|
On April 15 2016 15:56 Warcloud wrote:
Part of strategy is executing quickly. This requires good mechanics which simply increases the skill cap of the game. League of Legends requires strategy too but you have essentially infinite amounts of time to make strategic decisions.
Strategy and Mechanics are two different things. While SC2 is certainly much stronger on the mechanical side of things with LotV, the amount of strategy in the game has faltered immensely ever since HotS.
At the competitive level, most matchups revolve around one viable composition (i.e. biomine vs ling bane muta ultra in HotS and bio tankivac liberator vs ling bane muta ultra in LotV), whereas early Wings of Liberty had at least two viable comps per matchup.
Viewership for SC2 has dropped immensely because people are sick of seeing the exact same games with the exact same unit compositions play out. Meanwhile, Blizzard have no interest in making multiple unit compositions competitively viable, i.e. when was the last time you saw a professional mech gamer do a good tournament run?
Even League of Legends with its enforced 1 top, 1 mid, 1 jungle, support and adc bot map formations has more strategic diversity than SC2, and that mainly lies in item builds and champion diversity.
|
|
|
On June 08 2016 01:26 Thinh123456 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2016 00:43 BaronVonOwn wrote:On June 08 2016 00:05 Thinh123456 wrote:
I clearly don't want to slow down the pacing of combat in the game, but things like Baneling that cause me instantly lose because of missed click, missed closely watching is totatty unacceptable and very frustrating. DK and his dev team really misunderstand about this matter. Fast-pace game is good but instantly loss is a really an opposite, annoying problem. In my op, this is the most fundamental thing that every players even pros feel very frustrated about.
I agree with this, but it doesn't matter because they're not going to change the game. If anything there's been a clear direction towards adding more and more bullshit ways to lose in both expansions. Why fight it? Now instead of positional, macro games I just try to drown my opponents in all the bullshit strats I can think of. Inflicting the bullshit is way, way more fun than trying to survive the bullshit. I still hope that they will do this, perhaps not in this expansion but in another expansion of SC2. (SC:BW was released 1 year after SC:Origin). I think we need to accept that this is the expansion of DK and Blizzard, not for us much, so let they do whatever they want and keep praying after that they will do what the community asks for in the next expansion of SC2.
Jesus I'm glad ur not in charge of SC2 bacause that design would be more horrible than the new command and conquer...
SC2 Was always about speed, BW aswell... In BW u had some compositions for years (ever saw non mech vs protoss after 2007/8 ????) The game is more accessible than ever now, and it was horrible in the end of hots because it was whatever vs swarmhost in 2 hour games (looks like its fun for u playing vs bad free units)...
SC2 is fine now, we need ladder revamp and more casual friendly content and thats it... job done(thinking about how much of the pie named budget SC2 has)
|
On June 08 2016 01:08 BaronVonOwn wrote:
it's not that siege tanks and lurkers are weaker in SC2. It's just that the other units have been made so much stronger. Marines start with 45 hp, and go up to 55 vs. 40 max in BW. You've got marauders, roaches, ravagers etc. which can take out lurkers and siege tanks efficiently. Air units are way stronger than in BW. The power creep on medivacs vs. dropships is just ridiculous. Basically all the offensive units have been buffed and the defensive options were left in the dust. Then you have issues like the broken high ground advantage and warp-ins negating defender's advantage. Removing scourge gives all those super-speedy dropships and air units free reign. All this means SC2 strongly favors offense and if you're playing defensively you're in for a bad time.
Exactly.
Its especially the air units which have become ridiculous. In BW air units have always been rather fragile and rarely dealt much damage. It was always about mobility, never about DPS or durability. But in SC2 air units have almost become core units. And G2A has become weaker in comparison. Its incredible.
On June 08 2016 02:11 Barrin wrote:
Strategy is everything but the execution.
Actually no. There is also tactics. Many people get these two words mixed up but they are both something different. Strategy is long term. Your strategy is a unit composition, an expansion pattern, a general idea of what you want to do.
Tactics is the maneuvers you perform to do your strategy. Taking high grounds, defending choke points, etc.
But to most people these words have become interchangeable.
On June 08 2016 02:19 PharaphobiaSC wrote:
SC2 Was always about speed, BW aswell... In BW u had some compositions for years (ever saw non mech vs protoss after 2007/8 ????)
I have seen bio against P more often than you would believe. Bio is incredibly powerful against P in BW. If the P does not have any storms or reavers then the bio army will just roflstomp the P army any time. Marines are effective against anything P has both on the ground and in the air. Dragoons on the other hand deal only 50% damage against marines and medics. Firebats deal extra damage against zealots and full damage against shields.
Then there is the question when you go mech and how you go mech. There is not just 1 mech in BW. You can go for mass vultures, goliaths, tanks, wraiths, etc.
And in TvZ you also have lots of options. Go bio + vessels, bio + tanks, pure mech from the start, late game mech switch, bio + mines, wraiths, vulture drops, etc.
|
|
|
I played 20,000 games. I find no sense to lotv . I'm about to stop playing .
