• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 06:12
CEST 12:12
KST 19:12
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall9HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16Code S RO4 & Finals Preview: herO, Rogue, Classic, GuMiho0TL Team Map Contest #5: Presented by Monster Energy6
Community News
Weekly Cups (June 30 - July 6): Classic Doubles0[BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China5Flash Announces Hiatus From ASL63Weekly Cups (June 23-29): Reynor in world title form?13FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event22
StarCraft 2
General
Weekly Cups (June 30 - July 6): Classic Doubles Program: SC2 / XSplit / OBS Scene Switcher The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation Statistics for vetoed/disliked maps Weekly Cups (June 23-29): Reynor in world title form?
Tourneys
RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament WardiTV Mondays Korean Starcraft League Week 77
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response Simple Questions Simple Answers
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava Mutation # 480 Moths to the Flame Mutation # 479 Worn Out Welcome Mutation # 478 Instant Karma
Brood War
General
ASL20 Preliminary Maps SC uni coach streams logging into betting site Player “Jedi” cheat on CSL Flash Announces Hiatus From ASL BW General Discussion
Tourneys
CSL Xiamen International Invitational [BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China The Casual Games of the Week Thread [BSL20] Grand Finals - Sunday 20:00 CET
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Path of Exile Nintendo Switch Thread What do you want from future RTS games? Beyond All Reason
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative Summer Games Done Quick 2024! Summer Games Done Quick 2025! Russo-Ukrainian War Thread
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Anime Discussion Thread [Manga] One Piece [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread
Sports
Formula 1 Discussion 2024 - 2025 Football Thread NBA General Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
Blogs
Culture Clash in Video Games…
TrAiDoS
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
Blog #2
tankgirl
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 668 users

Terran Macro Mechanic: Drop Pods

Forum Index > SC2 General
Post a Reply
Normal
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-02-10 01:01:02
January 23 2009 21:41 GMT
#1
Terran Macro Mechanic: Drop Pods 4.0
Updated 2/9/09

-After Engineering Bay a Command Center can build up to 4 Drop Pod Add-ons. Cost and build time are the same as an SCV (50 minerals, 18 seconds).

-Infantry can be ordered into the Drop Pod (5 slots). SCVs, reapers, ghosts, maruaders and marines cound as infantry. Units can be rallied into Drop Pod.

-Player hits launch hotkey and selects drop location. Can drop anywhere within a Sensor Tower's range. The entire Add-on is launched and a new one must be build for it to be used again.







Terran Macro Mechanic: Drop Pods 3.0
Updated 1/29/09

-After factory a Command Center can purchase a Drop Pod for 10 minerals. Build time is 10 (about half of an SCV). Drop Pod rises out of the top of CC.

-Infantry can be ordered into the Drop Pod (5 slots). SCVs, reapers, ghosts, maruaders and marines cound as infantry. Units can't be rallied into Drop Pod.

-Player hits launch hotkey and selects drop location. Can drop anywhere within a Sensor Tower's range.









Drop Pods 2.0
Updated 1/27/09

-After factory tech a command center can purchase a drop pod for 25 min. Build time is 17 (same as an SCV). Drop pod rises out of the top of CC.

-Infantry units can be ordered into the drop pod (5 slots). Player hits launch hotkey and selects drop location. Units can't be rallied into a drop pod.

-Can drop anywhere terran player has units or buildings. So if you have a marine out in a field you can drop in a small range around him.




Couple uses:

-Combo with medivac for enhanced mobility and healing.

-Combo with cloaked ghost to infiltrate enemy base and drop in 5 backup infantry.

-Combo with Nighthawk mines to drop in a location your opponent thought you couldn't.

-Great for getting slow moving mauraders into the battle quickly rather then waiting for them to waddle across the map.

-Send one reaper behind enemy lines into mineral line, drop in 5 more reapers.

-Drop 5 new SCV's at that new expansion.

-Drop SCV's on that tank line for repairing.

-Drop marines behind enemies when they get in range of your troops. Allows for a surprise sneak attack.







Original Post: Drop Pods 1.0

How it Works
Command Center could be upgraded to Launch Center. Launch Center would have a Launch Rally Point that could be set to any Barracks. Units produced at Barracks with the Launch Rally Point would be automatically sent to a Drop Pod in the Launch Center. Drop Pods would have five infantry slots and once full could be dropped anywhere Terran player has vision (combo with comsat).

If a drop pod is full but not launched the marine would follow the regular rally point of the barracks it was produced at. This is why the lauch rally point is on the launch center and not the barracks.

Basically, when an infantry unit is produced instead of poping out of the barracks they are fitted into a drop pod. You can not load infantry already on the battlefield into the launch center. It is the same as not being able to warp-in an already produced zealot from one pylon to another.


Macro
Now say you wanted to make a drop pod with five marines. New players could set the launch rally point to one barracks and wait for all five marines to be produced out of that barracks. More experienced players could instead produce five marines from five different barracks and alternate the Launch Rally Point between barracks as each marine is produced. This produces a Drop Pod 5X as fast.

Notice that alternating the launch rally point between barracks is almost the same as SBS. Click rally point hotkey, select barracks, click rally point hotkey, select barracks.


Balance
To balance this mechanic I would give the protoss a mechanic where they can teleport in units in pylon power. For the zerg I would probably give them some sort of nydus ability. Further balance considerations can be addressed by a number of means including: Giving drop pods a min/gas cost, Making Launch Center Tier 2 or 3, Making the ghost call down drop pods, etc…





Cocrafted with Psi Warp and GnaReffotsirk
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
SWPIGWANG
Profile Joined June 2008
Canada482 Posts
January 23 2009 21:57 GMT
#2
Doesn't work with MBS....select 5 rax go mmmmm => pod
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-01-23 22:02:48
January 23 2009 21:59 GMT
#3
On January 24 2009 06:57 SWPIGWANG wrote:
Doesn't work with MBS....select 5 rax go mmmmm => pod


Selecting 5 rax and clicking on the Launch Center won't work. Launch rappy point is from Launch Center to Barracks. To set the Launch rally point you have to select the barracks with your cursor. So you could have your Launch Center hotkeyed to 2 and five rax hotkeyed to 3. You can select your Launch Center with 2 and then hit the launch rally point hotkey (lets make it L). But now you need to set the launch rally point. This means you have to click one of the rax.
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
Fontong
Profile Blog Joined December 2007
United States6454 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-01-23 22:38:38
January 23 2009 22:13 GMT
#4
Fastest way would be to rally 5 raxes right next to the Launch Center and then manually tell the marines to enter. Why bother manually setting 5 rally points when you can just set 1?

