EPT
[BWWI] Nyo's SC2 review. (*WARNING INSANELY LONG*) - Page 6
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Attolite
United States144 Posts
| ||
Nyovne
Netherlands19129 Posts
On July 22 2008 04:48 Blacklizard wrote: On Zerg- Let's hope they give Zerg another caster (or add to the Overseer) like suggested. I'd like to see Zerg get some help with cliffs, but as much as I miss scourge I am not sure they'd be "fair" against colossi. It'd be like hitting a grounded reaver. So glad they are testing consume! Like you say, we'll see if it is actually needed in the beta. As long as they at least test it I'm hoping we get it back though (AKA it's needed), even in a nerfed form. Yup it felt like zerg could really use a second caster, wonder if and how they'll be tackling that cause compared to the other races it really feels like a niche. It was in SC1 as well since the Queen, like the ghost, were extremely underused casters and I hope to see every unit in SC2 shine at certain times. The power of sci vessels and defilers more then made up for that, if not plain overshadowed them though. Consume always has been an interesting mechanic and just a much needed one in SC for the zerg to survive. Time will tell if its needed in SC2 and if so how it will handle. The mechanic at least I wouldn't mind to see return to SC2, not on the infestor persé, I just like it alot. | ||
|
Nyovne
Netherlands19129 Posts
On July 22 2008 06:51 UmmTheHobo wrote: From what you wrote it looks like starcraft 2 is amazing, And the fact that it is only in alpha makes it even more amazing o_O I really think the time when macro will be dealt with is during beta. Not to be rude, but no one outside blizzard has really played it long enough to give blizzard accurate feedback on MBS. Agreed, we offcouse cannot say certain things with certainty. However we can share our opinions based on our limited experience, which is all we can go at at the moment. We most especially have our take on the macro mechanics based purely on principle though. The principle is just counterproductive for a game with e-sports in mind, thats the main point we are stressing. Not that MBS or the new mechanics are bad or ruin the fun of the game, far from it. We just stress it most likely (confirmed by our limited experience) will have an adverse effect on the competative element of SC2. In short, what all the TL reviewers have been stating pretty much is that: To succeed as an E-Sport SC2 will require room for players to differentiate themselves skill- as well as style-wise. We feared before WWI and saw it confirmed there that said room is being diminished. Thats my beef with the new macro mechanics. All reviews on this site have approached SC2 with the perspective of its future and success as an E-sport, not as how an individual player would experience or enjoy it. Both perspectives have a serious difference in criteria, which is why so many people cannot conform themselves with our opinions on SC2. They can't view the game from the same perspective as we do. As such they view our arguments from a different perspective then from (and for) which they were written. | ||
|
Nyovne
Netherlands19129 Posts
On July 22 2008 07:18 TheLorme wrote: Hi, Nyovne I've read most of your post; many thanks for having shared your experience of SC2. You did an amazing job! Any specfic thoughts on the Thor and the role it currently fulfills? Were you satisfied by what you saw or experienced with that unit? I only used the Thor in a single TvT and haven't built or seen it used against me since. As such I cannot in all honesty give you an opinion on it as a unit. The only thing I can say about is, is that as an individual unit I found its design far more interesting (not neccesarily better!) when it was even slower and built by an SCV. As such I'd like it very much and I'd love to see another go at experimenting with a SCV constructed Thor. In that design I think it would be cool (again a terrible argument but I'm human with my own preferences after all lol!) to see the Thor a bit as it is right now (as a damage absorb/siege breaker, not an anti air platform at which it *seems* to fail terribly and I have no reason to suspect otherwise) but then constructed by an SCV. Also with even more reduced speed and being able to "lift-off" like terran buildings do to increase their speed a bit (they wouldnt be able to fire) and reach islands/slowly scale a large cliff. This last because at the moment Thors cannot be transported by dropships and I'd like to see them a bit more unique. Ah well, those are my boyish dreams for a cool terran mecha :D. In short though: I think the Thor is really cool and most of my friends thought the same. The only thing is that it totally lacks any personality and clear role as a unit which leaves it bland and generally confused as why you are actually building one and not spending that large amount of time, minerals and gas on something else like 2-3 banshees. | ||
