| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20338 Posts
On February 19 2015 12:28 eviltomahawk wrote: Actual kinda translation Source I've seen the same vid used for Dota2, Heroes of the Storm, and The Order 1886. It's the Hitler rant vid of our time. Cmon, you don't mention THE nvidia video? :0 + Show Spoiler + | ||
|
ZenithM
France15952 Posts
On February 19 2015 02:35 NarAliya wrote: If this is the case then its a good thing, but please do not compare micro to MOBA. Its an insult. If SC2 was WC3 just with a higher unit cap, then game would have been amazing. I always laugh when I hear the word "micro" in the context of a MOBA. There is no micro in a MOBA, simply because there is no macro. Can't have the one without the other. Sure, talk about "control" or "mechanics" or "skill" all you want, but it's sad that the word "micro" was translated into the MOBA world... "Micro" is cool and skilful when you have many other things to do, like in particular act on a bigger scale, i.e. "macro". It's way more impressive to see a player control his units and then realize that all this time, he was still producing units, expanding and upgrading, rather than watch a third-rate foreigner micro the shit out of his probe to block a hatch only to delay his own nexus for 30 seconds... | ||
|
Dingodile
4139 Posts
On February 19 2015 02:35 NarAliya wrote: If this is the case then its a good thing, but please do not compare micro to MOBA. Its an insult. If SC2 was WC3 just with a higher unit cap, then game would have been amazing. Never for a higher cap in wc3. low number of units and very micro based is its beauty. Remove tomeofexperience and mana regeneration item and a small fix on blademaster and it would be a perfect game. I really loved to micro my ~28 units and the control of 8 buttons. Impossible with Zerg because of Queens and buildings. I still consider that TvZ in sc2 have too much units in 200supply. I really dislike that zerglings and marines are 1supply thing. double their strength and life and 2supply would be much much better I think. | ||
|
Phaenoman
568 Posts
On February 19 2015 01:48 tamino wrote: This discussion about protoss warpgate mecanism being one of the major problems of sc2 is so right, but so WOL beta too  . Guys this has been discussed for years now, blizzard kept saying they wouldn't do anything regarding this subject, and nothing was announced for lotv. For myself I just lost faith, we will keep seeing ugly things like corruptors/vikings hard countering colossus and being useless afterward, ridiculous mass CC/mules late game, insta zerg maxout or the so called 300/200 zerg pop, and the never dying 4 gates allins...On February 19 2015 02:01 tamino wrote: Of course its not like its a big damn issue like in the old days, but it's still a viable build with some adjustments made and I find it so ridiculous... But agreed you dont see it often anymore on pro level. Its just funny such a no brain build (not no skill, but no brain) is still around after such a long time. Obviously it wasnt the main part of my post, but it is heavily related to warp gate, and look at how many changes were needed to try to solve it . And I play protoss. Wasn't that hard to guess that u play Protoss. Otherwise u'd mentioned other huge flaws. Anyways, what I dislike - and that's why I also have been liking the Idea of Warpgate-Gateway-Dualism - is the fact that in some cases players are forced to get a certain upgrade. Otherwise they can't compete, e.g. Warpgate, Stimpack (at least u decide if u wanna get CS or Stim first, but still), Siege-Upgrade in WoL, etc. | ||
|
404AlphaSquad
839 Posts
On February 19 2015 07:02 Big J wrote: There is really not a lot of difference in between those. Whether your Dragoon does 10 (+5vs armored, +10vs massive) or your dragoon does 20 (-5vs medium, -10vs big) is mostly a way of formulating things. The Broodwar system makes it so that the units are harder to tweak (you can't only nerf the damage a dragoon does vs medium, without either influencing its damage vs big/small too; or without changing all other units with explosive damage values). But they are a little more consistent to learn since you can predict which unit your unit is good against, just from knowing the damage type. (He has Ultras, so getting something with explosive is probably good) But in the end it comes down to your arbitrary unit designs and interactions anyways. 20damage can be high or low depending on your opponent's health values. There are also a number of other differences in the way how sc2 damage system works compared to Bw that makes it inferior to the Bw damage system ( for example how armor gets applied). The only advantage I grant the sc2 sytem is the increased flexibility of their dmg system when it comes to an interaction of a specific unit type. | ||
|
NarAliya
14 Posts
