|
Northern Ireland25159 Posts
On September 08 2024 05:24 Blitzball04 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2024 23:33 Balnazza wrote:
But you can see how this one change alone starts to ramp up the need for more and more changes. And here I'm back to my original point: None of these changes feel connected. They are just puzzle-pieces without any synergy. Because in the end, you haven't really answered what your Mod (at this point it should be clear that nothing of this will ever be implemented, so it will be a Mod in the end) is supposed to accomplish.
- Balance can't be it. SC2 is balanced (as good as balance in an assymetric Three-Race-RTS can be), so I highly doubt one guy randomly changing stats and gameplay mechanics will end up with a version of the game that is more balanced.
- "The game should feel different"? Then play a different game or program a new one. Both are much more viable than trying to change something that works.
- "It should feel more like SC1"? Then play SC:R
- Or is it about players should be forced to be more active on the map? Then again, just do bigger maps with less ressources. Though honestly, if we ignore very lategame stages of the game, I personally think SC2 is already plenty active on the map, probably way too much for newer players.
Change for the sake of change is the worst thing you can do for a game. If your changes don't have reason and are cohesive, they are in the end useless at best and harmful at worst. Good post The worst offenders are usually the ones that keep saying “ “Mech was viable in sc1, therefore it must be viable in sc2”. Or “ make sc2 more like Sc1” Moral of the story, don’t like sc2? Go watch or play another game cause those guys are definitely in the minority. I know BW is still popular, but I literally can’t watch any match from beginning to end due to how slow and feel like it lack of skills compare to sc2
Trying to make mech work has just never really done it for me in SC2, it’s not as engaging as it is in BW because they’re… different games.
Mech in SC2 in phases where it’s been strong is just a deathball, a slightly slower deathball, but a deathball nonetheless. Which people complain about when other factions have deathball comps.
It works great in BW, there’s a lot of interesting interactions. I’ve never really wanted that transplanted to SC2 because with the eco changes, control changes how do you kill a maxed mech ball? Either take to the air (not a fan of air ball metas), or circumvent it entirely.
I’d highly dispute there’s a lack of skills compared to SC2 mind :p
Marine-tank mirror is pretty darn fun, that’s something new and dynamic and really fits SC2. Has at least some of those positional elements
I totally understand, and agree with bringing some of the elements that made BW mech so iconic over to SC2, absolutely. But some mech zealots other the years have been like has to be Terran, it has to be fac units, etc etc.
I’d argue that some of the swarmhost metas were quite functionally similar to many of the mech staples. Immobile, bolstered with static D to cover the gaps, outranges everything on the ground. Pretty mechy
I think with the game changes with the sequel, you’re left with two options. A mech that is oppressively frustrating to play against if it’s strong, or not very good but not completely useless. Ideally you can find a middle spot but of the two I’d much prefer the latter. It’s not like Blizz didn’t try over the years
|
Northern Ireland25159 Posts
On September 08 2024 05:41 Vision_ wrote:
I don t need to change SC2. I need to change the gameplay of SC2 because i m pretty sure the game could be better if the variaton of tasks is improved. The ground control is lacking, the repeatability of the game isn t enought trought my eyes that s why i m more focused on economy changes. The idea is clear : create a ressource which is spreading everywhere on the map while blue mineral field are concentrated locally, contrary to violet mineral field which cover the map ponctually but oftenly.
One thing is strange to me, it s the high number of bases compared to the size of the map AND the repartition of these bases which are all near the border. Without too much explication, you can also see that the end game arrive soon in the expansion of your base, which means that for Terran or Protoss (avoid discuss zerg three base ahead by now), the third base setup match to the end game (in term of mineral income), and unfortunetly i say that the size of this three bases is too small for the stake of territory. Then, usually Zerg have been advantages by their vision so, they don t take enought risks also in the developpement of their strategy
I have many reasons to think that the postion of the minerals field behind each base is ridiculous. I could have developped my argument a little bit if I hadn't wanted to give you an answer today
How does having another resource that spawns far away from your base fix the issues you have with game flow, and Zerg particularly.
Especially in ZvP, less so but still impactfully in ZvT. Zerg is faster-moving, often leveraged for a lot of map control. If you’re proposing more resources being spread in more peripheral areas, the faction with the superior map control/presence is going to benefit disproportionately.
In the same vein, you don’t like worker harassment into standard concentrated mineral lines, but you’ve proposed worker gangs travelling around, carrying more resources per trip.
This makes them an even juicier target to be taken out by harassment.