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On June 07 2016 23:43 Barrin wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2016 17:55 deacon.frost wrote:On June 04 2016 15:15 WeddingEpisode wrote:
Blizzard did mention slowing down the game as
a possibility about a year or so ago, I don't know if it was
mentioned again though.
They were offering slowing the game speed which was unbelievably stupid IMO. Not sure what they were thinking, if anything. I just had to find this. Show nested quote +Experimenting with slowing down the pacing of combat in SC2
This is a topic we got a lot of community feedback on, so we did some heavy exploration in this area. The biggest thing we tried here was reducing the attack speed of each unit in the game by 40% and altering some damage values to compensate. Even though a change like this would seemingly have a huge implication on balance, we realized the gain wasn’t as big as we expected. Games feel different from before, but the main question has to be “Is this a positive change that makes games better?” We’re just not sure of this yet. For example, we’re seeing that slower engagements seem to reduce the skill component in combat. Additionally, games feel more dragged out than before. But we’ve only had limited testing at this point, so we’ll continue to explore this area in more detail before making a final call. source
I was writing about some community update where they were offering what I wrote. What you found was in beta and they didn't even test it... Well, who am I kidding, they removed macro mechanics and returned them anyway.
Multiplayer Game Speed
We also wanted to bring up a new idea for your feedback. We have received multiple pieces of feedback from Korean pro players who believe it would be nice if lower-level players had a slower game speed on ladder, similar to how it is in co-op missions mode.
If we are to consider something like this, we could imagine an approach like this: platinum and above players would play on the current speed (fastest), whereas gold and below would play one notch slower on fast speed. There are some feasibility issues we’d have to overcome, but we’d like to at least get your feedback on this.
We see both advantages and disadvantages to a change like this. Similar to why co-op missions uses different game speeds, StarCraft II is one of the most difficult games to master, and it may be both helpful and enjoyable for players of certain skill levels to be given extra time to think and act during their games. At the same time however, this would mean that the game wouldn’t feel the same for everyone, and it could also just feel “wrong” to make a change such as this since the game has been working a certain way for so long.
Obviously there are other pros and cons of making a change like this, and we have much time to consider the idea. We would love to hear your thoughts on this concept.
Source> http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/20419312467
|
From merely gold level casual player point of view (who enjoyes the game) I think Blizzard has done a fantastic job in making the game accessible to players like myself. Tons of UI help and all and I can't complain even if there are some more features I want :-)
Anyway, regarding the game speed. Yeah, the game is a bit too fast and not much strategy at all is involved in games below gm/masters.
It's pretty much keep you production as high as possible while a-moving into opponent and hope you have more units.
If the game speed would be a bit slower perhaps there could be more thought out moves done during the course of the game. Right now I'm too busy minding my own business so I don't react to the opponent at all. I have a build order and I stick to it no matter what.
But still I enjoy yolo a-moving my stimmed-bio-ball into opponent and get a huge grin om my face when it turns out I have more units than him.
|
Yes the game is too fast with 12 starting workers. Thats why most games feels like a coinflip. They should revert to HOTS economy with 6 workers.
|
On June 08 2016 17:57 SlammerSC2 wrote:
Yes the game is too fast with 12 starting workers. Thats why most games feels like a coinflip. They should revert to HOTS economy with 6 workers.
12 worker start just sped the early game a lot. Unless there was inbase proxy 2 gate there it was the same thing happening every game. It was boring as a viewer and boring as a player. I'm glad we got rid of that (but I do miss the proxy gates.)
|
On June 08 2016 18:01 Alluton wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2016 17:57 SlammerSC2 wrote:
Yes the game is too fast with 12 starting workers. Thats why most games feels like a coinflip. They should revert to HOTS economy with 6 workers. 12 worker start just sped the early game a lot. Unless there was inbase proxy 2 gate there it was the same thing happening every game. It was boring as a viewer and boring as a player. I'm glad we got rid of that (but I do miss the proxy gates.)
it removed the early game it didnt just speed it up.
|
On June 08 2016 18:09 91matt wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2016 18:01 Alluton wrote:On June 08 2016 17:57 SlammerSC2 wrote:
Yes the game is too fast with 12 starting workers. Thats why most games feels like a coinflip. They should revert to HOTS economy with 6 workers. 12 worker start just sped the early game a lot. Unless there was inbase proxy 2 gate there it was the same thing happening every game. It was boring as a viewer and boring as a player. I'm glad we got rid of that (but I do miss the proxy gates.) it removed the early game it didnt just speed it up.
