EPTNewsflash: you're not going to get the late 90s/early 2000s back. Those years of your life are gone. Constantly moving the goalposts so that Blizzard is always wrong isn't going to bring them back.
Legacy of the Void: Multiplayer Development Update - Page 10
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
RampancyTW
United States577 Posts
Newsflash: you're not going to get the late 90s/early 2000s back. Those years of your life are gone. Constantly moving the goalposts so that Blizzard is always wrong isn't going to bring them back. | ||
|
ETisME
12383 Posts
On November 20 2014 09:54 LaLuSh wrote: My point was more: the sort of variables which are dubbed "invisible" are what allowed for that play to be performed in the manner it was. No turn rate. Low attack point. Low casting points. They may be invisible variables. But without them the play wouldn't even exist. Dota has turn rate etc and remains to be an awesome micro intensive game. There are some terrible attack animation heroes like twin headed dragon and not that many champions in lol are as versatile as vayne either. You can look up the top 5 weekly lol highlights to really see what people like about the game. It's incredible to see how some master the same 4 spells and make their champion do unimaginable escapes or counter kills No turn rate etc is merely a characteristic of lol, just like you cannot block champions with your champion model. | ||
|
thewhiskey
Denmark29 Posts
On November 20 2014 06:51 TheDwf wrote: The problem with their "we'll add micro!" campaign is that they don't seem to understand what is micro (or rather interesting micro) in Starcraft to begin with. They seem to have a MOBA (or War3-like, but it cannot work when applied to a different genre) conception about it; but microing ≠ casting a spell. It is no coincidence if the race that received the biggest amount of SC2 nonsense, Protoss, has the most spellcasters—and despite that is not the most micro-intensive race! No one yells "great micro!" when a Terran presses 1T. Activating Cloak is the trivial part of Banshee micro. Waaah, the l4z0r of your Void ray is twice its size after you pressed the button; how thrilling. Micro is so much more than clicking buttons that trigger a mere bonus effect. It is about reflexes, mouse accuracy, speed of execution, anticipating adverse movements… Probably the spell that manages to add the most depth based on this is Blink, but Protoss has to pay a heavy tribute for that. Pay special attention to the kind of environement in which Blink micro is the most efficient: low or medium eco situations with only a handful of units. Certainly not the 150-200 supply scenarii which are nonetheless constantly featured since more than 2 years… If you want to see "more micro," how about allowing players to play more low or medium eco situations in which more interactions like this can occur? But instead of that you promote the high eco model that propels players towards the fateful "big engagements" in which the battle is won or lost in the 4 first seconds. Please work on solid fundamentals. An economy that makes sense. Simple units with elegant interactions. Don't bother adding 36 buttons to the Thor or the Colossus, they would still be garbage. Showering the game in MOBA gimmicks to create fake excitement that will die 4 months after LotV is out is not the way to go… This guy hits the spot perfect. Blizzard should print this out and hang it on the whiteboard at their next development meeting. | ||
|
schaf
Germany1326 Posts
On November 20 2014 04:25 sabas123 wrote: wow these changes are intresting, this means we won't see 12 starting workers anymore? There are no changes, it's all just saying "we're not really sure what we will do" I'm a bit surprised, I think their ideas were quite cool and could have been balanced if they just set to it and went with it. But this so much like "We showed you something that we put together in 2 months and now we want to figure out if it's any good." If they are not sure about anything, why show it at Blizzcon? | ||
|
VArsovskiSC
Macedonia563 Posts
#1 - Don't take BW as your focal starting point - yes, we loved it, we hated it, we played it for years now.. That game had it's own restrictions that this game doesn't have.. This game has multi-building selection and unlimited unit selection, therefore it makes sense to make units have abilities to force some "tactical positioning" of armies.. In fact "requirement of tactical positioning of armies is cruicial" in SC2, so therefore there are either hard-counters or abilities that deal with problems like those (a perfect example for this is the forcefield mechanics).. Therefore it's more pointless to talk about micro than abilities in a way cause we're having a whole new game and a whole new playground to deal with #2 - If we focus only on unit's microability - then we focus solely only on Terran.. Which unit from the other races would benefit from things like low turn rates, or IDK - no damage points or things like that ??, so yes - those are things that would benefit Terran that already have sh*t ton of harassment units.. I mean I can see the "background origin" of a thought process like that, but I can also see how