EPTState of the Game - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
[Phantom]
Mexico2170 Posts
| ||
|
jodljodl
162 Posts
 If you compare the state of sc2 today with past states i feel like this state is always preferable. SC2 is an awesome game. The best by far when it comes to competitive rts. And we all are lucky to have it. At least imo. On September 19 2021 01:15 kingism wrote: Anyone have any thoughts on this? Actually before we discuss specific units like Lurkers, the big picture is that Zerg (being the defender) will always, always come on top at the end of the meta, otherwise the meta is broken. You can ask Artosis and Tastelass, they have admitted this too on their streams. Unfortunately, there is no way to avoid this because you can't perfectly balance a game. So yes, if there are no more patches (which I hear is the case), expect to see most tournaments won by Zergs unless they have an off day. Regarding aforementioned opinion: Imo your point is comprehensible but i don't agree. I think your argument would apply for a game with complete information for the z player. Which isn't the case for sc2: Assume any game. Let's say someone would know all correct respones to any possible state of an instance of this game. Obviously knowledge of the instance of this game is a necessity for the correct respones. And since sc2 provides incomplete information for at least a part of any instance of the game one cannot knowingly make the correct response in any case. Of course in sc2 you don't need complete information to infer the state of an instance without a reasonable doubt - at least in pro games :>. But as long as it's possible for one player to hide sufficient information about the state of the game one can make it impossible for his opponent to knowingly react correct (in that sense that he is reacting with the best possible response.) So as long as the state of sc2 makes it possible for t and p to hide enough information from z to execute strategies to a certain point where z in general is not able to react in a way that z is in a favorable position in every case p and t still would be able to win in "perfect executed games". (This is a rough drawing of my argument but i think you should get the gist of it.) And that's why i don't think for a "not broken meta" z has to come out on top. | ||
|
Harris1st
Germany6916 Posts
On September 21 2021 05:04 [Phantom] wrote: As a note, the Liberator still has an AA splash attack. It can be incredibly powerful actually if you have many of them. Mass Lib destroys mass Carrier. It's not even funny. All Interceptors are dead in a split second | ||
|
NotoriousSCV
27 Posts
On September 20 2021 08:25 ThunderJunk wrote: I maintain that the biggest issue lies in the necessity to go Air in every matchup to have a balanced, effective composition. It struck me recently that there is no A2A splash damage unit in the game (besides the viper, which is a spellcaster). Broodwar is a perfect game. We should all just switch our attention back to Broodwar. I tried to get into SC2 as a spectator (an important aspect for a strategy eSport but I just find it hard to watch complained to the slower clearer engagements in BW (espcially since Remastered, the resolution and detail makes it very clear what is going on). The Zerg economy snowballing is the same issue in Pro BW (Z also top for foreigners) but look at the mechanical differences that make it interesting. The strength and importance of individual units and small engagements without being 'silly'. The overall design in SC2, especially the maps seems to force people in a rough copy of a pro BW game, with the bases you should EXPECT to take, and the definite expectation of macroing to 200/200 and taking a 3rd/4th. Anything else being a rush (but planned builds and cutting workers should be the basic game, not 3base macro)/cheese. Look at the macro Zerg in BW hanging on with low supply hoping to snowball, not maxing out and having multiple tech options. Zerg 4 base macro in BW has the same snowball and easier wins, see the recent trend for 3gas Crazy Zerg (ultra rush) - probably one of the easiest pro level builds to execute in the game if there's no pressure. And even then you still have to hold with muta micro for a while. PvZ is the same technical challenge it seems. Maybe SC2 should be want it wants to be, open the maps up wide and think more about the macro and 200 supply limit and why its being used to funnel players into particular choices to emulate macro games from the past. I suppose that's what we expect from a Starcraft game now. But if it turned more into AoE2 (the only other example unfortunately, i'm not familiar with Wc3 maybe people would prefer a move towards that?) prehaps it would be a more interesting use of the tools/engine that is available. Especially as theres spells like dota style hookshot