|
On January 06 2023 23:31 ZeroByte13 wrote:Because you're just one of many thousands of people who post their patch ideas online?  If they read TL at all, they might listen to some very popular opinion that's shared by majority of posters. Or do you really expect pro players to listen specifically to you?
No but i consider hydralisks as a core unit, i.e queens aren t supposed to replace them. I think if it s not mandatory to tweak hydralisks now. This balance team has to play with a 'cursor emphasis' for each unit , i don t know if i would have done better but for sure i would care about the advantage of creep in reducing Zerg awareness (instead of buff Hydralisks).
The rapid fire with tumors is really stupid imo, it s not what RTS need.
Increase mana spell of tumors seems to be shared by most of the community members, isn t it ?
|
The game is dead because you haven t enought repetability and you feel all games similar to the previous. Mainly because the game is based on the speed.
If the team want to go further, they have to improve the ground strategy like macro movement of army. Old players all know Total Annihilation, BW and C&C, this team should learn from these old games if they want to resurect the game.
Fights
- slower fights (less dps)
- battlefield terrain features (bonus on high ground, bonus in bushes, less awareness for Zerg)
- balance between the number of heavy and light units armor (define function of each unit : counter attecks, siege units, etc....
- Cliffs aren t enought used (reapers strenght scale over the game, roachs pass under cliffs ?, all units must be usefull during the game )
Economy
- less workers, actually harvest mineral system is old (harassement is too impactfull, as a consequence bases expansion shapes are too similar not enought flexible/strategic, plus add a level technology per mineral field structure to improve the income of ressource)
- Less minerals fields per base but a cheaper single structure only used for harvesting, build upon the mineral field, add risk concept if you build mines structures further (more like Age of Empire)
Others
- add spell like stun or create monster (which doesn t exist in SC2 ??!! Infested Terran ?)
- limit distance of teleport features like nydus network or BC
- Reduce air threat units (mass units problem, carriers, BC, etc...), air units must be used like spell casters, light units fighters or harassement
- common sense tweaks...
- add fun
Just my instruction guide
|
Your statements don't make much sense, dude.
On January 07 2023 20:05 Vision_ wrote:
The game is dead It's still the most popular RTS. And it was true for all 12 years since release.
If SC2 is "dead", all other RTS were never even alive. Unless you mean "dead to me".
On January 07 2023 20:05 Vision_ wrote:
Total Annihilation, BW and C&C, this team should learn from these old games if they want to resurect the game. SC2 is more popular than TA and C&C series combined. Who should learn from whom here?
On January 07 2023 20:05 Vision_ wrote:
- common sense tweaks...
- add fun
Just my instruction guide
Again, as it's the most popular RTS in history, probably it's pretty fun to many people, don't you think?
At least it's fun to more people than any other RTS managed to be? Otherwise why would they play it 12 years after release?
Also why do you post your "instruction" here? Why don't you just implement these changes and play this drastically better (for you) game? Nobody will do this for you.
And if you make your mod public, and it's actually really good - it might become popular.
|
The SC2 game is addictive that s why they play. But despite his wonderfull network, his ergonomy, his 3D motor, his antastic background/story, SC2 isn t enought macro movement oriented, i m just writing something obvious, just explaining where the cursor is since the beginning, why still alive ? because of micro management, why is dying ? because of lack of ground strategy, games looks like a ping-pong game (back and forth / no macro in armies movement).
I m not explaining something, i try to tell the truth to younger people, performance (APM) isn t a part fun dude
|
I hope you understand that your "truth" is NOT the universal truth for everyone?
And that a vast number of people do not share this opinion?
It would do you a world of good (in life in general, not just videogames) if you learned to tell facts from subjective opinions.
What makes a videogame fun is purely subjective. There cannot be any "truths" about that.
Some people like large scale battles with 1000s of units - some people don't like it at all.
Some people like when micro is important, some people hate it.
Some people like when a faction has 100 units to choose from, some prefer smaller roster of ~15 more unique units.
Some people like having upgrades for units, some don't like it.
What is fun to one guy is not fun to many others, it should be obvious to anyone - and I have no idea why people forget this simple fact all the time.
On another hand, what makes a game profitable and popular is less subjective. And from what we can see - Blizzard knew it better that anyone else in RTS genre.
And talking about SC2 balance (to not make this completely off-topic) - nobody will do any drastic changes to the gameplay. It's a 12 years old game, with probably 1 guy supporting in from Blizzard side.
We can expect new map pools, balance patches 1-2 times a year, maybe rework for one unit sometimes.
Anything more than that is completely unfeasible with current situation and resources available.
Any suggestions of massive reworks are just pure fantasy with 0% chance of being ever considered. So why even mentioning them?
|
On January 07 2023 21:45 Vision_ wrote:
The SC2 game is addictive that s why they play. But despite his wonderfull network, his ergonomy, his 3D motor, his antastic background/story, SC2 isn t enought macro movement oriented, i m just writing something obvious, just explaining where the cursor is since the beginning, why still alive ? because of micro management, why is dying ? because of lack of ground strategy, games looks like a ping-pong game (back and forth / no macro in armies movement).