perfectly response reacting units would end up being outright broken in this game cause of multi-building selection and being able to select multiple (infinite more likely) amount of units #3 - We don't need exclusively elitistic approach for the game.. There are already loads of us that don't play or don't want to play Terran for example for one sole reason - Terran right now is all about split or die with the Marines.. Or - drop or die cause of again - Terran relying solely of that one unit.. For example I can see how Protoss got a bit more "pat your back if you're only an elite but cry if not" treatment in LotV and honestly don't like it.. I mean it's cool MAYBE with the disruptor as the new unit, BUT - they got a huge PO and Warp-in nerfs, which I don't like honestly.. There are already crazy bio drops that are hard to deal with, why make them even more impossible to deal with ?? #4 - Why is the disruptor so elitistic-approached unit ?, I mean the cost of the thing screams - produce it only if you're godlike with it, otherwise lose 300 gas with almost doing nothing #5 - Cyclone should not have a role of a map domination unit.. Seriously - who the hell needs map domination vs a race that has to stay no matter what in it's base most of the time till they have an "effective clump of units to go out with" ready ?? It should have a specific type of units it's good against (more like - have a specific set of units that are it's bane).. Thinking of death-ball-disassembler unit - i.e. - "Key Target Priority Sniper" unit - something that deals with the "Viking squads hit or miss" problem vs Colossi in a rather very elegant way.. Therefore no offense - but the unit should suck vs certain units The hell with map dominance cause you're not relying on map dominance already.. Terran has scan which basically removes the need to have a map dominance as well as most advanced drop mechanic.. What Terran struggles right now are those key priority "in the back - well-guarded" units such as Colossi or Swarm Hosts, so why not keep strict role with the new unit to fix a problem that exists ? #6 - Speaking of Terran though - why another high DPS unit for the Terran - as if they didn't have enough big guns already What Terran (IMO) lacks isn't DPS, what Terran lacks is utility.. Right now the utility Terran has is solely represented by HSMs (which is another just big AoE "blob" "thing"), or PDD - which has the 50% (if not more) responsibility for bad and stalemate games Nerfing PDD was one good way to reduce stalemates, but that's like a solution of half the way, the other half is to give Terran reliable utility.. Mech for example didn't suffer cause of not enough AoE or DPS or whatever, mech suffered cause there was no utility, i.e. - the only utility mech relied on was a rather stalemate utility - i.e. - PDD They could've just added a disabler unit for the Terran and I'd be totally fine with it instead of one more DPS harassment "thing".. Sorry, but NO - the game shouldn't be designed nor balanced by argument like "cool to watch" or "dynamic".. More like - dynamic - probably is a good moto to balance/design the game upon, but "cool to watch" isn't a valid argument in my eyes, and most certainly shouldn't be.. Units should have ROLES and synergy, not just an "oomph" to it, they should "serve", not "amaze" (I mean amaze if possible - why not, but that's not the cruicial part of a unit), more like a fine balancing between the two things.. Let the "oomph" be a player skill "runtime" thing, not a unit "compile-time" thing If anyone of you remembers the "Total Annihilation Spider" - that's the kind of a unit I'm talking about - instead of DPS - more utility.. Would've made Mech viable (vs Protoss I mean), not just vs Zerg-ish (ofc. the unit would probably suck vs Zerg except vs Muta backdoors probably), and would be a bit more micro-intensive for the other faction that would be going into the "ball of mech units" overall I think.. AND would have a crazy potential of good players with good target fire disable multiple things simultaneously by alternating the target it's focusing #6 - A bit more "positive" thoughts now.. I LOVE what they're doing with the Zerg.. There's so much depth potential in the new units - as bizzare as it sounds - Zerg got the best treatment of all the races, or at least IMO most well thought out additions that "serve" instead of "oomph" things.. In other words - instead of more explosions (well they got some of it) - Zerg got more UTILITY :D I mean - Ravagers are a good way to do bunker-busts and a bit of "zoning" ability, and Infestors got infinite times more useful cause of some increased utility they are providing What I especially like about the "direction" of Zerg is - Zerg is finally getting some Back-door love, finally.. What I personally however think would've been the better approach of it is - make the Corruptor provide more backdoor utility, not just another "random" "void ray" attack thing In other words - I'd honestly suggest for Zerg the following: A - Remove the Corruptor's new ability and keep it's current "Corruption" ability B - Make a research on the Hive that will give the Corruptors the ability to carry and drop Spores and Spines - make