 1000 and starting workers to 12, then yes; the answer is they already made changes of roughly the same scale. Why wouldn't I expect them to?
There's no reason they couldn't make proper economy changes and stop with these patented half-measures of theirs.
The need to expand more aggressivly is not a proper change because?
On November 09 2014 01:36 LaLuSh wrote: God they didn't change how mining works. Just mineral nodes.
So disappointing.
Did you think they would? I doubt even the current pros would have wanted them to change it after playing sc2 for so long.
If they're willing to change nodes from 1500 to a 1000 and starting workers to 12, then yes; the answer is they already made changes of roughly the same scale. Why wouldn't I expect them to?
There's no reason they couldn't make proper economy changes and stop with these patented half-measures of theirs.
Fair point. But just so I understand you correctly, by proper economy changes do you mean scrapping auto mine?
On November 09 2014 01:52 Blizzkrieg wrote: So building an economy is just no longer a part of this game? I like the unit changes and all, but the worker/mineral change just doesn't sit right with me...
I didn't realize building up to 12 workers required so much skill. If anything, expanding and controlling your portion of the map is more important now if you want a large economy. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if optimal mineral saturation is currently 16, then 3 mining bases now = 4 mining bases in the next expansion.
Even if it isn't like that, mineral nodes now have ~900 minerals only, and you will have to expand quickly or will stave for minerals really soon. There won't be 3-base turtling anymore.
Found other showmatch, Zest + Jaedong vs. SoO + Polt, but sadly it isn't English cast, can't find English cast at all. :/
ZvP looks alot more better than ZvT. Btw is funny how they trying hit fast units with ravager without fungal.And corruptors looks very weak vs buidings.Not like on that video on first page.
On November 09 2014 01:36 LaLuSh wrote: God they didn't change how mining works. Just mineral nodes.
So disappointing.
Did you think they would? I doubt even the current pros would have wanted them to change it after playing sc2 for so long.
If they're willing to change nodes from 1500 to a 1000 and starting workers to 12, then yes; the answer is they already made changes of roughly the same scale. Why wouldn't I expect them to?
There's no reason they couldn't make proper economy changes and stop with these patented half-measures of theirs.
Huh? So a mineral line doesn't need less workers now to be "the most" efficient the before?
On November 09 2014 01:36 LaLuSh wrote: God they didn't change how mining works. Just mineral nodes.
So disappointing.
Did you think they would? I doubt even the current pros would have wanted them to change it after playing sc2 for so long.
If they're willing to change nodes from 1500 to a 1000 and starting workers to 12, then yes; the answer is they already made changes of roughly the same scale. Why wouldn't I expect them to?
There's no reason they couldn't make proper economy changes and stop with these patented half-measures of theirs.
Yeah sigh, quite disappointing.
Even though it is not optimal (no BW wandering workers), I would have preferred 4-6 starting workers, increased mining time, and 7-8 minerals per trip. Super easy to do in the editor.
Found other showmatch, Zest + Jaedong vs. SoO + Polt, but sadly it isn't English cast, can't find English cast at all. :/
ZvP looks alot more better than ZvT.
Well, these were just showmatches, to me it looked like that Stardust + Jjakji didn't prepare at all(or whoever played Z in first match), they all tried to show us new stuff.
On November 09 2014 01:36 LaLuSh wrote: God they didn't change how mining works. Just mineral nodes.
So disappointing.
Did you think they would? I doubt even the current pros would have wanted them to change it after playing sc2 for so long.
If they're willing to change nodes from 1500 to a 1000 and starting workers to 12, then yes; the answer is they already made changes of roughly the same scale. Why wouldn't I expect them to?
There's no reason they couldn't make proper economy changes and stop with these patented half-measures of theirs.
Supposedly, in the new maps there will be 6 mineral patches per base instead of 8; we did not see this during the showmatches because they played on old maps.
Wasn't this exactly what FRB had tested around 2 years ago and concluded it didn't work because the defenders advantage was reduced simultaneously.
In order for the whole spread-out to work you you have to make sure that the defenders advantage is high enough so it's possible to spread out and not just die to one big army. Moreover, it also needs to be possible to defend bases while investing into offensive units/playing aggressively simultaneously. Howeve,r in order do that, there needs to be groundbreaking changes to Starcraft (high ground advantage isn't enough).