|
DeadVessel
United States6269 Posts
Very nice post btw. | ||
|
Nyovne
Netherlands19129 Posts
On July 22 2008 08:38 DeepGreen wrote: Really awesome report. This is the kind of thing that really keeps me interested, not fansites, screenshots, youtube video, or any amount of discussion with fellow Starcraft players. This quote should govern any discussion of Starcraft 2 on any website anywhere on the internet. It should be written in bold and it should blink and maybe make it reach out of the computer and grab you by the balls and scream "OH MY GOD READ ME." Slightly related: I don't know if there's a job for a subheader writer anywhere, but if there is, you should apply. Those were hilarious. Another side, when you said that reavers were more fun than colossi, I initially read it as Reavers are in the game...with the superfreak AI that autosurrounds + automines + makes you pancakes. I think the major TL report mentioned it, but scarabs with this new AI would be SCARY. I'm relieved to hear from the various reports we've received that the "spirit" of SC is alive and kicking -- I'm curious if the build of SC2 you played demonstrated a dimension we haven't seen strategically. Not new angles on the old formulas, but are there characteristics that you believe will have a huge learning curve? Great that you enjoyed it! Thank you very much for reading it all and taking the time to leave some kind words for me . Much apprechiated! I mean I wrote this initially for myself but a little pat on the back never hurt anyone. (unless it was from Mr. T)Yeah people should be more interested in general design principles and implementations then bitch and moan about individial units and their statistics. Statistics and timings are 100% Beta material and are off less consequence then the bigger picture/mechanics/gamestyle which is what it is all about in the Alpha stages of design. The only thing that I could imagine of the new things which would have a steep learning curve would be to get aquinted with the new increased mobility of the races. This is offcourse purely based on WWI impression and I have no way to tell how it will hold up in actual play and if it will actually result in more mobile action across the map. If players are fully pressuring eachother it offcourse becomes a whole other game then when left alone. Time will tell how available these new racial mobilities actually are allthough I expect warp-in and nydus worms to be of huge importance in any aspect of future SC2 gameplay and gameflow if they remain in the game in any form. | ||
|
Nyovne
Netherlands19129 Posts
On July 22 2008 08:59 maybenexttime wrote: Hmm, about the lack of Consume problem. How about giving the Infestor an ability (upgrade required), let's say, Auto-digestion, which would allow you to trade Infestor's HP for Energy? There would be no additional mana upgrade, but instead you'd be able to get 3 mana points for 1 HP or something. :D By the way, the article on your games with burrow use would be very appriciated. ^^ Well the lack of consume isn't a problem yet and might never devellop into one hehe. Hp for Energy would be a nice mechanic tbh and unique to the SC universe. Beta will learn if any such mechanic is needed and if so I'm curious to what they'd come up with. Recycle an old tried and proven ability? Add that old ability but with a new design and twist? Or come up with a wholly new solution to a gamebalance problem. Always interesting to see what Blizzard can come up with. Hehe on some SC2 gamereports and burrow and shit I'll do it when I get around to it/get bored :D. | ||
|
Nyovne
Netherlands19129 Posts
On July 22 2008 21:02 Bash wrote: Weird, because there were dozens. No offense to the author. Not a big deal though, especially since you hurried a bit and didn't proofread and all that but one error did bother me because it was so frequent, the continuous use of "alot". It's "a lot". Of course noone expects you to bother to go back and change them... Haha sorry if it annoyed you, if I ever get THAT bored or if it will end up in the Final Edits I'll head back in and correct the spelling mistakes and have it proof read . | ||
|
Nyovne
Netherlands19129 Posts
