On April 02 2017 08:13 LtCalley wrote: thank you for this
i truly believe the 12 worker start ruined the game. i honestly don't know why i still play
It did ruin the game. Removing 1500 mineral patches + 12 worker start made the game too coin flippy.
If Blizzard wanted to really salvage some of the last year, they should add back 1500 minerals per every base. I dunno if people have seen any Brood War streams lately or played any Brood War but...1500 patches makes the game 100000000000x better because you can stay on 2,3, and 4 base longer and there is WAY more comeback potential even if you lose some workers or armies because you can rebuild.
12 worker start + removing minerals per base doomed LOTV to being the coin flippy BO win/loss game that it currently is. But the thing is we all know this is a huge issue and it could be addressed by reverting all patches to 1500 minerals and reverting worker start.
Problem is reverting 12 workers to 6 is probably too drastic for Blizzard, but honestly the game needs drastic changes. And for the love of god, winning/losing coin flip games to nydus worms and pylons under the ramp also really needs to be addressed imo.
On April 02 2017 11:55 stuchiu wrote: I always thought having early game all-ins as viable was integral to starcraft's identity.
The ironic thing is all-ins are more about build order win/loss in LOTV compared to WOL/HOTS. Like in WOL/HOTS you had almost 45 sec to 1 minute to react when you realized you were being all-ined. You could prepare. Remember all those 5-6 gate sentry all-ins where you'd see them doing it, it's very telegraphed, and you can prepare 4-5 bunkers.
Well...in LOTV those all-ins exist...it's just that they immediately end the game because they are not telegraphed and they hit at the exact same time that you see them. lol xD
And that's cause the 12 worker start has builds accelerated to points they are not possibly supposed to be at.
Warp prism adept all-in type of stuff...by the time you scout it, the warp prism is already to your base and about to warp-in mass adepts. You already have to have done a build that blind counters it if you want to live.
Same with invulnerable nydus worm. If the guy opts for this, by the time you scout his base and realize he's doing it, the nydus is already building in your main with queens about to pop out = you autolose unless you already were anticipating it and blind countered with cyclones, etc etc.
I really wish a lot of us here and in the community would petition or write up something to Blizzard about reverting some of the economy changes, and the 12 worker start, but i feel like it will just lead no where =/
After thinking about it more I dont mind early game allins in general. I LOVED ra3 and that game is just constant early aggression. But what I dont like about sc2 early allins is how unscoutable they often are especially in hots. Viable early game allins are acceptable if they can be scouted. It should be a gamble on the allining players part that can be used to punish corner cutting and greed. Viable early game allins should not be viable simply because you cant scout them fast enough resulting in a coin flip for the defender, where even if you went a defensive build if you went the wrong kind of defensive build you would lose. RA3 allins were generally the earlier type, hots protoss allins the latter. Im glad we have less coin flips now and more skillfull execution tbh.
for an allin to be healthy for the game it should be stopable in one of the following ways Defenders should a. be able to make a very small investment to stop the allin, like building on high ground vs zerg b. be able to somewhat reliably scout the allin, or at least enough parts of the opponents tech they can make good guesses. scouted answers need to be very very effective agianst the allin they deal with since there is a big downside for building defenses for something thats not coming. c. opening in a fairly defensiveness manner that still gives you a shot at the late game vs greedy builds if you can squeeze out edges latter on.
the problem with many of the best sc2 allins in the games past is that often, there was either 1. no strong deffensive build capable of stoping the allin consistently, you could know it was coming and loose anyway,blink stalker allin pre nerfs, and 1-1-1 allin pre protoss buffs are good examples. 2. no ability to scout if an allin is coming in time and further no ability to safe guard yourself against unscountable allins without coin flipping or crippling yourself in a macro game, proxy dts, proxy 5 minute orcles, proxy robos, proxy rax before the nerfs back in wol.
blizzard could have fixed this problem by buffing scouting, instead they just flattened alot of allins with econ, probably not the right approach but i prefer it over having to flip a coin to decide victory or defeat.
The thing i miss most honestly is the nice peaceful beginning to every game. It was so calm and chill at the start, the casters had time to talk about other things and build the hype, and for me this was a much less stressful experience. I really enjoyed learning how to scout and defending the iconic builds like 6 pool, 11/11 gate etc.
I completely understand why blizzard made the changes and I respect them doing so, I think its been long enough to accurately reflect on it. When i switch to HOTS or WOL and play a game I feel a strong sense of nostalgia and realise how much more i enjoy the beginning of the game.