If your goal is to encourage more movement around the map as you’ve stated, how is this facilitated by an almost obligatory requirement to babysit worker gangs. Which will likely see you be more, not less risk-averse
I just don’t see how these ideas:
1. Fit together in combination
2, Are implementable without completely redesigning SC2
3. Even solve the issues they’re meant to solve
They’re some interesting spitballing in a ‘if I was building an RTS I’d change some things about how resources traditionally work’.
I’d read that blog if you gathered your ideas and laid them out in a concise, readable way.
|
One day y'all will learn to stop paying attention to Vision and his hair-brained ideas lmao
|
Babysit is a moba term, i don t think it applies here.
If you are casual, the game will be attractive because of the difference between muscle memory mecanics of players which are less impactfull.
If you are pro then, a strategy has to be developped to react to an aggression at the border line of your territory. let s say a biiger vision range around those strategic point which allow pro to react because of the mini map. I don t know how easy are units on the minimap but this detail have his importance. Let s say also that these strategic point has to be defended by some defensive structure with a tiny buff (like spawn crawler or maybe don t require a worker to be built)
Map control is the key of strategy, I'm not teaching you anything but you are right, there s a risk that players doesn t want to allow a multi tasking economy part in their favorite game, which would ask them to adapt to a new meta game.
Another argument in my favor, it s the reduction of firerate from fastest to normal while all duration, cooldowns will be increased to fit their original speed (buildings keep their duration as it would be in 'fastest'). This will help players to decide of retreating unit and defending a specific point.
And it s not so idiot to put in light the weakness of SC2 (like harassement) in order to find what don t work out, because it s the natural process : you make an error then it confirms what would have only be a doubt (and not a knowledge).
Same for map control, you can argue that it s good as it is, i.e ping pong between two players, one attacks then the second counter, then counter the counter, i would agree with you it s already enought. But the game would be far interesting with two dimensions, not only fights happening on a single line.
I also agree that each race are rich enought and there s not so much to add. Did you see any ultralisks be used in pro games ? You can answer that you don t care, they are used at master level and then i would agree also. However In decreasing firerate you would be able to understand exactly why ultralisks are cannon fooder at pro level.
Catch workers is also specific by races and Zerg is favored :
- Vision + workers burrowed
Protoss have shield battery and observers which is also not bad for handle a pressure. Terran have walls. And in the end, i only see the same advantages which exist since the start of SC2, creep vision for Zerg. But the game does well so i m not afraid about balances because i consider thanks to SC2 evo complete that :
- Vultures are far more interesting that hellions
- Stalkers are in fact an harassement units
My main bet is to get a mini-game paper-rock-cissor with zerglings, vultures and stalkers (with a faster and light stalker), and there are a lot of unknown as the possibility of stalker being not adapted to this new role (it s hard to find solution here but one part of my idea is to increase the cooldown of blink in order to have a less completely snowball unit, then you can push the stalkers to a more biased unit against light, here it would requires carefull modifications). Afterall, Blizzard have added adepts while their functions is really close to Stalkers, so why not
|
Now you see. Just take a look to the new thread of starcraft Recall and you will be convinced that ressource can be spread all over the map to promote ground control.
Do i need to add some more arguments ?
|
On September 08 2024 18:09 Vision_ wrote:
Now you see. Just take a look to the new thread of starcraft Recall and you will be convinced that ressource can be spread all over the map to promote ground control.
Do i need to add some more arguments ?
That entirely depends what you mean with "it works". Literally anything can "work". You could make a SC-Mod that has no ressources at all or one that has no armies at all and only ressources. It all can "work". But if you want to propose gameplay-changes to the real game, then no, none of this works.
As for your post above: You yourself mentioned that your english isn't that good. But honestly, it isn't even your english, it is the fact that this is just gibberish. You are randomly throwing together points that often don't really have anything to do with each other. I don't know if all of these make sense in your head and are connected or if you just want to mention as much ideas as possible, but it isn't working.
You want to slow the game down so it is more accessible, but then you want to create a ressource-scenario that sounds like an absolute nightmare to babysit (which is not a MOBA-term originally btw). Map control also isn't "ping-pong" at the moment, but technically both players can be aggressive and defensive at the same time - because of how the economy is build. And what even is "If you are casual, the game will be attractive because of the difference between muscle memory mecanics of players which are less impactfull" supposed to mean?
As I said before: If you want to create a Mod, create a Mod. But do it like the Starcall-Guy. Just create it and don't present your ideas for the actual "main game", because they are clearly not working. And after you finish your Mod and release it, you can still ask for feedback and changes. But don't have "main bets" around how you think the game should be balanced with units that aren't even in the game (Vultures)...
|
It s funny how you are a hater.