Edit: Ok, the reason for it doesn't really make sense. But whatever.
[SECRET FONT] "Dragoon bunker"
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-01-23 22:43:50
January 23 2009 22:29 GMT
#5
Basically, when an infantry unit is produced instead of poping out of the barracks they are fitted into a drop pod. You can not load infantry already on the battlefield into the launch center. It is the same as not being able to warp-in an already produced zealot from one pylon to another.

If a drop pod is full but not launched the marine would follow the regular rally point of the barracks it was produced at. This is why the lauch rally point is on the launch center and not the barracks.

Edit: Added clarification to opening post.
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
MaiBoA38
Profile Joined June 2008
United States108 Posts
January 23 2009 23:22 GMT
#6
If they used this, they would get so much shit for making terran the exact same thing as space marines in Dawn of War
Sometimes its not intentional, sometimes you just botch it.
Tyraz
Profile Blog Joined September 2008
New Zealand310 Posts
January 24 2009 01:28 GMT
#7
On January 24 2009 08:22 MaiBoA38 wrote:
If they used this, they would get so much shit for making terran the exact same thing as space marines in Dawn of War

I agree. Dispite the fact they are MILES apart in terms of how they play and even fundamentally different. They are still dudes with guns, with lots of armored shit. The average gaming idiot looks at what they look like, rather than how they play... which irritates me to this day.
100% Pure.
armed_
Profile Joined November 2008
Canada443 Posts
January 24 2009 02:44 GMT
#8
On January 24 2009 07:29 Archerofaiur wrote:
Basically, when an infantry unit is produced instead of poping out of the barracks they are fitted into a drop pod. You can not load infantry already on the battlefield into the launch center. It is the same as not being able to warp-in an already produced zealot from one pylon to another.

Except in the case of warp-in it makes sense since warp-in is in itself production, while this drop pod thing is taking already produced units, but for some arbitrary reason you can only do it right when they come out of the barracks.

I like the idea, but it really doesn't seem to have any kind of logic to it.
Liquid`Jinro
Profile Blog Joined September 2002
Sweden33719 Posts
January 24 2009 03:57 GMT
#9
On January 24 2009 08:22 MaiBoA38 wrote:
If they used this, they would get so much shit for making terran the exact same thing as space marines in Dawn of War

They already used to have a drop pod ability in the game tho, it just worked a bit differently.

I'm too tired to be sure I've got how this works precisely, but I like it - solving it this way is better than forcing mechanics that mimick manual mining/sbs.
Moderatortell the guy that interplanatar interaction is pivotal to terrans variety of optionitudals in the pre-midgame preperatories as well as the protosstinal deterriggation of elite zergling strikes - Stimey n | Formerly FrozenArbiter
theonemephisto
Profile Blog Joined May 2008
United States409 Posts
January 24 2009 04:49 GMT
#10
I think it's a bit too unintuitive. Having all this stuff about shifting around the rally point and staggering production just doesn't sound right.
Liquid`Jinro
Profile Blog Joined September 2002
Sweden33719 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-01-24 17:24:10
January 24 2009 17:17 GMT
#11
Ahhh, I'm really starting to think the warp-in/drop pod/nydus worm trifecta is the answer.

I think I've understood how you want it to work but I think it's slightly unintuitive (ie why can't I send old units into the drop pod, why can't I just rally multiple rax to the drop pod etc).

Infact, if the main requirement for a macro mechanic (aside from it being fun/cool, which this certainly seems like it is!) is screen-change, then the mere fact that you have to set the rally point from your raxes to the drop pod should be enough to fullfil it, right?

IE:
5mmmmmm-> Rally to drop pod (click on drop pod, should probably be a secondary type of rally - like how drones and military units have different rally points for zerg).

Another way to do it would be to keep the calldown. HOWEVER, I would probably not put it on the Ghost! The reason for this is simply that Ghosts, while they look more useful than in SC, still seem like "specialist" units, meaning the ability wouldn't see nearly as much use as the Warp-in, which requires nothing but an ordinary Pylon.

No, I think the calldown ability should be given to something that's easier to access for a terran.. Some ideas:

- Allow SCVs to create Homing Beacons that work sort of like pylons by providing an area into which you can call down your Drop Pod.
- Allow Terran units (or buildings) to equip homing beacons (it could be an in the field upgrade) for a price.

As for not allowing already produced units to enter drop pods - why (aside from possible balance concerns)? If you want to send an already produced unit into a drop pod it's a process very similiar to macro - select unit, move screen to drop pod, click on drop pod, launch drop pod.

To further facilitate their use, Drop Pods could be an addon to the Barracks (or a stand alone building I suppose).

The Nydus Worm
About Nydus Worms (I know this thread is mostly about Drop Pods but the Worms are mentioned in the OP), I really liked them better when they were a unit on their own... This is my proposal for how to make them work:

Currently Nydus Worms are dropped from Overseers, as a spell. I think this is significantly less interesting than having a Nydus Worm unit that you can move underground, and choose where to pop up, the way it used to behave. I suppose it's not great for the Zerg to have a unit that tunnels and does nothing else (the Warp Prism doubles as a pylon, the Dropship is a Medivac now..) so how about this:
The Nydus Worm is summoned by the Overseer, but as an actual unit (can cost Mana or Minerals/Gas), and can move around. When it pops out of the ground it goes into Canal mode and units can pass through it (sort of like Siege mode for a tank).