On February 19 2015 18:51 Dingodile wrote: Never for a higher cap in wc3. low number of units and very micro based is its beauty. Remove tomeofexperience and mana regeneration item and a small fix on blademaster and it would be a perfect game. I really loved to micro my ~28 units and the control of 8 buttons. Impossible with Zerg because of Queens and buildings.. I played UD and staying at 50 food to bank gold vs some noob Orc player who could do whatever the hell he wanted was really bad gameplay imo. A higher food cap and scaled upkeep would have balanced that matchup at least. UD units, although having alot of utility, are weak individually but begin to scale absurdly well in numbers. That's why Coil/Nova is such a game ender when backed by micro, why mass Fiends/Frenzied Ghouls/Destro totally wrecks players and why NecroWagon is a niche but extremely dangerous strat in 4's RT and FFA. A higher food cap would have made expansions a little more prevalent rather than something reserved for Human macro game or manner Night Elves who just wanted to piss you off. Undead expos were awful outside of 3's/4's not only because they were expensive to protect (can't TP to it for instance), but also because UD never had ability to go above 50 food to have a large standing army that deterred attacks anyway. UD units are damn expensive also... Seriously, Lucifer/Believe/or some UD pro said this: "You can smoke, you can drink, you can take drugs. But never play Undead" The UD army is the fastest army in the game, but we had the least amount of units due to this bullshit. Higher cap --> scaled upkeep --> Expansions more important and accessible --> UD not getting wreaked constantly by higher food armies. On February 17 2015 15:40 jinjin5000 wrote:I still consider that TvZ in sc2 have too much units in 200supply. I really dislike that zerglings and marines are 1supply thing. double their strength and life and 2supply would be much much better I think. I can't say I disagree with that. Sounds like a good thing in my opinion and it would make engagements more entertaining and longer played out. And damn, this post made me really miss WC3. Gonna play it tonight! | ||
|
Dingodile
4139 Posts
| ||
|
Jenia6109
Russian Federation1613 Posts
On February 19 2015 21:45 Dingodile wrote: I played UD too. I know that Orc is pretty damn strong against UD BUT until 50supply. UD biggest problem (vs Orc) is the expansion and the try to have 50+ supply. Orc's main job is trying to avoid it and stay at 50 supply forever. Just in case, UD is much much stronger in the 100 vs 100 supply fights vs Orc if Heroes lvl arent too differently. No big expansion problems vs NE and HU. Are we discussing WC3:Legacy of the Void? | ||
|
Crainy
Germany83 Posts
On February 19 2015 07:12 KeksX wrote: Well thats another point, I doubt they even have a big enough team on SC2 anymore to do any big changes. I guess Heroes Of The Storm is where all the money goes into right now. It's hard not be pessimistic these days. I really hope Blizzard realizes what they have with SC2 and doesn't just let it slowly fade into oblivion after LotV. Not trying to sound like a dick, but im genuinely curious, what do you think DOES Blizzard have with SC2? What do you think is its potential for the company? Because I dont see it anymore. | ||
|
[PkF] Wire
France24239 Posts
On February 20 2015 01:42 Crainy wrote: Not trying to sound like a dick, but im genuinely curious, what do you think DOES Blizzard have with SC2? What do you think is its potential for the company? Because I dont see it anymore. If LotV is great, that would ensure Blizzard a total monopoly for the 10 next years over one of the most fundamental genres of e-sports. And who knows, maybe the MOBA frenzy won't last after all. | ||
|
SC2Toastie
Netherlands5725 Posts
On February 20 2015 01:43 [PkF] Wire wrote: If LotV is great, that would ensure Blizzard a total monopoly for the 10 next years over one of the most fundamental genres of e-sports. And who knows, maybe the MOBA frenzy won't last after all. The most fundamental genre with an exact total of one popular game? Blizzard is still invested in LOTV, it's their companies reputation and their biggest brand. Fucking this up means WC4 isn't takes seriously. Also, who invest tons of money into development if you - don't - care? | ||
|
eviltomahawk
United States11135 Posts
On February 19 2015 22:07 Jenia6109 wrote: Are we discussing WC3:Legacy of the Void? Not too far-fetched considering all the WC3 models that they've added to the SC2 map editor, but just on the PTR for now. The Arcade is hopefully gonna get real crazy once those carry over to the base game. | ||
|
[PkF] Wire
France24239 Posts
On February 20 2015 02:01 SC2Toastie wrote: The most fundamental genre with an exact total of one popular game? Blizzard is still invested in LOTV, it's their companies reputation and their biggest brand. Fucking this up means WC4 isn't takes seriously. Also, who invest tons of money into development if you - don't - care? Well RTS is one of the founding genres of e-sports. The number of games currently played doesn't matter. | ||