On July 23 2008 03:16 VIB wrote: Wow Nyovne you're the man. :D I finally had time to read it all and it was well worth it. One thing it got me wondering. What is your personal opinion on the potential of macro enhancing abilities like Mutate Larvae and the Reactor to increase the skill gap at top levels? Can a good player overrun a bad player because he used larvae/reactor better? (always making 1 larvae when it's up complemented by good overlord count etc) Could that maybe heal the damage done by mbs/automine? I personally would love to see more abilities similar to these. That sounds like it could be balanced changing the cast time of the deploy pylon aura ability. Is it too short right now? If it takes long enough so you could spot it, move defense there, kill it before it finishes deploying. Then you wouldn't need heavy air investment, just some. Didn't you say before that it was good offensively but bad defensively? Or did I misread something. To start with let me be clear that new mechanics like the mutated larvae and reactor tech get me really excited for the game. They aren't as much macro enhancing implementations but more of macro diversing mechanics. In other words, they add diversity to the game and allow for choices to be made during the macro (resource aquiring and spending) process. Implementations such as that get me really hyped. Why? Because as I stated a gazillion times and I will keep repeating it till the game gets released and then some: Room for players to differentiate themselves skill as well as style-wise will result in a more succesful E-sport. Options to integrate into a players larvae management which is the core of any zerg players macro is just awsome. Those are the things which are really good implementations imho cause they aid to the possibilities and room for players to differentiate themselves from eachother. Reactor/Techlab choices are likewise very interesting as they force choices between higher tier/quality units or faster more basic units. Simply put, choices for players during gameplay are good. Creative and original choices make a unique, entertaining and possibly groundbreaking and unique player. And thats one which I'll pay to watch play and cheer my lungs out for. E-Sports, nuff said. Changing the deploy time for Phase Prisms isn't the way to go with in my (very personal and limited) experience. Why? Simply because it would deduct from the game its already very fast and dynamic gameplay and it has nothing to do with a players skill. Units are fast, smoothe and have easy and immediately to deploy abilities. Fast and dynamic games make for entertaining games, for players as well as spectators. With that in mind I'd personally like to look for solutions to most problems in SC2 in dynamic and most of all player controled options. These most naturally flow from player controled abilities or units. As to your final point, I don't know if you misread anything! Nydus worms function pretty much as easier to use (in quality as well as quantity!) midgame nydus canals from the original game. Offensively they are incredibly strong as of yet and if they are too strong or not will need to be determined if players in actual play can effectively counter them. Two things make me doubt that they are not overpowered which are a) their insanely short deploy time after a really short time for an overlords creep to spread, and b) the fact that you can rally newly created units into the nydus system! A minor point c) would be that losing a nydus worm doesn't make you lose any units as losing a loaded overlord, dropship or phase-prism would. Defensively though they are GREAT for having a huge network to keep a large army mobile to defend your pletora and expansions spread out across the map. A huge disadvantage to their defensive use is that they need creep to spawn plus you need one building (nydus warren) per worm you want to spawn at the same time. As such its practically impossible to defend from cliff play once its in action and expanding to an island is a bit of a bitch as well. In short, nydus worms need some work but thats no surprise, its still alpha. What I could obviously see as a decent fix (but again would be a bit grabbing back again towards the original game) would be to implement some nerfs to the nydus system such as changing it to hive tech level and bringing back the lair level overlord transport (ventral sacks or somthing?)upgrade to the game. This would bring some spice and motivation for a zerg to hit hive tech level (which is seriously weak at the moment compared to their INCREDIBLE midgame) while clearing up some midgame problems such as an effective and most of all reactive defense vs midgame cliffplay. As far as island expansion aquisition goes I don't think the current system actually falls short though! It's mostly just cliffplay and the fact that nydus worms can be relatively easily stopped when there is some dedicated defense I guess. Especially when some nerfs will be implemented (which will happen, no doubt). As opposed to that the zerg Doom Drop is not only incredibly powerful and would add to zerg diversity strategy wise but (I know bad nostalgia argument) also pretty damn iconic to the zerg as a race. Good points, cheers. | ||
|
Nyovne
Netherlands19129 Posts
On July 23 2008 05:49 Tiamat wrote: I am sorry if you answered this already, but is the targeting AI the same as SC? For example, units would ignore workers and go after the attacking units, due to some sort of priority. Also this is what made muta/ling work as well, since mutas were higher than zerglings. Yes. | ||