them have THAT backdoor utility, instead of "random voidray attack thing" or something C - Leave the Nydus as is.. The new nydus is so damn broken that it's really hard to see it not breaking games, because - honestly - stray away from trouble, don't ask for it.. And by "trouble" in the sentence just above - I mean the following - when alternating/adding new units - don't add things that are too damn strong vs one of the other two races and almost not making a difference vs the other.. That's a vey easy lesson to learn after the Widow-Mine and/or Ghost history.. The mine was too damn w.t.f. blob vs Zerg for too long until it got overnerfed, then strayed back a bit, and totally kept being useless vs Protoss until very lately when it became "too much of a thing", I mean - no need for such things at all really Don't "follow" "BroodWar utility" - BW could "afford" such a "badly designed utility" cause army movement wasn't so easy and unit pathing wasn't so smart and AoE wasn't so destructive.. For example giving Terran units that are exclusively anti-zerg and don't do a thing vs Protoss, or vice versa - Protoss killers but not do a thing vs Zerg - that's a really BAD design in the beginning to start with Long-story-short - above I meant the following: #7 - my personal impression/opinion is that with the new Nydus Zerg got a "piece of that Widow-Mine-problem treatment" as I believe that the new Nydus - vs Terran Nydus and backdoor would still be "meh", but vs Protoss would wreck everything That's bad idea overall honestly.. TRUE - that it gives diversity, but also - it's a lot of design trouble asking for a generic mechanic such as "backdooring".. In other words - if it's generic - make it "stay" generic.. Make it flexible - if someone can't deal with it make it less impactful vs those who can't deal with it, if someone can - make it less easy to stop, not vice versa with those things That's why I honestly think that nydus should be kept "alone" as is and make the Corruptors (by being able to drop and carry spores and spines) partially do that thing as I personally think that Protoss would have less trouble with it, and Terran would have more.. The nydus as is - IMO is such an anti-Protoss targeted which is really bad design starting point The rest can still be done with Overlord drops as well as the new Swarm Host way of functioning (which may or may not be concerning, but has to be tested/seen how it would be working) Overall - those are my point-of-view things, hopefully some end up to better gameplay or discussion at least :D (Thanks for the patience - if someone actually cared to read the whole wall-of-text thing) | ||
|
LaLuSh
Sweden2358 Posts
On November 20 2014 16:02 ETisME wrote: Dota has turn rate etc and remains to be an awesome micro intensive game. There are some terrible attack animation heroes like twin headed dragon and not that many champions in lol are as versatile as vayne either. You can look up the top 5 weekly lol highlights to really see what people like about the game. It's incredible to see how some master the same 4 spells and make their champion do unimaginable escapes or counter kills No turn rate etc is merely a characteristic of lol, just like you cannot block champions with your champion model. I think you're right. There are ways of creating interesting micro intensive games like dota2 without going the maximum unit-responsiveness route. Ultimately I think it has to do with what kind of a game it is. Dota2 doesn't really pretend hero abilities and items in the game are balanced in relation to each other. They're balanced against a backdrop of incredibly strong defender's advantages. There's no concept of balancing for "equal power curves" (every hero needing to have equal strength and utility in all parts of a game, you know, the things that keep League balance designers occupied). XP and Gold discrepancies regularly balloon out of proportion without icefrog feeling a need to go out and exterminate them (even though some rubberbanding was added recently). It's an extremely asymmetrical game. League in comparison is a game which is much more concerned with concepts like equal power curves, or keeping XP and Gold differences within reasonable limits. Every champion is meticulously balanced in relation to every other champion (or at least attempted to). In that sense League has to emphasize other meaningful differentiators of skill. So it has all that movement & aim sweetness in it. I'd wish SC2 went more in the direction of dota2 actually, which sort of makes it absurd that I keep arguing about the need for adding a bunch of intricate micro tricks. I think that's the direction you want to take your game if you want to emphasize and accentuate the uniqueness of compositions, play styles and strategies. In that case I couldn't even be mad if these advanced micro tricks didn't end up being a part of the game. I think in reality SC2 is a bit closer to League in style and philosophy. Compositions are balanced in relation to each other. Too much rubberbanding towards equality. Which becomes a problem when what you've professed to be aiming for is to have all the races feel distinct, asymmetrical and unique. I think there's a certain type of game flow which helps enhance that perception, and that's the dota2 style of balancing overpowered stuff against a backdrop of extremely strong defender's advantages. | ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