available. Btw the series i watched was Heromarine comeback 3-2, but even though that should be a hugely exciting result and series. I just didn't find it as such. We have expectations of what to see in the game, the map feels cramped and the paths through the game seem to be quite forced. Just some other feels: - Upgrades are prominently displaced on OBS, but expected and maybe less exciting because of it (maybe upgrades themselves at fault to some extent - but there's too much OBS stats in general, sometimes better without any of it) - Harassment is expected/less exciting because of general mobility and speed of units, in my opinion. Maybe SC2 should have a powerful ground spellcaster Hero for each race that is a separate upgradable entity; and become the ball vs ball (plus hero) game that it tends to default to. Copying the basic BW map style and flow of game (2base and look for harass opportunity) isn't as impressive or fun, seems to make everyone sad to play. And the complaints over 10 years reflects that. Hero supported rushes and hero/ball fights could make the whole game unique in it's own way. Edit: sorry let me just say a clearer way to say what I mean, the current SC2 design seems to suggest strongly to the player 'here's the bases and build order to reach critical mass' and players immediately set on that path (complete with giant worker counts). No one enters a BW game with that exact expectation, its flexible the entire game long - following a strategy in midgame should be normal not a special build every time, but that's how SC2 feels to me. | ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On September 22 2021 12:56 NotoriousSCV wrote: + Show Spoiler + I tried to get into SC2 as a spectator (an important aspect for a strategy eSport but I just find it hard to watch complained to the slower clearer engagements in BW (espcially since Remastered, the resolution and detail makes it very clear what is going on). The Zerg economy snowballing is the same issue in Pro BW (Z also top for foreigners) but look at the mechanical differences that make it interesting. The strength and importance of individual units and small engagements without being 'silly'. The overall design in SC2, especially the maps seems to force people in a rough copy of a pro BW game, with the bases you should EXPECT to take, and the definite expectation of macroing to 200/200 and taking a 3rd/4th. Anything else being a rush (but planned builds and cutting workers should be the basic game, not 3base macro)/cheese. Look at the macro Zerg in BW hanging on with low supply hoping to snowball, not maxing out and having multiple tech options. Zerg 4 base macro in BW has the same snowball and easier wins, see the recent trend for 3gas Crazy Zerg (ultra rush) - probably one of the easiest pro level builds to execute in the game if there's no pressure. And even then you still have to hold with muta micro for a while. PvZ is the same technical challenge it seems. Maybe SC2 should be want it wants to be, open the maps up wide and think more about the macro and 200 supply limit and why its being used to funnel players into particular choices to emulate macro games from the past. I suppose that's what we expect from a Starcraft game now. But if it turned more into AoE2 (the only other example unfortunately, i'm not familiar with Wc3 maybe people would prefer a move towards that?) prehaps it would be a more interesting use of the tools/engine that is available. Especially as theres spells like dota style hookshot available. Btw the series i watched was Heromarine comeback 3-2, but even though that should be a hugely exciting result and series. I just didn't find it as such. We have expectations of what to see in the game, the map feels cramped and the paths through the game seem to be quite forced. Just some other feels: - Upgrades are prominently displaced on OBS, but expected and maybe less exciting because of it (maybe upgrades themselves at fault to some extent - but there's too much OBS stats in general, sometimes better without any of it) - Harassment is expected/less exciting because of general mobility and speed of units, in my opinion. Maybe SC2 should have a powerful ground spellcaster Hero for each race that is a separate upgradable entity; and become the ball vs ball (plus hero) game that it tends to default to. Copying the basic BW map style and flow of game (2base and look for harass opportunity) isn't as impressive or fun, seems to make everyone sad to play. And the complaints over 10 years reflects that. Hero supported rushes and hero/ball fights could make the whole game unique in it's own way. Edit: sorry let me just say a clearer way to say what I mean, the current SC2 design seems to suggest strongly to the player 'here's the bases and build order to reach critical mass' and players immediately set on that path (complete with giant worker counts). No one enters a BW game with that exact expectation, its flexible the entire game long - following a strategy in midgame should be normal not a special build every time, but that's how SC2 feels to me. Well, we used to start with 6 workers and had plenty of cheeses. But that got changed and the early game is being almost skipped. And trust me, we're not going back (no matter how much I hate the 12-worker start) | ||