I don't have a strong opinion on the actual mineral patch change in terms of economy, in some ways I like it, and i wonder what the game would look like with 6 workers and new mineral patches.
Maybe in some way we see less bo's. But in general I love LotV more than previous expansions, don't get me wron there were plenty of enjoyable moments, cool strats and insance games in both HotS and WoL. But I really like LotV as the evolution of sc2, so far the best strategy evere mad to my mind.
On April 02 2017 11:55 stuchiu wrote: I always thought having early game all-ins as viable was integral to starcraft's identity.
The ironic thing is all-ins are more about build order win/loss in LOTV compared to WOL/HOTS. Like in WOL/HOTS you had almost 45 sec to 1 minute to react when you realized you were being all-ined. You could prepare. Remember all those 5-6 gate sentry all-ins where you'd see them doing it, it's very telegraphed, and you can prepare 4-5 bunkers.
Well...in LOTV those all-ins exist...it's just that they immediately end the game because they are not telegraphed and they hit at the exact same time that you see them. lol xD
And that's cause the 12 worker start has builds accelerated to points they are not possibly supposed to be at.
Warp prism adept all-in type of stuff...by the time you scout it, the warp prism is already to your base and about to warp-in mass adepts. You already have to have done a build that blind counters it if you want to live.
Same with invulnerable nydus worm. If the guy opts for this, by the time you scout his base and realize he's doing it, the nydus is already building in your main with queens about to pop out = you autolose unless you already were anticipating it and blind countered with cyclones, etc etc.
I really wish a lot of us here and in the community would petition or write up something to Blizzard about reverting some of the economy changes, and the 12 worker start, but i feel like it will just lead no where =/
yeah so you would turtle 2 times longer each game, I appreciate that you have you own way to enjoy the game, but 3 hour long games were kinda exhausting during HotS especially with mech terrans.
I think the issue is a combination of nerfed macro mechanics for P and Z, as well as weakened mules for T, mining out faster and the 12 worker start that tilts LotV so heavily in a harassment direction. Economy is everything in LotV and weakened macro mechanics mean that getting back into a game after losing workers is far more difficult. You can't rebuild workers quickly or catch up through MULEs properly. So something that in HotS wouldn't have done game ending damage now does. On top of that, LotV introduced or changed a bunch of units that excel at killing economy - adepts, liberators, overlord drops, warp prisms, auto-turret on ravens.
So in the end the economy is more fragile by design, but also more important. Then on top of that it's also easier killed. In HotS, there were a ton of choices to make as to when it's better to delay economy for tech or when a stronger standing army is more important, or when economy over both is the right choice. There were far more varied strategic choices. In LotV it's always economy that's the best option. Always.
The introduction of the 12-worker start was when I left SC2 and never looked back.
Of course, at the time, I was one of the few people quitting solely for that reason... and as such... caught a lot of flak from people like "common 12 workers will be great, you're being a baby".
I wish I'd had this article to back me up at the time haha.
This excerpt from the article sums it up beautifully: "The threat of unleashing one of these builds needs to be a constant thought in both players’ minds if they want to claim victory. The fact that they exist changes the risk/reward dynamic of the map pool. It is a big risk to go Nexus first on a 2 player map against Zerg simply because fast pool is available. What might otherwise be the default choice become a calculated decision. "
I agree whole heartedly. I think people were so blinded by the fact of "finally! no more 6 pools!" that they never pondered the long-term implications of the meta.
Blizzard should seriously see this article!!! I think if they understood, they'd consider it. With all the extra harass options, think of how interesting LoTV games would be with 6 worker starts. Shoot.... it'd bring me back to this game.
But lets be honest... they care more about the viewers than they do the players so I'm not holding my breath.
On April 02 2017 03:49 Charoisaur wrote: Don't really agree. It's not strategic depth but a coin-flip because you have to make potentially game-deciding decisions before having the opportunity of gathering information. PartinG losing a GSL because he guessed wrong in game 7 was bullshit.
It isn't a coin filp. It is a skill.
The Patriots won a Superbowl believing the Seahawks were going to throw a slant based on their formation and the number of timeout Seattle had (Seattle was on the 1 yard line with the best rushing offense in the NFL, everyone thought they would run the ball). The Seahawks did throw a slant, and the Patriots intercepted the ball and won. But it wasn't randomness, it was preparation and calculated risk taking. But if the Seahawks didn't throw a slant and made their formation look like it, they might have been able run the ball in easily, and win the Superbowl.