| ||
|
TedCruz2016
Hong Kong271 Posts
#5 - Cyclone should not have a role of a map domination unit.. Seriously - who the hell needs map domination vs a race that has to stay no matter what in it's base most of the time till they have an "effective clump of units to go out with" ready ?? It should have a specific type of units it's good against (more like - have a specific set of units that are it's bane).. Thinking of death-ball-disassembler unit - i.e. - "Key Target Priority Sniper" unit - something that deals with the "Viking squads hit or miss" problem vs Colossi in a rather very elegant way.. Therefore no offense - but the unit should suck vs certain units The hell with map dominance cause you're not relying on map dominance already.. Terran has scan which basically removes the need to have a map dominance as well as most advanced drop mechanic.. What Terran struggles right now are those key priority "in the back - well-guarded" units such as Colossi or Swarm Hosts, so why not keep strict role with the new unit to fix a problem that exists ? Well, I think the addition of Cyclone is an attempt to solve mech's low mobility problem, also an encouragement for T players to diversify their strategies other than bioball alone in both TvP and TvZ. I believe it's designed to counter blink stalkers, though it seems a little OP in the showmatch videos. The unit will not be scraped but definitely will be nerfed - 9 + 9vs armor instead of flat 18 damage; lower HP; shorter range; attacking ground unit only. Those are my guesses. I totally agree with you about the deathball-disassembler unit for T. Usually T is in a huge disadvantage in late game because T's fighting P and Z's late game units with MMM. T should have the ability to defeat a well-established deathball instead of incessant harassments of MMM drops to slow the opponent down. I wish Blizzard could make a STUN spell - stunning a single unit for a few seconds, disabling it from attacking or moving - and replace ghost's snipe or raven's auto turrent with it. On the other hand, with the hardened shield removal and the sieged tank pickup, it is possible to make mech the new normal in TvP. Without immortal, P still have blink stalkers and pheonix to counter tank, so it will be a fair play. | ||
|
meshfusion
Russian Federation232 Posts
On November 20 2014 06:51 TheDwf wrote: The problem with their "we'll add micro!" campaign is that they don't seem to understand what is micro (or rather interesting micro) in Starcraft to begin with. They seem to have a MOBA (or War3-like, but it cannot work when applied to a different genre) conception about it; but microing ≠ casting a spell. It is no coincidence if the race that received the biggest amount of SC2 nonsense, Protoss, has the most spellcasters—and despite that is not the most micro-intensive race! No one yells "great micro!" when a Terran presses 1T. Activating Cloak is the trivial part of Banshee micro. Waaah, the l4z0r of your Void ray is twice its size after you pressed the button; how thrilling. Micro is so much more than clicking buttons that trigger a mere bonus effect. It is about reflexes, mouse accuracy, speed of execution, anticipating adverse movements… Probably the spell that manages to add the most depth based on this is Blink, but Protoss has to pay a heavy tribute for that. Pay special attention to the kind of environement in which Blink micro is the most efficient: low or medium eco situations with only a handful of units. Certainly not the 150-200 supply scenarii which are nonetheless constantly featured since more than 2 years… If you want to see "more micro," how about allowing players to play more low or medium eco situations in which more interactions like this can occur? But instead of that you promote the high eco model that propels players towards the fateful "big engagements" in which the battle is won or lost in the 4 first seconds. Please work on solid fundamentals. An economy that makes sense. Simple units with elegant interactions. Don't bother adding 36 buttons to the Thor or the Colossus, they would still be garbage. Showering the game in MOBA gimmicks to create fake excitement that will die 4 months after LotV is out is not the way to go… I wish I could upvote this post +1000000 points. Holy shit you are so right man. That's exactly what their problem is  I hope David Kim gets to read your post | ||
|
FrozenProbe
Italy276 Posts
On November 20 2014 18:46 TedCruz2016 wrote: On the other hand, with the hardened shield removal and the sieged tank pickup, it is possible to make mech the new normal in TvP. Without immortal, P still have blink stalkers and pheonix to counter tank, so it will be a fair play. Hardened shields aren't gone entirely, you can soak up 200 damage of any kind with the new active ability. It isn't a complete hard-counter but immortals are still really good vs siege tanks, especially with the new warp prism, another unit that can destroy siege lines is the AoE ball that they added, if you clump up your tanks I need maybe 2 of those things to demolish everything. Anyways, mech will be probably better vs protoss. But not with the current iformations that we have on the economy. | ||