A problem I can see is that the other two races need a pylon/homing beacon while the zerg would need nothing - so perhaps the way it works now is best.. Hm I'm not sure tho, I definitely like the idea of being able to control the tunneler Having it be a unit that can simply tunnel between any creep point would be ok too I guess.

In the end we are left with 3 mechanics that accomplish much the same thing while still being unique for each race. They are all going to be used regularly, fullfilling the possible macro gap, without relying (in the slightest) on an outdated (by RTS genre standards) UI.

I now strongly feel Blizzard were on to something good with the Drop Pod/Warp-In/Nydus mechanics.
Moderatortell the guy that interplanatar interaction is pivotal to terrans variety of optionitudals in the pre-midgame preperatories as well as the protosstinal deterriggation of elite zergling strikes - Stimey n | Formerly FrozenArbiter
SWPIGWANG
Profile Joined June 2008
Canada482 Posts
January 24 2009 17:32 GMT
#12
Infact, if the main requirement for a macro mechanic (aside from it being fun/cool, which this certainly seems like it is!) is screen-change

If you look at the SCL proposals, it is a necessary but not sufficient condition. What a macro mechanic needs to do is to interrupt you, consistently, every 30 seconds or so per base if the macro people are to be believed.

So abilities you don't use every 30 seconds just don't cut it.

Strategic things that you do a few times a game, like a drop attack, is far too irregular and uncommon to be a macro mechanic! You need to do it all the time or else you are not being interrupted enough!

/whine
Liquid`Jinro
Profile Blog Joined September 2002
Sweden33719 Posts
January 24 2009 18:00 GMT
#13
Blabla, it doesn't have to be an exact copy of SBS (and I know you are just mimicking the regular complaints ;p).

Anyway, warp-in will be used constantly, and if done right then Drop Pods would be too. Nydus Worms are trickier but I guess you could have a rally to nydus tunnel -> go to nydus exit of your choice and unload.

Meh.
Moderatortell the guy that interplanatar interaction is pivotal to terrans variety of optionitudals in the pre-midgame preperatories as well as the protosstinal deterriggation of elite zergling strikes - Stimey n | Formerly FrozenArbiter
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-01-24 18:20:00
January 24 2009 18:16 GMT
#14
The reason I put the launch rally point on the command center was two fold. One if your drop pod is full your marines would then follow the barrack's rally point. Second if you make it so the barracks can rally to the CC then I can rally 5 rax there and then remotely que marines. I never have to come back to the base for a targeted action. I can then drop the pod on my army with hotkeys.
Now say we can include a targeted action in the base that involves the drop pod. If we do this then we can allow units that are produced in the base to enter the drop pod. The drop pod would then serve as a kind of super jump, catipulting units into battle. The catch is that we need to find a targeting action. In the opening post this was the launch rally point.


The biggest issue with drop pods and the nydus worm seems to be limitations on where to drop. For the drop pod I was thinking anywhere the terran player has units with the lore being that drop pods can only fall near other units because the units call them down. However, this would just be the lore, you wouldn't have to click a marine and call the drop pods as one of his abilities.


The nydus worm faced problems because you could tunnel directly into an opponents base. What if we allow the nydus worm to tunnel anywhere but it cant enter the vicinity of an opponents buildings. So like maybe the psi field generated by pylons stops it and enemy creep stops it (oh wait creep is neutral, darn). Thoughts?



Finally, I will try and sum up the whole loading the drop pod part in one sentence to point out that its not overly complex (at least in my opinion).

The command center has a launch rally point that fits newly produced units in a drop pod.
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
UmmTheHobo
Profile Blog Joined April 2008
United States650 Posts
January 24 2009 18:22 GMT
#15
Drop pods are a blatant rip off of Warhammer 40,000. Change it to a dropship drop. Hell, Para-troopers would be pretty cool as well.
...
Liquid`Jinro
Profile Blog Joined September 2002
Sweden33719 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-01-24 19:04:47
January 24 2009 18:26 GMT
#16
Well the Nydus Worm problems really are solved by only allowing it to "deploy" on Creep, a trait that can be kept regardless of the form the Nydus Worm takes.

As for why I suggested a Homing Beacon building, I think that would force about the same screen change as Warp-In. You never have to go back to your base for Warp-in, but you have to go to a pylon field to place the units right?

With a Homing Beacon you would just have to go to such an area to call the Drop Pod down.

I guess you'd have to disable mini-map calldowns tho.

Speaking of targetting points, you could simply have it so that you have to manually click on the Drop Pod to load units into it, just like how rallying units to a dropship doesn't make them enter the dropship.

That way you have to go back to base everytime you want to load the pods.

On January 25 2009 03:22 UmmTheHobo wrote:
Drop pods are a blatant rip off of Warhammer 40,000. Change it to a dropship drop. Hell, Para-troopers would be pretty cool as well.

Meh, Blizzard already had Drop Pods in the game, I honestly don't care if it's a rip-off or not as it's a fun ability.

The Tyranid Ravener's tunneling ability is a Nydus Worm rip-off too.
Moderatortell the guy that interplanatar interaction is pivotal to terrans variety of optionitudals in the pre-midgame preperatories as well as the protosstinal deterriggation of elite zergling strikes - Stimey n | Formerly FrozenArbiter
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-01-24 18:56:49
January 24 2009 18:55 GMT
#17
On January 25 2009 03:26 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Well the Nydus Worm problems really are solved by only allowing it to "deploy" on Creep, a trait that can be kept regardless of the form the Nydus Worm take.


I think I like this solution. So the nydus worm would tunnel underground but could only surface on creep. There are some problems like island maps but you could still use overlords for that.


On January 25 2009 03:26 FrozenArbiter wrote:
As for why I suggested a Homing Beacon building, I think that would force about the same screen change as Warp-In. You never have to go back to your base for Warp-in, but you have to go to a pylon field to place the units right?


When you arn't warping in with a proxy pylon or warp prism you are going to be warping in using pylons in your base.


On January 25 2009 03:22 UmmTheHobo wrote:
Drop pods are a blatant rip off of Warhammer 40,000. Change it to a dropship drop. Hell, Para-troopers would be pretty cool as well.