|
always_winter
United States195 Posts
The SC2 business model is inferior to the World of Warcraft business model, among others, in that it is not a perpetual form of revenue and offers little incentive for users to invest additional capital into the game, aside from purchasing expansions every three years. A monthly subscription to online multiplayer isn't the answer, but there are more elegant solutions like add-ons and customization which have already proven highly profitable in MOBA's like League of Legends (which, coupled with its immensely superior viewership, clearly indicate MOBA's are the more attractive product and it is no wonder Blizzard is investing more of its resources into development of Heroes of the Storm). Exacerbating this sad state of affairs (from the perspective of an RTS-lover) is the fact Blizzard is unwilling to humbly accept its gross missteps in initial game development, issues which were largely hidden in the early stages of Wings of Liberty due to unfamiliarity, but were quickly unearthed in latter development and remain painfully in place today. Heart of the Swarm, after the initial appeal of new units had subsided, in my opinion became one of the most destructive expansions Blizzard has ever released. Instead of resolving some of the core issues with game design, Blizzard opted to maintain the status-quo while injecting novel units in an attempt to shift the metagame, some of which, like the Swarm Host and Oracle, did far more harm than good to an already extremely delicate state of balance and design. The status-quo, the incredibly stale and/or poorly designed gameplay, remains entirely intact and Legacy of the Void is shaping to be the final nail in the SC2 coffin. | ||
|
[PkF] Wire
France24239 Posts
On February 20 2015 03:19 always_winter wrote: Heart of the Swarm, after the initial appeal of new units had subsided, in my opinion became one of the most destructive expansions Blizzard has ever released. Instead of resolving some of the core issues with game design, Blizzard opted to maintain the status-quo while injecting novel units in an attempt to shift the metagame, some of which, like the Swarm Host and Oracle, did far more harm than good to an already extremely delicate state of balance and design. The status-quo, the incredibly stale and/or poorly designed gameplay, remains entirely intact and Legacy of the Void is shaping to be the final nail in the SC2 coffin. Agree. And it's still happening : new units for little to no reason and blatant problems not being addressed. This is my main concern. | ||
|
KeksX
Germany3634 Posts
On February 20 2015 01:42 Crainy wrote: Not trying to sound like a dick, but im genuinely curious, what do you think DOES Blizzard have with SC2? What do you think is its potential for the company? Because I dont see it anymore. A game no one even TRIES to copy because of its complexity, a "sleeper fanbase" all over eSports that's just waiting for something big to happen, an already somewhat professional scene very very dedicated to the game together with a ton of diehard fans that will support the game forever and with all their money. (Potentially) the oldest eSports fanbase in all of eSports. I think SC2 has the potential to be one of the , if not THHE most consistent eSports. People have watched and enjoyed the Starcraft franchise 15 years +/-. Basically, it's potential is very similar to CS:GO which is currently without competition as well. | ||
|
Jenia6109
Russian Federation1613 Posts
So, for the opposite I will say that SC2 is perfect now! Ok, not so perfect. But here are just some things that make the game not perfect and i will count them. 1. Strong Warp Gate pushes in PvZ and sometimes in PvT in mid game. LotV solution: Warp Gate nerf and Zerg anti FF units. 2. Tempest vs Massive Air. LotV solution: Tempest rework. 3. Swarm Hosts in late game. LotV solution: Swarm Host rework (even in HotS!) 4. Mech in TvZ stalemates. LotV solution: Point Defence Drone nerf (even in HotS!) 5. Blink Stalkers in PvT. LotV solution: Warp Gate nerf again. 6. Mech is so weak in PvT. LotV solution: Immortal rework, adding the Cyclone. 7. Some units are not useful in lategame: Reaper. LotV solution: none. So, LotV will make the game perfect. What are you afraid of? I think even the economy change is unnecessary. But the Scan Range is necessary one! So, just wait for Reaper change and it will be 101% perfect RTS of all time until SC3. Chill guys, shake it off until the LotV! | ||
|
Xamo
Spain886 Posts