|
effecto
France142 Posts
| ||
|
SeriousLus
169 Posts
every sentence of David could be addressed with an essay of its own but its too much work so I just do what i always do when I read sth from Dave.. SIGH..................... and cry | ||
|
Daralii
United States16991 Posts
On November 20 2014 18:46 TedCruz2016 wrote: Well, I think the addition of Cyclone is an attempt to solve mech's low mobility problem, also an encouragement for T players to diversify their strategies other than bioball alone in both TvP and TvZ. I believe it's designed to counter blink stalkers, though it seems a little OP in the showmatch videos. The unit will not be scraped but definitely will be nerfed - 9 + 9vs armor instead of flat 18 damage; lower HP; shorter range; attacking ground unit only. Those are my guesses. I totally agree with you about the deathball-disassembler unit for T. Usually T is in a huge disadvantage in late game because T's fighting P and Z's late game units with MMM. T should have the ability to defeat a well-established deathball instead of incessant harassments of MMM drops to slow the opponent down. I wish Blizzard could make a STUN spell - stunning a single unit for a few seconds, disabling it from attacking or moving - and replace ghost's snipe or raven's auto turrent with it. On the other hand, with the hardened shield removal and the sieged tank pickup, it is possible to make mech the new normal in TvP. Without immortal, P still have blink stalkers and pheonix to counter tank, so it will be a fair play. I'd say it's anti-colossus more than it is anti-blink. Near impossible to keep colossi alive against them unless you load it into a prism. | ||
|
TedCruz2016
Hong Kong271 Posts
| ||
|
ZAiNs
United Kingdom6525 Posts
On November 20 2014 21:20 TedCruz2016 wrote: Anti-colossus? Are you kidding me? Last time I checked, cyclone's range is 5, which is only a half of upgraded colossus'. Cyclones have more range when they lock-on it seems, and there is a range upgrade for the Cyclone. And upgraded Colossi currently have range 9, not 10, and in LotV at the moment they have 8. | ||
|
papaz
Sweden4149 Posts
On November 20 2014 07:56 LaLuSh wrote: It's hard to care and hard to argue against when what they say is so vague it could mean practically anything. Pretty much this. Nobody but David Kim can be so vague it's near impossible to know what he is talking about. He basically has made a lengthy post saying "it's alpha, we are testing, nothing is final" and has labeled his blog as "dev update" which is a joke. It's not an update of anything until something is shown. | ||
|
TedCruz2016
Hong Kong271 Posts
On November 20 2014 21:24 ZAiNs wrote: Cyclones have more range when they lock-on it seems, and there is a range upgrade for the Cyclone. And upgraded Colossi currently have range 9, not 10, and in LotV at the moment they have 8. It's not finalized anyway. If it's really an anti-colossus unit, it may lose its ability to shoot and kite air unit thus P can go skytoss or do immortal/disruptor drop to harass. And by the way, is armory a requirement to produce cyclone? If the answer's yes, P will have plenty of time to react. | ||
|
Liquid`Nazgul
22427 Posts
The most basic example is zealot probe micro vs lings in BW if you don't know how it works and you see 1 zealot and probes take out 10 zerglings your reaction will be "holy fuck how did he do that I didn't know that was possible that is amazing". This is a good thing. Opposed to the suggestion that someone watching that will be "well I don't know how that works that sucks". Please for the love of god forget the premise that you need to understand what you are watching. It's such a huge deal to where this game is going to go. If you don't understand you absolutely can and will be impressed, and if you do understand you will have even more appreciation. Casuals and hardcores alike will benefit more from it. There doesn't have to be an artificial separation in what both of those audiences like to watch. Listen to LaLuSh! p.s. I do love the approach to having and defending more bases. | ||
|
Jerom
Netherlands588 Posts
It's still an amazing game to watch though, but if they really want to reach for the stars and start competing with the Moba games again, then this issue really needs to be fixed imo. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On November 20 2014 21:57 Jerom wrote: I'd love to see them reconsider the macro in the game. I know Starcraft is a macro game, but the game is simply frustrating to play when you aren't at least decent at the game. There are so many players who don't have the time to play this game every week, and I just don't see how this game is fun to play if you aren't going to fully commit to it. It's still an amazing game to watch though, but if they really want to reach for the stars and start competing with the Moba games again, then this issue really needs to be fixed imo. ?? Assuming ladder does its job, your opponents should have roughly similar macro, so what do you mean? | ||
| ||