All of Starcraft is a blatant rip off of Warhammer 40,000, which is a blatant rip-off of starship troopers, alien movie, lord of the rings, etc...
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
Liquid`Jinro
Profile Blog Joined September 2002
Sweden33719 Posts
January 24 2009 19:00 GMT
#18
I think I like this solution. So the nydus worm would tunnel underground but could only surface on creep. There are some problems like island maps, though.

Well there are some solutions to Island Map problems I think:
1) The worm could behave like the DoW2 tunneler - Click where you want to tunnel to, a few seconds later (depending on distance) the worm pops up.
2) The Overseer could be the Nydus worm - basically it would spew creep, then dive into it (there's no reason why it couldn't swim, and in space, well it will just float like usual).

When you arn't warping in with a proxy pylon or warp prism you are going to be warping in using pylons in your base.

Ok, fair enough. But what about what I suggested above, that you have to manually enter your units into the drop pods - much like you'd have to manually enter a dropship? So you rally the units to the drop pod with your MBS hotkeyed Barracks, but then you have to order them to actually enter the building.
Moderatortell the guy that interplanatar interaction is pivotal to terrans variety of optionitudals in the pre-midgame preperatories as well as the protosstinal deterriggation of elite zergling strikes - Stimey n | Formerly FrozenArbiter
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
January 24 2009 19:24 GMT
#19
On January 25 2009 04:00 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Show nested quote +
I think I like this solution. So the nydus worm would tunnel underground but could only surface on creep. There are some problems like island maps, though.

Well there are some solutions to Island Map problems I think:
1) The worm could behave like the DoW2 tunneler - Click where you want to tunnel to, a few seconds later (depending on distance) the worm pops up.
2) The Overseer could be the Nydus worm - basically it would spew creep, then dive into it (there's no reason why it couldn't swim, and in space, well it will just float like usual).

I thought about that a couple months back. It might work. Would you still need to cast creep or could the overseer just morph anywhere into a worm. One thing to note we are no longer dealing with a worm "unit." Its now like a spell that you have to sacrifice a overlord for.

Show nested quote +
When you arn't warping in with a proxy pylon or warp prism you are going to be warping in using pylons in your base.

Ok, fair enough. But what about what I suggested above, that you have to manually enter your units into the drop pods - much like you'd have to manually enter a dropship? So you rally the units to the drop pod with your MBS hotkeyed Barracks, but then you have to order them to actually enter the building.



I am still thinking how this could work. Could you give a little more detail? It might not be bad but the question is will people just say "why can't I rally my units into it?"


Now its kind of like sending units into the nydus network after they are produced. When you rally a hatchery to a nydus network do the units automatically enter the network?
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
Liquid`Jinro
Profile Blog Joined September 2002
Sweden33719 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-01-24 19:32:24
January 24 2009 19:31 GMT
#20
I'm not sure.

However, if you rally a unit to a bunker, I'm almost sure it doesn't automatically enter. If you rally to a dropship I'm also almost sure it doesn't auto pick up the unit.

Ah, and if you want you could perhaps have a special rally point for the building - something like "Load unit into Drop-pod", but you'd have to click it for every production cycle (since you might not want the next round of units to enter the drop pods right?).
Moderatortell the guy that interplanatar interaction is pivotal to terrans variety of optionitudals in the pre-midgame preperatories as well as the protosstinal deterriggation of elite zergling strikes - Stimey n | Formerly FrozenArbiter
maybenexttime
Profile Blog Joined November 2006
Poland5540 Posts
January 24 2009 19:56 GMT
#21
A simple explanation could be that the default rally command is "move" (they should actually revert it back to "move" ) and not "load," "enter" or "attack."

And "move" implies "move to that unit/structure/place; don't do anything else I didn't tell you."
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-01-24 22:58:39
January 24 2009 22:55 GMT
#22
On January 25 2009 04:56 maybenexttime wrote:
A simple explanation could be that the default rally command is "move" (they should actually revert it back to "move" ) and not "load," "enter" or "attack."

And "move" implies "move to that unit/structure/place; don't do anything else I didn't tell you."



This is a topic for a whole other thread but what weve stumbled on here is something I like to call UI discrepancy. When a piece of the UI works in a manner different from every other similar UI piece. UI discrepancy in SC1 is what caused the MBS problem in the first place. The hotkeying of buildings functioned differently from the hotkeying of units. This sends conflicting messages to the player that multi-hotkeys are possible but you can't multi-hotkey buildings.
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
SWPIGWANG
Profile Joined June 2008
Canada482 Posts
January 24 2009 23:44 GMT
#23
By Archerofaiur
Drop Pods would have five infantry slots and once full could be dropped anywhere Terran player has units.

By FrozenArbiter
As for not allowing already produced units to enter drop pods - why (aside from possible balance concerns)? If you want to send an already produced unit into a drop pod it's a process very similiar to macro - select unit, move screen to drop pod, click on drop pod, launch drop pod.

This could easily break the mechanic as well as balance as there is no recharge to drop-pods.

Players would hold a sizable number of marines in base and launch them all at once at important point on the map and hardly use them continuously except when the battle is pretty much already joined. (at which the player would normally do better microing marines as opposed to optimalizing reinforcement, since marines die so fast and is so dependent on micro...and reinforcements hardly come in time) Frankly, with such a hyper mobility option (free, anywhere on map, non-interceptible mobility!), it is questionable if terran players would even want much of a field marine army at all, or fight for the center at all as opposed hiding behind cliffs and seige, since staying in base gives them much greater mobility and dropping enemies to death.

In other words, it would by used like the nydus network where most units are hold in central reserve and deployed on need in a short bust.