We are talking about the idea of having a mod with mineral spread uniformly on the map and then, a creative boy do it and all you are able to do it s again discuss for the god sake. I can do anything for you if you aren t able to recognize a promising idea
|
On September 09 2024 00:06 Vision_ wrote:
It s funny how you are a hater.
We are talking about the idea of having a mod with mineral spread uniformly on the map and then, a creative boy do it and all you are able to do it s again discuss for the god sake. I can do anything for you if you aren t able to recognize a promising idea
You never really mentioned that you want to make a Mod, you always talked about Gameplay or balance changes for the main game. Your inability to even explain the base of your idea is not my fault.
But hey, since I'm apparently a hater: There is no "promising idea". All you have presented so far are extremly bad, incohesive shards of thrown together ideas that have no standing whatsoever and would completly ruin the game if implemented, because they neither follow any balance-logic, nor do they take into account how SC2 gameplay is constructed.
Feel free to prove me wrong by actually creating your Mod instead of rambling more incohesive nonsenses. Have fun, I'm curious how it will look eventually!
|
On September 09 2024 00:18 Balnazza wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2024 00:06 Vision_ wrote:
It s funny how you are a hater.
We are talking about the idea of having a mod with mineral spread uniformly on the map and then, a creative boy do it and all you are able to do it s again discuss for the god sake. I can do anything for you if you aren t able to recognize a promising idea You never really mentioned that you want to make a Mod, you always talked about Gameplay or balance changes for the main game. Your inability to even explain the base of your idea is not my fault. But hey, since I'm apparently a hater: There is no "promising idea". All you have presented so far are extremly bad, incohesive shards of thrown together ideas that have no standing whatsoever and would completly ruin the game if implemented, because they neither follow any balance-logic, nor do they take into account how SC2 gameplay is constructed. Feel free to prove me wrong by actually creating your Mod instead of rambling more incohesive nonsenses. Have fun, I'm curious how it will look eventually!
You know what ? i don t care, i let you the last words
|
|
|
Northern Ireland25159 Posts
On September 08 2024 23:06 Balnazza wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2024 18:09 Vision_ wrote:
Now you see. Just take a look to the new thread of starcraft Recall and you will be convinced that ressource can be spread all over the map to promote ground control.
Do i need to add some more arguments ? That entirely depends what you mean with "it works". Literally anything can "work". You could make a SC-Mod that has no ressources at all or one that has no armies at all and only ressources. It all can "work". But if you want to propose gameplay-changes to the real game, then no, none of this works. As for your post above: You yourself mentioned that your english isn't that good. But honestly, it isn't even your english, it is the fact that this is just gibberish. You are randomly throwing together points that often don't really have anything to do with each other. I don't know if all of these make sense in your head and are connected or if you just want to mention as much ideas as possible, but it isn't working. You want to slow the game down so it is more accessible, but then you want to create a ressource-scenario that sounds like an absolute nightmare to babysit (which is not a MOBA-term originally btw). Map control also isn't "ping-pong" at the moment, but technically both players can be aggressive and defensive at the same time - because of how the economy is build. And what even is "If you are casual, the game will be attractive because of the difference between muscle memory mecanics of players which are less impactfull" supposed to mean? As I said before: If you want to create a Mod, create a Mod. But do it like the Starcall-Guy. Just create it and don't present your ideas for the actual "main game", because they are clearly not working. And after you finish your Mod and release it, you can still ask for feedback and changes. But don't have "main bets" around how you think the game should be balanced with units that aren't even in the game (Vultures)...
How do casuals play the game? And I mean genuine casuals. They don’t expand remotely as fast as the real competitively minded, much less than the pros
Vision is extrapolating the game flow from how it’s played at the highest level, and making adjustments accordingly to appeal to casuals who largely don’t play like that.
Ok we’ve changed how resources are distributed so you’re able to optimally mine off 2 bases now, but we’ve added this worker change to encourage you to move to the periphery. But at least you’re not stressed by trying to defend mineral lines across 4-5 bases, so problem solved right?
Except casual players take a hell of a while to get to 4+ bases, or if they do it’s very unsafely done and only viable because opponents play quite passively. Even if one has long passed the point of playing at lower MMRs, just watch an episode or two of Harstem’s rather excellent ‘is it imba or do I suck?’ series that features anyone from like plat down. Some may watch the pros and you can see some of the ideas permeate down, but it’s a very different game at that level.