I m not explaining something, i try to tell the truth to younger people, performance (APM) isn t a part fun dude
Mate.
No.
The microability and detail-orientation that SC2 allows and rewards (combined with fluid controls, clean visuals, and fun, powerful units that really benefit from that micro) is a huge part of its appeal. I watch professional AoE and just think it looks like all the tedious parts of an RTS without the same fun army control.
The best games, for viewer and player (in my opinion, and the opinion of many players and viewers), are the most back and forth `ping-pong' games. Things like biomine vs lingbanemuta midgame where you have this constant brawl - a brawl where army control is relevant every minute of play - are peak SC2.
And it's just not possible to have this and not be APM demanding. The attention battle is a huge part of the fun and skill-expression. Take that away and what you have can't even be called Starcraft.
You also seem to not understand just how big a role the basic macro and strategic choices play nevertheless.
Most games are ultimately determined by who has more stuff - the micro usually just tips the edges, push advantages further, that kinda thing.
|
On January 07 2023 23:52 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2023 21:45 Vision_ wrote:
The SC2 game is addictive that s why they play. But despite his wonderfull network, his ergonomy, his 3D motor, his antastic background/story, SC2 isn t enought macro movement oriented, i m just writing something obvious, just explaining where the cursor is since the beginning, why still alive ? because of micro management, why is dying ? because of lack of ground strategy, games looks like a ping-pong game (back and forth / no macro in armies movement).
The best games, for viewer and player (in my opinion, and the opinion of many players and viewers), are the most back and forth `ping-pong' games. Things like biomine vs lingbanemuta midgame where you have this constant brawl - a brawl where army control is relevant every minute of play - are peak SC2.
.
I agree with you, i like SC2 when there is back and forth, that s my favorite part of the game.
But don t you think the game would be better if you have strategy componnent in 2 Dimensionnal axes ?
1 axe is obviously more boring, (1 axe is forced mainly because of limited border area i.e 2D is only possible if the battlefield would be spheric).
I enjoyed SC2 games when you was able to see the border of creep as a battlefield line not when games are more likely "ping-pong". Then, an hypothetical extension must be oriented with the defence of ramps as neural strategic point (gas ressource are spent in technology, expensive units AND defence).
ps : it s chess game comparaison with go (chess is 2 dimensionnal but pawns are 1 dimensionnal and the opposition looks more like a line fight)
|
SC2 is a great game but in the end I became too much about mechanics.
Which is why I moved on to AOE4 where strategy is just as important as mechanics. You can outthink an opponent, instead of just outclick him.
I hope the next SC like game (ie Front Giants game) will have a better balance between mechanics and strategy, not just rewarding the faster player.
|
On January 08 2023 23:54 MockHamill wrote:
SC2 is a great game but in the end I became too much about mechanics.
Which is why I moved on to AOE4 where strategy is just as important as mechanics. You can outthink an opponent, instead of just outclick him.
I hope the next SC like game (ie Front Giants game) will have a better balance between mechanics and strategy, not just rewarding the faster player.
I really hope this won't be the case, I've just started playing AOE4 due to the winter sale and while it's a super fun game which is especially easy on the transition coming from SC2 the army management is already outright boring to me (and to be fair, in AOE kinda always has been).
Whatever floats your boat of course and the more variety, the better, but if Storm Gate tries to be especially appealing to non-RTS players by lowering the mechanical skill ceiling too much, this would be disappointing, if you wanna outthink your opponent there's also turn-based games for that.
|
On January 08 2023 23:54 MockHamill wrote:
SC2 is a great game but in the end I became too much about mechanics.
Which is why I moved on to AOE4 where strategy is just as important as mechanics. You can outthink an opponent, instead of just outclick him.
I hope the next SC like game (ie Front Giants game) will have a better balance between mechanics and strategy, not just rewarding the faster player.
thats simply because of the game speed, or the pace. If you slow the typical SC2 game down by 30-40% and start with 6 workers instead of 12, then its becoming more about strategy and less on mechanics. You have time to think, change plan and build order base on scouting, and do other things rather than trying to do 3-4 things at the same time. The draw back would obviously be that game would last longer just like how AoE4 is, minus the early cheese game.
I believe it was a conscious decision by the SC2 development team at the time to make the game the way it is pace-wise and I think the success it got was partly because of that. I do not know if Stormgate would actually try to do the same thing, or they will take the design approach more like SC1/WC3.
|
On January 09 2023 00:45 Creager wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2023 23:54 MockHamill wrote:
SC2 is a great game but in the end I became too much about mechanics.
Which is why I moved on to AOE4 where strategy is just as important as mechanics. You can outthink an opponent, instead of just outclick him.
I hope the next SC like game (ie Front Giants game) will have a better balance between mechanics and strategy, not just rewarding the faster player. I really hope this won't be the case, I've just started playing AOE4 due to the winter sale and while it's a super fun game which is especially easy on the transition coming from SC2 the army management is already outright boring to me (and to be fair, in AOE kinda always has been). Whatever floats your boat of course and the more variety, the better, but if Storm Gate tries to be especially appealing to non-RTS players by lowering the mechanical skill ceiling too much, this would be disappointing, if you wanna outthink your opponent there's also turn-based games for that.