I don't think nydus network is ever considered a "macro" mechanic by the community as it does not result in the steady interruption of the player as with "real" and "good" macro mechanics that makes you drop whatever you are doing every 30 seconds! It also does not effect production, mining or economy thus makes not a macro mechanic as well.
-------
On the other hand, a simple rechargeable drop-pod would require screen changes simply for rally reasons. One would have to switch rally points from normal reinforcement from the ground to going into the pod if the pod recharges at a different speed than production cycles. (too much units means a lineup around the pod, too little units means idle pod)

----
random whine:

However, rally point switches are "too easy" with MBS even if does require a screen change, and rally points are not time intensive as you can do it at anytime within a unit's production cycle and one can not further optimize it. In traditional production macro, a god-like player can play with zero queue while filling all production buildings which cuts the timing down to absolute zero time after production is done. (which can only mean a higher skill ceiling etc etc whine whine)


The Nydus Worm

See above on why this isn't a macro mechanic. It ain't got no minerals related to it!

----------
The issue isn't that players need an APM sink, but they need an APM sink that effects minerals, production, or supply. Otherwise "dodge the nuke" suggestion that is now closed due to all the flaming would be a fine mechanic. (and it is a mechanic that is actually in existing games and totally understood by the player base!)
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-01-25 01:49:57
January 25 2009 01:14 GMT
#24
On January 25 2009 08:44 SWPIGWANG wrote:

However, rally point switches are "too easy" with MBS even if does require a screen change, and rally points are not time intensive as you can do it at anytime within a unit's production cycle and one can not further optimize it.


Well to use it to the most gosuness you want to have all your marines coming out as close together as possible. So youd want to que them but offset them by say 0.5 seconds. You will need this 0.5 sec to switch from rax to rax.


Also the way we have it now you can only drop near player's units. Not anywhere on map.
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
Liquid`Jinro
Profile Blog Joined September 2002
Sweden33719 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-01-25 02:27:15
January 25 2009 02:26 GMT
#25
Yeah, it would be even more limited if you needed to make Homing Beacons (actually, you could have turrets or the sensor towers act as homing beacons).
Moderatortell the guy that interplanatar interaction is pivotal to terrans variety of optionitudals in the pre-midgame preperatories as well as the protosstinal deterriggation of elite zergling strikes - Stimey n | Formerly FrozenArbiter
liquorice
Profile Joined August 2008
United States170 Posts
January 25 2009 05:23 GMT
#26
On January 25 2009 08:44 SWPIGWANG wrote:
Show nested quote +
By Archerofaiur
Drop Pods would have five infantry slots and once full could be dropped anywhere Terran player has units.

Show nested quote +
By FrozenArbiter
As for not allowing already produced units to enter drop pods - why (aside from possible balance concerns)? If you want to send an already produced unit into a drop pod it's a process very similiar to macro - select unit, move screen to drop pod, click on drop pod, launch drop pod.

This could easily break the mechanic as well as balance as there is no recharge to drop-pods.

Players would hold a sizable number of marines in base and launch them all at once at important point on the map and hardly use them continuously except when the battle is pretty much already joined. (at which the player would normally do better microing marines as opposed to optimalizing reinforcement, since marines die so fast and is so dependent on micro...and reinforcements hardly come in time) Frankly, with such a hyper mobility option (free, anywhere on map, non-interceptible mobility!), it is questionable if terran players would even want much of a field marine army at all, or fight for the center at all as opposed hiding behind cliffs and seige, since staying in base gives them much greater mobility and dropping enemies to death.


Actually, I think that adding this kind of instantaneous mobility might limit mobility overall. Since you can only drop-pod your rines once, someone can pretend to attack a lot somewhere (hallucination, lots of ovies, whatever) causing the terran player to drop all of his rines there, only to find that his other base is suddenly open to attack, with no reinforcements in drop pods. Strategic stuff.

On another note, I'm not sure if this would be macro or micro. Yes, you're making units, but you're also deploying them strategically... hmm...
fuck yeah zerglings!
Disregard
Profile Blog Joined March 2007
China10252 Posts
January 25 2009 05:27 GMT
#27
Space Marines in WH40k could be deployed in Drop Pods in Tier 3. =D
"If I had to take a drug in order to be free, I'm screwed. Freedom exists in the mind, otherwise it doesn't exist."
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-01-25 22:21:50
January 25 2009 22:19 GMT
#28
On January 25 2009 04:56 maybenexttime wrote:
A simple explanation could be that the default rally command is "move" (they should actually revert it back to "move" ) and not "load," "enter" or "attack."

And "move" implies "move to that unit/structure/place; don't do anything else I didn't tell you."




I am mostly for allowing the UI to follow the most logical choice. So I would have a barracks rallyd to a buniker automatically put the units in a bunker. I think that player actions should reflect player choices. Rarely does a player choose to bring marines to a bunker and then have them sit out in the cold. That being said I think I have a work around.


What if you have like a launch pad and you call up the drop pod (maybe you have to purchase it). The drop pod comes up from below the launch pad and you can put units in it. Then you can drop the units in the drop pod.


Now if you make it a purchase to get a drop pod then the player wont automatically get a new drop pod to replace the old one. This means that even if you rally your units to the launch pad they wont have a drop pod to go in to. This could require a player to come back, purchase the drop pod and insert units manually.


Couple things I don't like about this.


First, if were having the player come back to the base they should be doing meaning full action. I feel uncomfortable hinging the back-to-base action on whether UI conventions allow for marines to automaticallly enter drop pods they are rallyed to. I would be much more satisfied if we could find some strategic aspect involved in preparing drop pods that occurs in the base. Hmm

Second, A min/gas cost seems too costly for this mechanic. There are better mobility options you could get. Which brings us to the next point.

The 'load marines in base unload somewhere else in the map' overlaps with the medicvac's role. Now the drop pod is a one way trip which helps differentiate it from the medivac, warp-in and nydus. However I wish we could find something else to further set this mechanic apart. Thoughts?
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
maybenexttime
Profile Blog Joined November 2006
Poland5540 Posts
January 25 2009 22:37 GMT
#29
Well, it actually IS a solution.

Rallying on the Drop Pod would make units automatically enter it, but if you make the Drop Pod something you actually need to purchase then you'd naturally have to go back to base to set the new rally point onto the Drop Pod. It'd look like this:

1. You queue some units and a Drop Pod.
2. You get yourself busy with another task while units and the Pod are being trained/built.
3. Drop Pod's ready - you go back to base to load the already trained units and set the rally point onto the Pod.