On February 18 2015 21:29 JCoto wrote: @BluzMan You just pointed the real point of Warpgate: there is no real option to go Gateway play other than 2-gate cheese (which is indeed a timing question). Warpgate should be a different level of tech (possibly at twilight level), with almost same functionality but with build times being slightly longer to warpgate units to its Gateway version, so Gateway play production > Warpgate play production, solving the all-in potential, the PvZ soultrain, the early game weakness until MSC, and solving the PvP Stalker shit (the defending player would have production advatage by using Gateway instead of Warpgate). With that, even Warpgate all-ins (Blink all-in and even some kind of Chargelot cheese) would be viable. Another added advantage would be that one could spend more Chronoboosts on tech units or upgrades considerating that WG time could be cut down. A posible downside is lategame strength and production, however that should not be a problema to Toss... In my opinion, complete dependance on an upgrade early game (WG) to simply play on par with other races is a design fail. With the new economy type in LotV, actual timings shouldn't matter to balance, so we could rethink them a bit, but I'm almost sure that Protoss would be balanced with that change (And I'm a Toss).... Close attenton to MSC though. Is not that hard to figure that out imao. Even within the actual meta, with slightly longer to build pylons (30s) 2-gate would stay in balance. Having longer production times for WG will not solve anything... You just need 1 more gateway Aka 150 minerals to compensate. With all the econony changes, that's a minor difference. For me, GW and FF are fun and are part of what makes Protoss unique. They should not be removed. Having midgame units that break FF will make protoss even more defensive, in my opinion. | ||
|
Xamo
Spain886 Posts
On February 18 2015 11:12 Big J wrote: Harassment has a lot to do with it, but I think it is mainly just that the unit interactions are much better in TvZ than in any other non-mirror matchup. You trade blow for blow, banelings for marines, mines for banelings, zerglings for mines, mutas for medivacs. Nothing ever comes without a real danger for the units involved. If you want to drop you know that your units are in severe risk of dying to mutalisks. Banelings don't kill units twice. Mines cooldown give zerg a lot of time to deal with the unit after it has activated. Marine speed and baneling speed have been intentionally designed in an extremely healthy relation to each other. Hellions wreck shit but also always take damage from queens and speedlings and roaches. And even when the dynamics aren't that good (like roach/hydra vs bio) there is still lots of unit trading involved. There are very little things that trade energy for resources or outrange the enemy in such a severe way that it can kill stuff for free. This isn't the case with forcefields, blink, Colossi, Photon Overcharge, Time Warp and Storms. Protoss always trades nothing vs something at the start of their battles until they run out of their initial defenisve abilities and range advantages. This creates dynamics in which Protoss oppoents build overwhelming force to survive the phase in which you get nothing done against them, to then evaporte them in very few seconds. And Protoss needs overwhelming force of trading prevention to not let that happen. The TvZ matchup becomes much worse if it gets to a phase in which there are also a lot of these sorts of units involved (Swarm Hosts, Vipers, Broodlords, Vikings Ravens, Siege Tanks). In PvZ and TvZ T/Z also utilize many more of those free trading mechanics against Protoss (Ghost, Viking, Swarm Host, Viper) and Protoss is much worse at defending mobile forces which can make proper medivac/mutalisk usage also such a free trading mechanic. That doesn't mean that those mechanics are bad in general - they are very much needed to overcome turtle play - but if they become your core way of playing both people have a hard time getting stuff done. I also think that a warp prism is too big of an investment for protoss to only harass, both in resources and in build time in the robotics facility. Terran can reuse medevacs in their core army, zerg does not even need that with speedlings. If the warp prism would be reusable in army vs army, less expensive and with shorter build times, we would see more games like TvZ with battles + harassment. The micro potential of the LotV WP is promising in army vs army situations, but buffs are needed to the cost and specially build time. | ||
|
Xamo
Spain886 Posts
On February 19 2015 02:35 NarAliya wrote: If this is the case then its a good thing, but please do not compare micro to MOBA. Its an insult. If SC2 was WC3 just with a higher unit cap, then game would have been amazing. That's not sc2, it is wc4 :-) | ||
| ||
|
|
CrankTV Team League
Bombastic Starleague
The PondCast
HomeStory Cup
Replay Cast
HomeStory Cup
Replay Cast
HomeStory Cup
OSC
Sparkling Tuna Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