So it isn't a coin flip at all. That is the kind of decision making that is present in every game, including LOTV (if I build an Oracle and without knowing I have a Stargate you place a Widow Mine in your mineral line, that isn't a coin flip, as Bill Belichick says, something might just not look right). The problem is that LOTV has removed a lot of the decision making from the game, and that is why it is stale.
You have to micro, have to macro, but the behind the scenes is significantly diminished. The preparation and build order planning, the skill I brought to Starcraft, was beating my opponent with preparation before the game began with unique build orders behind the scenes
It's sad that I can't do exactly what Sun Tzu says all warfare is based on: deception, in a strategy game! I used to like to make it look like I'm taking a third and throw an all-in at you. Or make it look like an all-in while I take a hidden base. It forces you to scout, react, and think, not just mindlessly macro and micro. But while you're thinking on your feet, I'm executing a game plan I made long before the game. And that is how I won a lot games in WOL, by out thinking my opponent because I'm not great at micro or macro.
"All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.” ― Sun Tzu, The Art of War
And that's why the Patriots win, behind the scenes the players are supported by a system that tries to understand what their opponent is going to do, and the counter it, before the game begins.
And thus, the outcome of that play in the Superbowl, just like Parting's GSL 7 game, was decided before the game began. That isn't a coin flip at all. Stating it is disrespectful to the skill and preparation that goes on behind the scene.
There is a reason we had so most repeat GSL Code S champions in the first year of the GSL, the most volatile of the all years in terms of gameplay. Starsense is real and a skill.
what a disgusting way to think about strategy
as far as Im concerned the only justification for Fog of War is removing it would make the game boring
Missed a good opportunity for an ActionJesuz callback.
But yeah, not sure what to respond, I like the 12 worker start, I feel I'm doing more of what I find really fun in RTS real sooner, but I acknowledge all the problems described in the article and the comments.
Super fragile workers and over-designed "harassment" units isnt really helpful to that either. Not sure how to consolidate these beliefs and make a reasonable suggestion to how to alleviate it, or perhaps time will fix things.
On April 02 2017 03:49 Charoisaur wrote: Don't really agree. It's not strategic depth but a coin-flip because you have to make potentially game-deciding decisions before having the opportunity of gathering information. PartinG losing a GSL because he guessed wrong in game 7 was bullshit.
It isn't a coin filp. It is a skill.
The Patriots won a Superbowl believing the Seahawks were going to throw a slant based on their formation and the number of timeout Seattle had (Seattle was on the 1 yard line with the best rushing offense in the NFL, everyone thought they would run the ball). The Seahawks did throw a slant, and the Patriots intercepted the ball and won. But it wasn't randomness, it was preparation and calculated risk taking. But if the Seahawks didn't throw a slant and made their formation look like it, they might have been able run the ball in easily, and win the Superbowl.
So it isn't a coin flip at all. That is the kind of decision making that is present in every game, including LOTV (if I build an Oracle and without knowing I have a Stargate you place a Widow Mine in your mineral line, that isn't a coin flip, as Bill Belichick says, something might just not look right). The problem is that LOTV has removed a lot of the decision making from the game, and that is why it is stale.
You have to micro, have to macro, but the behind the scenes is significantly diminished. The preparation and build order planning, the skill I brought to Starcraft, was beating my opponent with preparation before the game began with unique build orders behind the scenes
It's sad that I can't do exactly what Sun Tzu says all warfare is based on: deception, in a strategy game! I used to like to make it look like I'm taking a third and throw an all-in at you. Or make it look like an all-in while I take a hidden base. It forces you to scout, react, and think, not just mindlessly macro and micro. But while you're thinking on your feet, I'm executing a game plan I made long before the game. And that is how I won a lot games in WOL, by out thinking my opponent because I'm not great at micro or macro.
"All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.” ― Sun Tzu, The Art of War
And that's why the Patriots win, behind the scenes the players are supported by a system that tries to understand what their opponent is going to do, and the counter it, before the game begins.
And thus, the outcome of that play in the Superbowl, just like Parting's GSL 7 game, was decided before the game began. That isn't a coin flip at all. Stating it is disrespectful to the skill and preparation that goes on behind the scene.