What do you think? Doesn't look atrificial at all to me. ^______^
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-01-26 01:15:05
January 26 2009 01:05 GMT
#30
Lets say we made the drop pod build time about the same as say, an SCV. Now quick recap of actions for manual mining

1) Order SCV (can be done with hotkeys remotely)
2) Wait production time, Micro army
3) Return to CC
4) Drag select SCV
5) Order to move to minerals

Now lets look at this drop pod model

1) Order Drop Pod (can be done with hotkeys remotely)
2) Wait production time, Micro army
3) Return to CC
4) Drag select Units
5) Order to move to drop pod
6) Order Launch
7) Select destination

Now obviously we arn't the developers. We have as much luck perdicting balance values as we do lottery numbers. But we can give estamated guesses. Price is Right style "How much would you pay for this beuatiful new Drop Pod?" I bid 25 min.
What about you, Higher, Lower?

Couple other points:

-Makes heavy mech feel that much heavier. Terran players have to choose between a more mobile infantry army or the slower but heavy hitting mech army.

-Strategic choice, Do I upgrade CC to launch center, surveilence station or planetary fortress?

-Send one reaper behind enemy lines into mineral line, drop in 5 more reapers.

-Combo with medivac for enhanced mobility and healing.

-Combo with ghost to infiltrate enemy base and drop in 5 backup infantry.

-Combo with Nighthawk mines to drop in a location your opponent thought you couldn't

-Great for getting slow moving mauraders into the battle quickly rather then waiting for them to waddle across the map.

-Drop 5 new SCV's at that new expansion.

-Drop SCV's on that tank line for repairing.


Can you think of any more?
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
Liquid`Jinro
Profile Blog Joined September 2002
Sweden33719 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-01-26 01:15:17
January 26 2009 01:14 GMT
#31
Hm, is there any reason to not allow metal into drop pods?
IE why can't 1 tank enter (assuming 1 tank = 4 marines in size in a dropship, like in SC1)?

The only worry I have is that if you don't have some kind of restriction on where you can land your drop pods - other than vision - then medivacs are going to become completely obsolete for anything but healing, no?
Moderatortell the guy that interplanatar interaction is pivotal to terrans variety of optionitudals in the pre-midgame preperatories as well as the protosstinal deterriggation of elite zergling strikes - Stimey n | Formerly FrozenArbiter
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-01-26 01:57:03
January 26 2009 01:18 GMT
#32
On January 26 2009 10:14 FrozenArbiter wrote:
The only worry I have is that if you don't have some kind of restriction on where you can land your drop pods - other than vision - then medivacs are going to become completely obsolete for anything but healing, no?


This could be said about the nydus worm and Overlord (or warp-in and prism) but here are some of the differences. I am all for finding more ways to differentiate it from the medicvac if people can think of some.

Differences from medicvac

-Can't heal

-Only one way, think of it as a marine cannon

-Can drop anywhere terran player has units/buildings (we changed if from just where terran has vision)

-Only infantry

-Costs minerals

-Limited by # of launch centers

-Limited by build time

-Different Tier maybe



So the main advantages the medivac has over the drop pod is its a two way transport, can heal, can carry mech, can carry more units, reusable, and can pick up units right as they are about to die (crucial for micro). Also note that there is a mineral, gas and time investment in upgrading your CC to a launch center.

As far as why you can't drop metal, my personal opinoin is that metal should be slow. Terran have always been about sacrificing mobility for firepower. This is exemplified in siege mode, putting marines in bunker, Planetary Fortress can't float, etc...
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
Augury
Profile Blog Joined September 2008
United States758 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-01-26 04:40:30
January 26 2009 04:20 GMT
#33
You could make it exactly like warp in, but have drop pods fall in range of a CC or something. Should allow vehicles to be dropped in as well, you could then ignore ships or have them use light speed or some BS to jump in.

The rally point method just isn't 'fluid' enough for my taste.

Edit:
The Warp-In/Drop Pod/Nydus Worm idea seems really good, homing beacons for terran, pylons for toss, and creep for zerg.
liquorice
Profile Joined August 2008
United States170 Posts
January 26 2009 17:15 GMT
#34
On a side note, using a rally point wouldn't really be that smart anyway, even if the feature was there. If you rally them to outside, you can still defend against whatever, if they're stuck in the drop pod, tough luck.
fuck yeah zerglings!
Kim_Hyun_Han
Profile Blog Joined January 2009
706 Posts
January 27 2009 14:03 GMT
#35
but, how could this help the game to have two differentiate game styles
one for players that can max out in no time
other for players that like microing.

+ Show Spoiler +
this is the main point of the macro problem, would macroing mean anything if anyplayer could max with the same speed/ease?
like, Light cant max like ForGG, and etc
the revolutions that starcraft had along the years had only a meaning cause of the differences that got born between players with their peculiar abilities in multitask, micro and macro what evolved the metagame to its actual stage.

Kleander
Profile Blog Joined November 2006
United States334 Posts
January 28 2009 02:22 GMT
#36
On January 26 2009 13:20 Augury wrote:
You could make it exactly like warp in, but have drop pods fall in range of a CC or something. Should allow vehicles to be dropped in as well, you could then ignore ships or have them use light speed or some BS to jump in.

The rally point method just isn't 'fluid' enough for my taste.

Edit:
The Warp-In/Drop Pod/Nydus Worm idea seems really good, homing beacons for terran, pylons for toss, and creep for zerg.


i thought blizzard was trying to avoid this?

making the races exactly the same, that is. Terran isnt a mobile race, one of the best times to attack them is when they are moving, but they make up for it by having insane stationary abilities.

in sc:bw protoss had recall, and zerg had nydus canal, terran had nothing (maybe if you count lifting your buildings... but thats nowhere near the potential danger of a recall, or playing whack-a-mole with a nydus canal). It fits with the races for terran to not have this kind of "pocket army" thing.