You’re not swapping x for y here, you’re swapping turtling on 2/3 bases and having to guard workers in those locations with well, being on the same number of bases but now with having to babysit worker trains navigating the map.
Which is going to be more mechanically taxing and require more multitasking in a cohort that already struggles with that facet of the game?
To my knowledge, nowadays, perhaps not in the past, Vision neither watches tournament SC2, nor plays the game. Obviously nothing wrong with that!
But how do you redesign a game if you don’t know how it is currently designed?
|
On September 09 2024 04:23 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2024 23:06 Balnazza wrote:On September 08 2024 18:09 Vision_ wrote:
Now you see. Just take a look to the new thread of starcraft Recall and you will be convinced that ressource can be spread all over the map to promote ground control.
Do i need to add some more arguments ? That entirely depends what you mean with "it works". Literally anything can "work". You could make a SC-Mod that has no ressources at all or one that has no armies at all and only ressources. It all can "work". But if you want to propose gameplay-changes to the real game, then no, none of this works. As for your post above: You yourself mentioned that your english isn't that good. But honestly, it isn't even your english, it is the fact that this is just gibberish. You are randomly throwing together points that often don't really have anything to do with each other. I don't know if all of these make sense in your head and are connected or if you just want to mention as much ideas as possible, but it isn't working. You want to slow the game down so it is more accessible, but then you want to create a ressource-scenario that sounds like an absolute nightmare to babysit (which is not a MOBA-term originally btw). Map control also isn't "ping-pong" at the moment, but technically both players can be aggressive and defensive at the same time - because of how the economy is build. And what even is "If you are casual, the game will be attractive because of the difference between muscle memory mecanics of players which are less impactfull" supposed to mean? As I said before: If you want to create a Mod, create a Mod. But do it like the Starcall-Guy. Just create it and don't present your ideas for the actual "main game", because they are clearly not working. And after you finish your Mod and release it, you can still ask for feedback and changes. But don't have "main bets" around how you think the game should be balanced with units that aren't even in the game (Vultures)... How do casuals play the game? And I mean genuine casuals. They don’t expand remotely as fast as the real competitively minded, much less than the pros Vision is extrapolating the game flow from how it’s played at the highest level, and making adjustments accordingly to appeal to casuals who largely don’t play like that. Ok we’ve changed how resources are distributed so you’re able to optimally mine off 2 bases now, but we’ve added this worker change to encourage you to move to the periphery. But at least you’re not stressed by trying to defend mineral lines across 4-5 bases, so problem solved right? Except casual players take a hell of a while to get to 4+ bases, or if they do it’s very unsafely done and only viable because opponents play quite passively. Even if one has long passed the point of playing at lower MMRs, just watch an episode or two of Harstem’s rather excellent ‘is it imba or do I suck?’ series that features anyone from like plat down. Some may watch the pros and you can see some of the ideas permeate down, but it’s a very different game at that level. You’re not swapping x for y here, you’re swapping turtling on 2/3 bases and having to guard workers in those locations with well, being on the same number of bases but now with having to babysit worker trains navigating the map. Which is going to be more mechanically taxing and require more multitasking in a cohort that already struggles with that facet of the game?
If you watch pros, I bet sometimes you have this "huh, when did he add another base?"-moment, because it often happens so nonchalantly, it is one of the absolute basic on pro-level. But as you said, this isn't how lower level players play the game. On lower levels, there is more of a "ah shit, my base starts to run out, I need an expansion!". Because on lower levels, you don't do all the things at the same time, you do them one at a time - which is true btw for all games. You don't harrass, expand, tech and build your army at the same time.
Balancing economy is one of the most difficult things in any good RTS and usually the thing every low-to-mid level player sucks the most at. There is even a very great proof for that:
In AoE 2, there are the Chinese. The Chinese are very unique compared to all the other 30ish races, because they start with more workers, but less food. And if you look at the stats, Chinese are absolutely giga-thrash on the lower skill-level. It is one of the worst races in the game. But the higher the Elo, the higher the winrate. It is an almost perfect curve.
But why? Because lower level players often don't utilize their civs correctly, they play a very standard opening (that is mostly the same for all 30ish civs). But with Chinese, if you play standard, you are falling behind very quickly, so your worker-advantage turns into a worker-deficit.
To my knowledge, nowadays, perhaps not in the past, Vision neither watches tournament SC2, nor plays the game. Obviously nothing wrong with that! But how do you redesign a game if you don’t know how it is currently designed?