|
dbrinker
30 Posts
On September 20 2021 08:25 ThunderJunk wrote: I maintain that the biggest issue lies in the necessity to go Air in every matchup to have a balanced, effective composition. It struck me recently that there is no A2A splash damage unit in the game (besides the viper, which is a spellcaster). Broodwar is a perfect game. We should all just switch our attention back to Broodwar. I totally understand where you are coming from. The longer sc2 is the dominating RTS in the west, the smaller the RTS scene will be come in relation to the other esports. Sc2 is a great game but its best days are behind it (by far) and it needs to get taken out back and put out of its misery. straight up. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25107 Posts
On September 22 2021 12:56 NotoriousSCV wrote: I tried to get into SC2 as a spectator (an important aspect for a strategy eSport but I just find it hard to watch complained to the slower clearer engagements in BW (espcially since Remastered, the resolution and detail makes it very clear what is going on). The Zerg economy snowballing is the same issue in Pro BW (Z also top for foreigners) but look at the mechanical differences that make it interesting. The strength and importance of individual units and small engagements without being 'silly'. The overall design in SC2, especially the maps seems to force people in a rough copy of a pro BW game, with the bases you should EXPECT to take, and the definite expectation of macroing to 200/200 and taking a 3rd/4th. Anything else being a rush (but planned builds and cutting workers should be the basic game, not 3base macro)/cheese. Look at the macro Zerg in BW hanging on with low supply hoping to snowball, not maxing out and having multiple tech options. Zerg 4 base macro in BW has the same snowball and easier wins, see the recent trend for 3gas Crazy Zerg (ultra rush) - probably one of the easiest pro level builds to execute in the game if there's no pressure. And even then you still have to hold with muta micro for a while. PvZ is the same technical challenge it seems. Maybe SC2 should be want it wants to be, open the maps up wide and think more about the macro and 200 supply limit and why its being used to funnel players into particular choices to emulate macro games from the past. I suppose that's what we expect from a Starcraft game now. But if it turned more into AoE2 (the only other example unfortunately, i'm not familiar with Wc3 maybe people would prefer a move towards that?) prehaps it would be a more interesting use of the tools/engine that is available. Especially as theres spells like dota style hookshot available. Btw the series i watched was Heromarine comeback 3-2, but even though that should be a hugely exciting result and series. I just didn't find it as such. We have expectations of what to see in the game, the map feels cramped and the paths through the game seem to be quite forced. Just some other feels: - Upgrades are prominently displaced on OBS, but expected and maybe less exciting because of it (maybe upgrades themselves at fault to some extent - but there's too much OBS stats in general, sometimes better without any of it) - Harassment is expected/less exciting because of general mobility and speed of units, in my opinion. Maybe SC2 should have a powerful ground spellcaster Hero for each race that is a separate upgradable entity; and become the ball vs ball (plus hero) game that it tends to default to. Copying the basic BW map style and flow of game (2base and look for harass opportunity) isn't as impressive or fun, seems to make everyone sad to play. And the complaints over 10 years reflects that. Hero supported rushes and hero/ball fights could make the whole game unique in it's own way. Edit: sorry let me just say a clearer way to say what I mean, the current SC2 design seems to suggest strongly to the player 'here's the bases and build order to reach critical mass' and players immediately set on that path (complete with giant worker counts). No one enters a BW game with that exact expectation, its flexible the entire game long - following a strategy in midgame should be normal not a special build every time, but that's how SC2 feels to me. Yeah good post. SC2 is oft criticised in terms of compositional balance, but the general flow of things less so. Especially in Legacy, maps feel like battle arenas for max v max games more often than not. Things are contracted a lot, with a little more space you get divergence in styles. There’s less of a trade off in harassment focused, aggressive styles vs a player teaching hard or macroing hard. Most macro styles have some harassment component, and tech and power macro wise basically by default. Aggressive styles basically have to cripple or kill or they’re not doing enough damage. I still think SC2 is very good too, don’t get me wrong. I’m hoping the next top RTS whatever it might be can take some of the best elements from what came before and learn from the strengths and weaknesses of various approaches. | ||