I think the thread below is more in the right direction for a proper interruption macro mechanic
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=78501

Ambition is a poor excuse for not having enough sense to be lazy. 지지 Guess who's learning Korean
Llamaz
Profile Blog Joined April 2008
Australia90 Posts
January 28 2009 06:18 GMT
#37
OR you could just leave the game the way it is, and not have to balance all the other races.

But I'm biased =/ I hate protoss warpin. It's so cheap and gay. Think of it as a cannon rush, except much gayer. Imagine a pesky probe hiding a pylon in the side of your base (ok its YOUR fault if he manages that), or a proxy pylon giving instant map control. If you get contained, he could set up a pylon so that units are streamed in instantly.

Don't get me started on the floating pylon thing (forgot the name =/).

I however have faith in blizzard. They are the developers, not us. They know how to make games, and they know what they're doing. I'm sure they will create an excellent, competitive, game.
Osmoses
Profile Blog Joined October 2008
Sweden5302 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-01-28 07:41:54
January 28 2009 07:39 GMT
#38
I don't care if there are dop pods in other games, its not a new idea at all but it's still sweet (terran space warfare needs drop pods!), I loved seeing them in the terran gameplay demo. In my opinion, drop pods need to be in the game in one form or the other.

As for the mechanics, they could be implemented in any number of ways. Toggle button on barracks to load them or release them, putting them in at the shadow ops like it used to be, the command center being upgraded, as a unit created at a starport addon, seriously, any would be just fine. I don't even know why they removed them to begin with. Maybe blizzard just doesn't want to make the three races too similar with the whole warp-in/nydus/drop-pod functionality or maybe they are agreeing with me when I'm saying too much mobility is not a good thing.

Edit: but if that's the problem then cut the damn medivac, I demand drop pods!
Excuse me hun, but what is your name? Vivian? I woke up next to you naked and, uh, did we, um?
Dariush
Profile Joined April 2007
Romania330 Posts
January 28 2009 07:58 GMT
#39
Did you guys forget about the uniqueness of the races? toss already have warp-in, terrans don't need something similar.
Liquid`Jinro
Profile Blog Joined September 2002
Sweden33719 Posts
January 28 2009 17:57 GMT
#40
Every race has a dropship.

Every race can have their own version of warpin without hurting uniqueness too much - just give them vastly different properties. You wouldn't call the Nydus Worm and Warp-In "too similiar", so there's no reason drop pods should be either.
Moderatortell the guy that interplanatar interaction is pivotal to terrans variety of optionitudals in the pre-midgame preperatories as well as the protosstinal deterriggation of elite zergling strikes - Stimey n | Formerly FrozenArbiter
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-01-29 03:42:54
January 29 2009 03:37 GMT
#41
Many people have offered that the drop pods could use rader towers to drop. I have changed the original post to reflect this. I have also labled the various versions we have gone through. The current version looks like this.


Terran Macro Mechanic: Drop Pods 3.0

-After Factory tech a Command Center can purchase a Drop Pod for 10 minerals. Build time is 10 (about half of an SCV). Drop Pod rises out of the top of CC.

-Infantry can be ordered into the Drop Pod (5 slots). SCVs, reapers, ghosts, maruaders and marines count as infantry. Units can't be rallied into Drop Pod.

-Player hits launch hotkey and selects drop location. Can drop anywhere within a Sensor Tower's range.







What would the impact of this version be on macro gameplay?

Please feel free to comment on how you would make drop pods should work. So if you like drop pods costing 10 min but think they should still be able to drop anywhere a terran player has vision its ok to say so. This is a community effort.

Also Kleander the Terran are supposed to be the most mobile race. I think it even says so in the lore.
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
Osmoses
Profile Blog Joined October 2008
Sweden5302 Posts
February 03 2009 23:03 GMT
#42
Hum this idea has gone places since last I visited this thread. I like it alot. With the included purpose of the sensor tower, this is a very neat macro mechanic! It's kind of like a terran nydus canal which only goes one way and requires a bit more involvement from the player, and more is good now that we've become spoiled with UI improvements. It would give terran players an excellent reason to return to base to fill up those drop pods and it would make the sensor tower a primary target whenever you'd attack a terran position.

Did we get a good answer to why mech should not be allowed into the drop pods?

As far as having the bulk of your army waiting in your base to be launched into battle, if this should even be considered a problem since it would give the enemy free reign of the map as long as he keeps the sensor towers off it, this could be very easily countered by the drop pods taking a fair number of seconds to reach their destination, and if the sensor tower was destroyed before they got there they would be lost (just as an aside, seeing them crash all over the map would be an incredibly rewarding graphic element to partake in).

The only problem I see with this mechanic is that it is very similar to the protoss warp-in. The only difference, at least if it worked the way I 'd like it to would be that any units can be loaded and not just freshly produced ones, which by association would mean the protoss would still get shorter production times. And the terrans unload one by one from the drop pods, whereas the warp-in is only as fast or slow as the player who orders it.
Excuse me hun, but what is your name? Vivian? I woke up next to you naked and, uh, did we, um?
armed_
Profile Joined November 2008
Canada443 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-02-03 23:47:03
February 03 2009 23:38 GMT
#43
For anyone complaining about the similiarity to warp-in, the drop pod mechanic is more than distinct enough. As long as they're limited by build time and unit capacity, it'll be completely impractical to rely on them completely for army delivery, so you'll still have to do standard reinforcing as opposed to warp-in which completely replaces normal reinforcing.

Also, I don't really see the need to restrict it to sensor tower range. Medivacs having healing means that the Terran player is going to be building them anyway if he's using infantry, and really what with already having invested resources in them they're going to be used for drops. Even failing that, it should be easy to make Medivacs the only effective method for larger scale drops given that you can only launch as many drop pods as you have CCs, and they still give a significant advantage in being able to transport units that aren't near a CC. Being able to drop anywhere in a certain range around units and buildings gives the mechanic a lot more potential uses that make it much more unique.

On January 26 2009 10:18 Archerofaiur wrote:
As far as why you can't drop metal, my personal opinoin is that metal should be slow. Terran have always been about sacrificing mobility for firepower. This is exemplified in siege mode, putting marines in bunker, Planetary Fortress can't float, etc...