|
Nyovne
Netherlands19129 Posts
On July 23 2008 13:40 RinoZerg wrote: Mighty post. Awesome info in here. Sets my mind at ease (slightly) about the surround AI. I'm not very confident that SC2 will ever have anything like the macro requirements SC though. You cannot replicate that engine in a mainstream game these days. It all depends on what new mechanics they can cook up. btw. Sheesh. Is it really that hard to read a long post? O_o. Its about SC2! Make it longer! ^^ Haha, cheers. As to your point, it's not an engine problem at all. Change back all rally commands upon construction completion (workers and attack units!) back to move instead of a-move and harvest and watch how at least 75% of the problem instantly goes away. Add some tweaks to the MBS construction queue options for units and I'm pretty damn sure at least 90% of people problems with it again gone. These are at least really really simple and easy to implement solutions which might very well (would have to play test to confirm offc) solve the (in my opinion) biggest problem in SC2 as an E-sport. (That along with the whole prevention vs consequence problem) | ||
|
Nyovne
Netherlands19129 Posts
On July 23 2008 14:50 xgc-Infinite wrote: Appreciate the writeup, it gave me something to read while avoiding work at work. Glad to help :D. | ||
|
Nyovne
Netherlands19129 Posts
On July 24 2008 04:01 dmetheny wrote: No, as someone said it's basically like queuing up units at a barracks, Saves time but wastes resources. It shouldn't affect high level play at all really. Simple, clear and well put, thanks for clearing that up for people! | ||
|
Nyovne
Netherlands19129 Posts
On July 24 2008 04:13 beefhamburger wrote: Is there spell queuing? As in, for mm, move somewhere => shift T (to stim) causing the marines to stim once they've reached the move location? Or does it work like SC where you can't queue up abilities? This would make it too easy for temps or other spell casters to spread out storms. Being able to shift-click storm locations would remove so much micro/multitasking since you could just choose 1 temp and shift-T to storm like 3 different spots on one chained command. Nope sorry, no abilities or spell queues which I think is a good thing. Forces more personal player control over his units which creates room for players to differentiate. Spellcasting and ability use is one of the things I feel that Blizzard did immediately right, straight up in Alpha and where I expect very little tuning/fixes in the Beta period. | ||
|
Nyovne
Netherlands19129 Posts
On July 24 2008 05:07 yangstuh wrote: I really wish we had more pro gamer impressions/interviews on SC2 Meh, allthough always great and interesting to read I'm alot more looking forward to real Korean progamer impressions and feedback on the game once it actually hits its Beta phase where the fine-tuning gets done and balance is established . | ||
|
Nyovne
Netherlands19129 Posts
From Ki_Do in sc2 the workers will auto split, now that worker split-micro of the very very very early game might be gone(ok thats not a big loss, but i like it ^^) however i just got this strange thought- since we got features like auto surround that makes micro for newbs easier but manually surround is still better, so manually spliting would still be better than the automatic one? i mean, you got any feeling about that? Response: Splitting workers into 2-2-2 or just 3-3 instead of all 6 onto one node is still more efficient and made the difference between having those 300 mins for that hatchery on 13 when my drone arrived at the expo or that id have to wait a bit or that I had 150 mins again right after my hatch-pool-hatch--> 3 lings timed. It's mere seconds but ah well, every little bit eh? Especially when rushing or having to defend against proxy zeals/other cheese. So don't worry, you'll still be doing that little iconic SC split at the start but in a different form . | ||
|
Nyovne
Netherlands19129 Posts
On July 24 2008 07:51 DeadVessel wrote: Nyovne, I agree with you about the ambiguity of units in battle. I hope that they'll make them more defined as the game progresses. Very nice post btw. Agreed Jared, thats why I'm awaiting the Beta period with great anticipation to see how they work it and how all the units turn out while being properly playtested. Cheers m8ty. | ||
IntoTheWow
is awesome32269 Posts
| ||
|
traced
1739 Posts
if they really want to keep automining maybe they should just make it a very expensive early upgrade. something that would cripple you at a high level but make the game less cumbersome at a low level. maybe like a 600 mineral 400 gas upgrade only available after your second base. just a thought. | ||
|
Ki_Do
Korea (South)981 Posts
automine is a very importante aspect that kills macro, even with penalties that still would be bad | ||
| ||