|
NotoriousSCV
27 Posts
I just wonder if now we should expect some SC2 Complete, or SC3 with engine upgrade and if we should imagine our ideas in that. I hope for all the SC2 fans sake there could be one last hurrah, an exciting add-on that rallies all previous players and brings them back. Forget the BW expectations and tropes and use more moba ideas. Macroing/expanding rethought, maybe mins/gas on the map in some other form and fought over by units (neutral caches of resources to actively defend/attack/secure like points on the map? it fits the game better). Enough changes to make players give it a second try, Get rid of their main complaints completely like cheesing - it doesn't need to be in the game just because its Starcraft (hero/commander unit would help this). Maybe resources could be collected to a mobile unit that replaces CC/Nexus/Hatch. The giant modern gamer group might be willing to give it a try all over again with more pleasant reactions. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25107 Posts
On September 23 2021 03:02 NotoriousSCV wrote: Yeah I don't like to be truly negative about SC2, it is a great engine with great potential and the things it's done for western eSports RTS acceptance is huge in the long run. We are better as a community together trying to push forward and find a middle ground, the amount of interest/buzz SC2 generated amongst the modern generation, we BW fans were all jealous and somewhat bitter for a long time about it. I just wonder if now we should expect some SC2 Complete, or SC3 with engine upgrade and if we should imagine our ideas in that. I hope for all the SC2 fans sake there could be one last hurrah, an exciting add-on that rallies all previous players and brings them back. Forget the BW expectations and tropes and use more moba ideas. Macroing/expanding rethought, maybe mins/gas on the map in some other form and fought over by units (neutral caches of resources to actively defend/attack/secure like points on the map? it fits the game better). Enough changes to make players give it a second try, Get rid of their main complaints completely like cheesing - it doesn't need to be in the game just because its Starcraft (hero/commander unit would help this). Maybe resources could be collected to a mobile unit that replaces CC/Nexus/Hatch. The giant modern gamer group might be willing to give it a try all over again with more pleasant reactions. I’m cursed by playing BW as a kid and never discovering the wider scene then, and SC2 coming out and I discover all this stuff and there’s been a pro scene in Korea for forever and all! Via a big WC3 fixation. Tried to make up for lost time but harder to find the time in adulthood to get competent at a game as hard as BW. There are elements in all three I love, I can’t really envisage something melding them all without being a bit incoherent mind. WC3 having heroes works very well for me because the entire game is built around it and creeping and levelling etc. It also swapped out the complexity of macro with these other mechanics. And for the Starcrafts there’s just a satisfaction in macroing well and multitasking in a mechanically difficult game that to me is great. It may be a niche appeal, but there’s something to that too. Doesn’t happen often (if you’re me anyway) but those times where you’re macroing on point, deflect every attack and are managing things across 4/5 focus points on the map feel more satisfying than most gaming experiences. From attempts I’ve seen so far, most attempts to simplify mechanics end up taking away from that sense of mastery over your domain, and don’t end up doing too well. But yeah I’m sure some smarter folks than me will deliver some really killer RTS in the future that incorporates the best of what know and some new ideas and really knock it out of the park. | ||
|
Bonkarooni
United States383 Posts
Disguising your attacks, denying information, and taxing your opponents multi-tasking abilities are weapons both Protoss and Terran have to use against a zerg opponent. They are weapons that are hard to 'balance' per say, but they do make zerg opponents defeatable. Yltimately the beauty of StarCraft is that it's a mix of playing the piano, chess, and poker. | ||
| ||