AOE4 is a fantastic single player game.
As for high level multiplayer? I'd rather watch paint dry.
|
Well it is is a matter of opinion of course.
I prefer to watch SC2.
I prefer to play AOE4.
|
On January 09 2023 02:32 Beelzebub1 wrote:AOE4 is a fantastic single player game.
Isn't its campaign pretty much disjointed and not very exciting?
I watched a guy playing it who can make almost anything entertaining, and it felt... average at best.
Or do you mean Skirmish, not campaign?
|
If SC2 was slowed down just slightly, it would be great and make it much more accessible a game.
It was slowed down successfully by discouraging deathballs and adding more units that zone and make the game more about smaller/spread out engagements, and more interaction on both sides, but it was also sped up since units' speed kept getting faster and faster. It kind of sucks that, especially if this patch goes through, it'll feel like a third of all units got their speed buffed over time, and we could have instead nerfed the speed of other units slightly instead, or come to some middleground.
Anyway, if the game speed was 10% slower, or if the DPS overall was decreased by ~15%, those would already be significant help in making micro and reacting more manageable for people who aren't fast, and make it feel more about thinking and less about speed.
|
On January 09 2023 17:28 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
If SC2 was slowed down just slightly, it would be great and make it much more accessible a game.
It was slowed down successfully by discouraging deathballs and adding more units that zone and make the game more about smaller/spread out engagements, and more interaction on both sides, but it was also sped up since units' speed kept getting faster and faster. It kind of sucks that, especially if this patch goes through, it'll feel like a third of all units got their speed buffed over time, and we could have instead nerfed the speed of other units slightly instead, or come to some middleground.
Anyway, if the game speed was 10% slower, or if the DPS overall was decreased by ~15%, those would already be significant help in making micro and reacting more manageable for people who aren't fast, and make it feel more about thinking and less about speed.
Age of Empires is slower but less popular. I think it's a misbelief slowed down gamespeed makes the game more accessible
|
On January 09 2023 17:55 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2023 17:28 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
If SC2 was slowed down just slightly, it would be great and make it much more accessible a game.
It was slowed down successfully by discouraging deathballs and adding more units that zone and make the game more about smaller/spread out engagements, and more interaction on both sides, but it was also sped up since units' speed kept getting faster and faster. It kind of sucks that, especially if this patch goes through, it'll feel like a third of all units got their speed buffed over time, and we could have instead nerfed the speed of other units slightly instead, or come to some middleground.
Anyway, if the game speed was 10% slower, or if the DPS overall was decreased by ~15%, those would already be significant help in making micro and reacting more manageable for people who aren't fast, and make it feel more about thinking and less about speed. Age of Empires is slower but less popular. I think it's a misbelief slowed down gamespeed makes the game more accessible
Age of Empires is a bad example because it's boring to watch
I'm not saying that SC2 should be as slow as WC3 (or any other RTS for that matter) because that would be awful, just that SC2 needs to find its own sweet spot in terms of game speed.
Warcraft III, on its own terms, hit a pace that was enjoyable for both viewership and players. it had a snappy early-game that was unsettled by the unpredictability of item drops, which led towards intense mid-game skirmishes and dramatic micro battles. what stands WC3 apart is the comeback potential. that's what made it exciting for me.
imagine Maru vs herO. Maru is down 60 supply vs herO's max. herO is ready to push in and land the killing blow. now take herO out of the chair and swap him with a low master player. Maru still loses from this position 90% of the time. WHY? because no amount of micro can overcome a severe supply deficit in SC2. to win from this position, Maru doesn't just need his opponent to play poorly. he needs the opponent to fuck up spectacularly beyond all belief
hatch a similar scenario in WC3 and what happens? Moon, Infi or Grubby win 90% of the time, in large part because the game is paced in favour of miracle micro.
SC2 is a numbers game first and a micro battler a very distant second. I suggest that the gulf between these 2 things should be narrowed so that micro can become more exciting and meaningful.
|
The latest batch of changes. Overall tweaks to the power dynamic of HTs vs vipers, disruptors vs hydra and some tweaks to raven's strength while addressing cyclone dmg nerf vs armored (e.g town halls) by buffing lock-on range.
Also, ghost slightly more reliable with its snipe trades.
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/HbZ4584.png)
|
is it too late to add units? zerg needs a flying cloaked unit like the othe two races
|
Its good that they still making change and testing, but how is this going to make it into IEM? Then again, these are more like "fine tuning" than change, they know that Ghost Snipe range nerf got pushed back so they extend it a bit, same with Hydra speed, Cyclone micro and Disruptor Ball AoE.
|
On January 09 2023 21:42 tigera6 wrote:
Its good that they still making change and testing, but how is this going to make it into IEM? Then again, these are more like "fine tuning" than change, they know that Ghost Snipe range nerf got pushed back so they extend it a bit, same with Hydra speed, Cyclone micro and Disruptor Ball AoE.
no, these are not minor changes protoss has a chance at winning if this patch doesnt go live, if it does as is, 100% zerg wins
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