I mean, the answer for that is clearly "you don't". But this isn't really game-design, it rather is "I don't like SC2 at all but also don't want to look for a different RTS"...
|
If you don't like current sc2 go play another game, is not an argument. Many ppl have left over the years who had just as much passion as you, but because the game developed into something different they left. If I leave it's because there is no chance for P at the highest lvl. So should I play another game with a viable Protoss race? What if sc2 fit me more than sc1?
I like many of his ideas, but they should be able to stand on its own without introducing other new ideas to justify them. I agree that the economy increase too much in the mid game, so much that z, and p cannot eek out enough advantage from a winning position, before the terran then gets into a similar position, but because of mules then get the superior economy and then proceeds to win the game
.
A true strider stalker sounds cool, but overlaps too much with the adept, and if you keep the +vs. armoured stalker, but change them to light tag, then they become absolute tank killers.
I knew about hydra, lurker, vulture being medium and think it would be cool if they had removed armour tag, in exchange for lower attack range on the lurker, hydra.
Lurker could have a major rework and this unit would become way cooler.
Imagine a lurker with slower traveling spines, 30 dmg against all and was less hard countered by tanks and immos. They could be the true ambush unit and more powerful at controlling locations, due to killing all units better. But if microed against (avoiding spines) zerg would need to disengage and reinforce.
|
Northern Ireland25159 Posts
On September 09 2024 14:48 ejozl wrote:
If you don't like current sc2 go play another game, is not an argument. Many ppl have left over the years who had just as much passion as you, but because the game developed into something different they left. If I leave it's because there is no chance for P at the highest lvl. So should I play another game with a viable Protoss race? What if sc2 fit me more than sc1?
I like many of his ideas, but they should be able to stand on its own without introducing other new ideas to justify them. I agree that the economy increase too much in the mid game, so much that z, and p cannot eek out enough advantage from a winning position, before the terran then gets into a similar position, but because of mules then get the superior economy and then proceeds to win the game
.
A true strider stalker sounds cool, but overlaps too much with the adept, and if you keep the +vs. armoured stalker, but change them to light tag, then they become absolute tank killers.
I knew about hydra, lurker, vulture being medium and think it would be cool if they had removed armour tag, in exchange for lower attack range on the lurker, hydra.
Lurker could have a major rework and this unit would become way cooler.
Imagine a lurker with slower traveling spines, 30 dmg against all and was less hard countered by tanks and immos. They could be the true ambush unit and more powerful at controlling locations, due to killing all units better. But if microed against (avoiding spines) zerg would need to disengage and reinforce.
Cool idea, but I think you run into SC2’s general problem with scaling.
What is a cool, and manageable bit of micro/counter micro when armies are quite small, becomes prohibitively difficult to do as armies scale up.
So what in theory is a cool, space-controlling unit that requires some finesse to use, and has counterplay, ends up even stronger in high numbers because the counterplay gets harder, so mitigating the unit’s weaknesses.
For example, even a relative scrub like me can handle a disruptor or two. Their relatively high attack/ability cooldown, and being completely useless when on cooldown is a real weakness.
Once you get to 5/6+ it’s a whole different ballgame (joke intended) for even pretty decent players. Keeping track of which are on cooldown or not is harder, mechanically dodging them is harder, balls are flying with more frequency at you.
It’s not impossible, but most of us aren’t Clem, who can seemingly bat them away as if they’re an errant beach ball interrupting his picnic.
To be clear, I do actually like the core idea but that would be my predicted effect of a harder-hitting lurker once we get into real late game/super late game territory.
SC2 is still best in class when it comes to microability of units, it just gets much harder to do that when armies get bigger and it’s why deathballs of various forms have always been a cornerstone of the game
|
On September 09 2024 14:48 ejozl wrote:
If you don't like current sc2 go play another game, is not an argument. Many ppl have left over the years who had just as much passion as you, but because the game developed into something different they left. If I leave it's because there is no chance for P at the highest lvl. So should I play another game with a viable Protoss race? What if sc2 fit me more than sc1?
I'm not talking about balance-changes. "Unit x has y more/less range or damage or costs more/less ressources" doesn't change what kind of game SC2 is, that is more than fine. But if you need to change the entire economy and half the units first before you enjoy the game...find another game.
|
I get your point. But many have quit over the new lotv economy, because for them, this is not starcraft. Many have argued for a more wild economy like bw, because getting stuck on 3 bases isn't very starcrafty. Ppl have left over protoss cheese, because it isn't starcrafty, and ppl still argue for the removal of warp gate because it isn't rts'y and therefore not starcrafty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