It removed the useless 5 minutes from the start of the game. It was boring as a viewer and boring as a player. Every game casters had to figure out something not related to the game to talk about to fill it.
|
On June 08 2016 18:12 Alluton wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2016 18:09 91matt wrote:On June 08 2016 18:01 Alluton wrote:On June 08 2016 17:57 SlammerSC2 wrote:
Yes the game is too fast with 12 starting workers. Thats why most games feels like a coinflip. They should revert to HOTS economy with 6 workers. 12 worker start just sped the early game a lot. Unless there was inbase proxy 2 gate there it was the same thing happening every game. It was boring as a viewer and boring as a player. I'm glad we got rid of that (but I do miss the proxy gates.) it removed the early game it didnt just speed it up. It removed the useless 5 minutes from the start of the game. It was boring as a viewer and boring as a player. Every game casters had to figure out something not related to the game to talk about to fill it.
It removed important early game choices.
Simple example:
HotS PvZ: available macro openers for Protoss: Gate expand, Forge fast expand (forge first), FFE (nexus first) and extremely greedy Nexus first into gate.
LotV: 1 or 2 Gate -> Nexus -> Core
In lotV nexus first is negligibly more economical (You get 1 probe more?)
In other words there is no choice for builds in early game anymore and You always open the same (very similar) way which is still "boring" no?
The fact that casters like to ramble instead of paying attention to details of how players openers collides it does not mean it was unimportant.
|
I don't understand why people are trying to change the definition of tactics when its always been synonymous with strategy.
Anyway, I don't think SC2 is too fast. If it was slow you'd have people complaining it'd too much about micro and people moving around slow units far quicker than they are able to puts them at an incredible disadvantage.
I think I have to disagree with "removed important early game choices". Not sure how I should word this, but if I lose early game in WoL/HotS, its because I was at an awkward time of my build and I got caught with my pants down and i'd be losing at the exact same spot. If I lose early in LOTV, I'm at way different timings of my build instead of that just 1 spot in WoL/HOTS. Early on, I've made like 1-4 decisions, but in LOTV I've probably made like 10 or 20 (bullshit numbers). I feel like I made way MORE choices at the point of loss, if that makes sense.
|
On June 08 2016 18:12 Alluton wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2016 18:09 91matt wrote:On June 08 2016 18:01 Alluton wrote:On June 08 2016 17:57 SlammerSC2 wrote:
Yes the game is too fast with 12 starting workers. Thats why most games feels like a coinflip. They should revert to HOTS economy with 6 workers. 12 worker start just sped the early game a lot. Unless there was inbase proxy 2 gate there it was the same thing happening every game. It was boring as a viewer and boring as a player. I'm glad we got rid of that (but I do miss the proxy gates.) it removed the early game it didnt just speed it up. It removed the useless 5 minutes from the start of the game. It was boring as a viewer and boring as a player. Every game casters had to figure out something not related to the game to talk about to fill it.
They had to talk about something else cos half of the casters didn't have enough game knowledge anyway or were casting match-ups they didn't play. The early game for me was where you planned out what you were going to do and made key decisions, its now gone. You barely have time to do location hotkeys let alone think about anything.
|
On June 08 2016 20:00 lestye wrote:
I don't understand why people are trying to change the definition of tactics when its always been synonymous with strategy.
not in the context of warfare :
(tactics) [also treated as singular] The art of disposing armed forces in order of battle and of organizing operations, especially during contact with an enemy
Strategy : The art of planning and directing overall military operations and movements in a war or battle
(source : oxford dictionary)
In Sc2 :
* strategy = I'm gonna push on the zerg's fourth when my bio hit +2/+2 while dropping his main
* tactics = I'm gonna run in, burrow my mines, stim my bio ball and as soon as I see the banelings coming I run the marines back and split them as fast as I can
|
Back on subject :
SC2 is not too fast it's our tunnel vision under stress that makes it look like so, the more you practice and get used to situations the more you can actually multitask and find room to adapt during fights.
PROOF : watch your own replays and you'll think "OMG, what was I doing there? was I in the kitchen making a sandwich when he engaged my army?"
|
On June 08 2016 20:44 Gwavajuice wrote:
Back on subject :
SC2 is not too fast it's our tunnel vision under stress that makes it look like so, the more you practice and get used to situations the more you can actually multitask and find room to adapt during fights.
PROOF : watch your own replays and you'll think "OMG, what was I doing there? was I in the kitchen making a sandwich when he engaged my army?"
Yeah, you are right. But the game right now focuss too much on the competitive aspect and ignores the fun part of the game. The reason is not because of the high pace (we get used to it and we love it of course) but because of the instant GG. The threat of your whole army melts in a seconds is too high in SC2 and it make players especially the casuals feel stressful and nervous, and ruin their good experience of the game. Yep, maybe you are young and very passionate, you don't mind the hardcore competitive gaming but there will be time when you just want to play the game for fun and so do many people will be. I do not understand why Blizzard push this game too much on the hardcore side and forget about the fun part of the game especially 1v1. I also do not see this problem in BW.
|
|
|
I dont think the game is too fast, there are simply too many gimmicky things in LOTV compared to HOTS.
The faster start of LOTV is great and so many things have improved, but it lacks on the fun 1v1 department.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