There is a reason we had so most repeat GSL Code S champions in the first year of the GSL, the most volatile of the all years in terms of gameplay. Starsense is real and a skill.
what a disgusting way to think about strategy
as far as Im concerned the only justification for Fog of War is removing it would make the game boring
Is this sarcasm? The whole point of strategy games is decision making based on incomplete information. This is a fundamental aspect of many games, ranging from poker to a variety of video games like RTS, MOBA, FPS. You can even find it in games with so-called "perfect information" like chess and fighting games. It is what distinguishes competitive games played by humans against humans from other genres of puzzles, challenges, feats of skill.
So yeah, "removing it would make the game boring". Starcraft is supposed to be a strategy game, not a comparison of who has the best micro execution. If the game and the players can no longer evolve strategically then what's the point?
Yes, If the start would be with less workers but overall with a faster build time of them. Worker harass and higly effective harassment units would be less of an issue. This makes combacks easier and will most likely lead to more battle focuses gameplay. Making it more attraktive to watch and play...
I also have felt that 12 workers really took away from the "feel" of what StarCraft is supposed to be.
I understand the reasoning, and probably that it is less frustrating for some, but the possibility of early aggression in SC has always been a staple of the game.
There was always a certain suspense to it, and it allowed a different kind of player to have a role.
For some reason, a lot of players seem to feel that StarCraft is all about the "macro game" and only want big battles with full economy, but I have always found the scrappy nature of the early and mid game to be much more interesting to play and watch.
It's probably too late for Blizz to ever go back to 6 workers, but until then, LotV just isn't appealing to me. I'm glad to have BW being revitalized... it feels really cool to have that early game back.
It's probably too late for Blizz to ever go back to 6 workers, but until then, LotV just isn't appealing to me. I'm glad to have BW being revitalized... it feels really cool to have that early game back.
I'd love If Blizzard would even try to transfer BW in Numbers and Models to the SC2Galaxy engine.... So far they didn't try, we all think that it would be of inferior balance, but it hasn't been proofed so far.
I don't think this would be that big of an efford to do as all Models already exist....
I completely agree about the 12 worker start I wish they had just reduced the total amount of minerals, and made all the patches have the same amount too (what's up with that seriously)
On April 02 2017 03:49 Charoisaur wrote: Don't really agree. It's not strategic depth but a coin-flip because you have to make potentially game-deciding decisions before having the opportunity of gathering information. PartinG losing a GSL because he guessed wrong in game 7 was bullshit.
It isn't a coin filp. It is a skill.
The Patriots won a Superbowl believing the Seahawks were going to throw a slant based on their formation and the number of timeout Seattle had (Seattle was on the 1 yard line with the best rushing offense in the NFL, everyone thought they would run the ball). The Seahawks did throw a slant, and the Patriots intercepted the ball and won. But it wasn't randomness, it was preparation and calculated risk taking. But if the Seahawks didn't throw a slant and made their formation look like it, they might have been able run the ball in easily, and win the Superbowl.
So it isn't a coin flip at all. That is the kind of decision making that is present in every game, including LOTV (if I build an Oracle and without knowing I have a Stargate you place a Widow Mine in your mineral line, that isn't a coin flip, as Bill Belichick says, something might just not look right). The problem is that LOTV has removed a lot of the decision making from the game, and that is why it is stale.
You have to micro, have to macro, but the behind the scenes is significantly diminished. The preparation and build order planning, the skill I brought to Starcraft, was beating my opponent with preparation before the game began with unique build orders behind the scenes
It's sad that I can't do exactly what Sun Tzu says all warfare is based on: deception, in a strategy game! I used to like to make it look like I'm taking a third and throw an all-in at you. Or make it look like an all-in while I take a hidden base. It forces you to scout, react, and think, not just mindlessly macro and micro. But while you're thinking on your feet, I'm executing a game plan I made long before the game. And that is how I won a lot games in WOL, by out thinking my opponent because I'm not great at micro or macro.
"All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.” ― Sun Tzu, The Art of War
And that's why the Patriots win, behind the scenes the players are supported by a system that tries to understand what their opponent is going to do, and the counter it, before the game begins.
And thus, the outcome of that play in the Superbowl, just like Parting's GSL 7 game, was decided before the game began. That isn't a coin flip at all. Stating it is disrespectful to the skill and preparation that goes on behind the scene.
There is a reason we had so most repeat GSL Code S champions in the first year of the GSL, the most volatile of the all years in terms of gameplay. Starsense is real and a skill.
what a disgusting way to think about strategy
as far as Im concerned the only justification for Fog of War is removing it would make the game boring
Is this sarcasm? The whole point of strategy games is decision making based on incomplete information. This is a fundamental aspect of many games, ranging from poker to a variety of video games like RTS, MOBA, FPS. You can even find it in games with so-called "perfect information" like chess and fighting games. It is what distinguishes competitive games played by humans against humans from other genres of puzzles, challenges, feats of skill.