In the breath of gameplay thread, Barrin compares the game to League of Legends where players are spread out, but that's possible becasue of defensive towers. These defensive towers can then be slowly broken if you outplay your opponent and use minions to soak up the towers shots. Such a solution is extremely difficult to get to work in Starcraft.
This would be better because?
BW economy rewarding taking extra bases, but didn't force the race/playstyles which were less mobile to take as many bases. The economy model in LOTV forces everyone to take bases as fast as possible, which is more likely to create more passive gameplay than vice versa.
On November 09 2014 01:36 LaLuSh wrote: God they didn't change how mining works. Just mineral nodes.
So disappointing.
Did you think they would? I doubt even the current pros would have wanted them to change it after playing sc2 for so long.
If they're willing to change nodes from 1500 to a 1000 and starting workers to 12, then yes; the answer is they already made changes of roughly the same scale. Why wouldn't I expect them to?
There's no reason they couldn't make proper economy changes and stop with these patented half-measures of theirs.
Supposedly, in the new maps there will be 6 mineral patches per base instead of 8; we did not see this during the showmatches because they played on old maps.
Wasn't this exactly what FRB had tested around 2 years ago and concluded it didn't work because the defenders advantage was reduced simultaneously.
In order for the whole spread-out to work you you have to make sure that the defenders advantage is high enough so it's possible to spread out and not just die to one big army. Moreover, it also needs to be possible to defend bases while investing into offensive units/playing aggressively simultaneously. Howeve,r in order do that, there needs to be groundbreaking changes to Starcraft (high ground advantage isn't enough).
BW economy rewarding taking extra bases, but didn't force the race/playstyles which were less mobile to take as many bases. The economy model in LOTV forces everyone to take bases as fast as possible, which is more likely to create more passive gameplay than vice versa.
Im not sure how you would play passive when you need to stop your oponent from out expanding you. Especially considering everyone now have units and ways of breaking turteling.
On November 09 2014 02:06 mikumegurine wrote: hmmm so Protoss only gets 1 new unit
and Zerg only gets 1 new unit and 1 (BW unit lurker)....
there might be more new units added right?....
DK said that they might add one more unit for Protoss, but that is it. I don't think that 2 units per race is bad at all, to be honest I've expected one. Also, they have changed a lot of old units.
On November 09 2014 01:36 LaLuSh wrote: God they didn't change how mining works. Just mineral nodes.
So disappointing.
Did you think they would? I doubt even the current pros would have wanted them to change it after playing sc2 for so long.
If they're willing to change nodes from 1500 to a 1000 and starting workers to 12, then yes; the answer is they already made changes of roughly the same scale. Why wouldn't I expect them to?
There's no reason they couldn't make proper economy changes and stop with these patented half-measures of theirs.
Supposedly, in the new maps there will be 6 mineral patches per base instead of 8; we did not see this during the showmatches because they played on old maps.
Wasn't this exactly what FRB had tested around 2 years ago and concluded it didn't work because the defenders advantage was reduced simultaneously.
In order for the whole spread-out to work you you have to make sure that the defenders advantage is high enough so it's possible to spread out and not just die to one big army. Moreover, it also needs to be possible to defend bases while investing into offensive units/playing aggressively simultaneously. Howeve,r in order do that, there needs to be groundbreaking changes to Starcraft (high ground advantage isn't enough).
In the breath of gameplay thread, Barrin compares the game to League of Legends where players are spread out, but that's possible becasue of defensive towers. These defensive towers can then be slowly broken if you outplay your opponent and use minions to soak up the towers shots. Such a solution is extremely difficult to get to work in Starcraft.
BW economy rewarding taking extra bases, but didn't force the race/playstyles which were less mobile to take as many bases. The economy model in LOTV forces everyone to take bases as fast as possible, which is more likely to create more passive gameplay than vice versa.
Pros can multitask and harass while taking multiple base. Multiple bases greatly increase the effectiveness and importance of harass.
On November 08 2014 04:50 KeksX wrote: Wow Blizzard finally tries something new and do something radical and everyone is like "WTF I HATE THIS" - just wait FFS this is what we all wanted for years.
This is not the final build to be released today. God damn some people are ungrateful.
EPT