So yeah, "removing it would make the game boring". Starcraft is supposed to be a strategy game, not a comparison of who has the best micro execution. If the game and the players can no longer evolve strategically then what's the point?
The fact that you refer to Poker as a strategy game says everything about how our definitions of strategy clearly differ from one another. Poker is a mathematically trivial gambling game.
That aside, removing Fog of War in StarCraft wouldnt make it a comparison of who has the best micro execution. It would still be about understanding the game strategically and tactically, and mechanics. What would make it boring, though, is how silly the games would play out.
On April 02 2017 03:49 Charoisaur wrote: Don't really agree. It's not strategic depth but a coin-flip because you have to make potentially game-deciding decisions before having the opportunity of gathering information. PartinG losing a GSL because he guessed wrong in game 7 was bullshit.
It isn't a coin filp. It is a skill.
The Patriots won a Superbowl believing the Seahawks were going to throw a slant based on their formation and the number of timeout Seattle had (Seattle was on the 1 yard line with the best rushing offense in the NFL, everyone thought they would run the ball). The Seahawks did throw a slant, and the Patriots intercepted the ball and won. But it wasn't randomness, it was preparation and calculated risk taking. But if the Seahawks didn't throw a slant and made their formation look like it, they might have been able run the ball in easily, and win the Superbowl.
So it isn't a coin flip at all. That is the kind of decision making that is present in every game, including LOTV (if I build an Oracle and without knowing I have a Stargate you place a Widow Mine in your mineral line, that isn't a coin flip, as Bill Belichick says, something might just not look right). The problem is that LOTV has removed a lot of the decision making from the game, and that is why it is stale.
You have to micro, have to macro, but the behind the scenes is significantly diminished. The preparation and build order planning, the skill I brought to Starcraft, was beating my opponent with preparation before the game began with unique build orders behind the scenes
It's sad that I can't do exactly what Sun Tzu says all warfare is based on: deception, in a strategy game! I used to like to make it look like I'm taking a third and throw an all-in at you. Or make it look like an all-in while I take a hidden base. It forces you to scout, react, and think, not just mindlessly macro and micro. But while you're thinking on your feet, I'm executing a game plan I made long before the game. And that is how I won a lot games in WOL, by out thinking my opponent because I'm not great at micro or macro.
"All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.” ― Sun Tzu, The Art of War
And that's why the Patriots win, behind the scenes the players are supported by a system that tries to understand what their opponent is going to do, and the counter it, before the game begins.
And thus, the outcome of that play in the Superbowl, just like Parting's GSL 7 game, was decided before the game began. That isn't a coin flip at all. Stating it is disrespectful to the skill and preparation that goes on behind the scene.
There is a reason we had so most repeat GSL Code S champions in the first year of the GSL, the most volatile of the all years in terms of gameplay. Starsense is real and a skill.
what a disgusting way to think about strategy
as far as Im concerned the only justification for Fog of War is removing it would make the game boring
Is this sarcasm? The whole point of strategy games is decision making based on incomplete information. This is a fundamental aspect of many games, ranging from poker to a variety of video games like RTS, MOBA, FPS. You can even find it in games with so-called "perfect information" like chess and fighting games. It is what distinguishes competitive games played by humans against humans from other genres of puzzles, challenges, feats of skill.
So yeah, "removing it would make the game boring". Starcraft is supposed to be a strategy game, not a comparison of who has the best micro execution. If the game and the players can no longer evolve strategically then what's the point?
The fact that you refer to Poker as a strategy game says everything about how our definitions of strategy clearly differ from one another. Poker is a mathematically trivial gambling game.
This is false. The least complex commonly played form of poker, Limit Texas Hold'em was only "kind of" (it's ~close~) solved last year, after years of work in academia. More complex (and more popular) forms of poker such as No Limit Texas Hold'em and Pot Limit Omaha, on the other hand, are, depending on how you calculate it, more complex, and possibly harder to solve than Chess.
edit: Try to think of a game that becomes more complex when each player is given perfect information. Now think of a game that becomes less trivial (more complex) due to withholding information. Now it should be plain to see that the amount of information given to each player at time of play is essential to complexity. (and ~strategy~) If anything, StarCraft would become more trivial with full maphacks.
EPT