If, say, only 1 tank could be fit in a drop pod, then again the fact that you can't rely on them as your only means of reinforcing your army would make this a non-issue.

~Oh, also, a 10 mineral cost will probably be completely insignificant. That's what, 2 SCV trips? It's a bad habit to use the BW metagame as a reference, but really past factory tech even a progamer probably wouldn't suffer any from losing 10 minerals that often.
Liquid`Jinro
Profile Blog Joined September 2002
Sweden33719 Posts
February 04 2009 00:30 GMT
#44
I know talking about balance without the game even being out yet, but don't you think it sounds a bit.. powerful, to be able to Drop Pod dozens of units to any location where you have *one* unit? >_<

I mean, I think they added the Creep requirement to the Nydus Worm for a reason.

On a different note, does anyone know if Nukes are still built in the "Launch Centers"? If so, it probably makes sense for those Launch Centers being where you produce Drop Pods.
Moderatortell the guy that interplanatar interaction is pivotal to terrans variety of optionitudals in the pre-midgame preperatories as well as the protosstinal deterriggation of elite zergling strikes - Stimey n | Formerly FrozenArbiter
armed_
Profile Joined November 2008
Canada443 Posts
February 04 2009 01:33 GMT
#45
On February 04 2009 09:30 FrozenArbiter wrote:
I know talking about balance without the game even being out yet, but don't you think it sounds a bit.. powerful, to be able to Drop Pod dozens of units to any location where you have *one* unit? >_<

Really, when you're just theorycrafting, worrying about balance is silly. For pretty much any concept it's possible to play around with the numbers until it's useful but not overpowered, the only question is how difficult that is. For drop pods it doesn't even seem difficult, since they're practically free even reducing the capacity a bit shouldn't make them useless.

The CC being where drop pods are produced also gives a good balancing tool, that way you can allow larger drops in late game with lots of CCs while it's still restricted to small numbers in early-mid game where it might compromise balance.

Also, doing it that way encourages you to spread your production buildings between your bases to make use of all of your CCs, which along with the fact that you need to make a few more screen switches increases the multitasking added. Putting drop pods in some other building lets you put your production and your drop pod launchers all in one place and makes it significantly easier.
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-02-04 04:14:31
February 04 2009 04:09 GMT
#46
On February 04 2009 08:03 Osmoses wrote:

The only problem I see with this mechanic is that it is very similar to the protoss warp-in. .


Differences from Warp-In

-Transports already produced units

-Requires mineral investment

-Requires build time

-Limited by number of CC's

-"Bundles" units in one spot

-Drop Area much larger than Pylon field


That last point is really important because it causes the mechanic to play totally different from warp-in. Placing units in a small pylon is much more limiting than being able to place in a huge radius. What do sensor towers cover, like 1/4th of the map?

The mechanic is structured so that you need a building to call down the units but the location of the building does not limit where you can place those units. So I can have the Sensor tower in this valley but call down my marines all the way in that other valley. Requiring a building, especially one that is visible to the enemy, also makes it harder but not impossible to drop in your opponents base.
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
Liquid`Jinro
Profile Blog Joined September 2002
Sweden33719 Posts
February 04 2009 04:37 GMT
#47
Hrm, I had forgotten how big their radius is, I don't think it's quite 1/4th of the map tho ;o Not sure I love the thought of it being that big, but oh well, can always change (or Sensor Towers could have a secondary mode where they act as beacons for Drop Pods, but have their radius turned down).
Moderatortell the guy that interplanatar interaction is pivotal to terrans variety of optionitudals in the pre-midgame preperatories as well as the protosstinal deterriggation of elite zergling strikes - Stimey n | Formerly FrozenArbiter
Osmoses
Profile Blog Joined October 2008
Sweden5302 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-02-04 20:16:34
February 04 2009 06:56 GMT
#48
On February 04 2009 13:37 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Hrm, I had forgotten how big their radius is, I don't think it's quite 1/4th of the map tho ;o Not sure I love the thought of it being that big, but oh well, can always change (or Sensor Towers could have a secondary mode where they act as beacons for Drop Pods, but have their radius turned down).

Yes, I really don't think this should be too powerful. Having to build an offensive sensor tower within a small radius of where you wanted the drop pods should be a requirement.

Now, what do we think about CCs or Shadow Ops being able to queue and store more than one pod? Making one pod takes a fair amount of time, giving the player the option of either waiting 2 or 3 minutes for 3-4 drop pods or sending one out every 30 seconds or so?

Edit: And already produced units would of course be loadable into the pods.
Excuse me hun, but what is your name? Vivian? I woke up next to you naked and, uh, did we, um?
flabortaster
Profile Joined June 2007
Philippines99 Posts
February 04 2009 16:18 GMT
#49
why can't you rally units to the drop pod. I expect with the modern UI/AI, units rallied to dropships, bunkers and drop pods should enter it. Its lie rallymine. you rally to the cluster so the worker mines(obvious task). Rallying to the transport/bunker should be obvious also. If you don't want them entering the transport/bunker just rally nearby.
Osmoses
Profile Blog Joined October 2008
Sweden5302 Posts
February 05 2009 04:31 GMT
#50
On February 05 2009 01:18 flabortaster wrote:
why can't you rally units to the drop pod. I expect with the modern UI/AI, units rallied to dropships, bunkers and drop pods should enter it. Its lie rallymine. you rally to the cluster so the worker mines(obvious task). Rallying to the transport/bunker should be obvious also. If you don't want them entering the transport/bunker just rally nearby.

I'm against this solely because of the reverse Dune argument.
Excuse me hun, but what is your name? Vivian? I woke up next to you naked and, uh, did we, um?
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-02-05 04:39:23
February 05 2009 04:35 GMT
#51
I asked on BNet and this was Dustin's answer.

"In the current build you can rally a Barracks into a Bunker or a transport. Units rallied in this way move successfully to the bunker or transport and enter. If the transport is moving, the rallied unit will chase the transport until it catches up and then the rallied unit loads. "

Source:
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=14910132147&sid=3000


So this does through a monkey wrench in the mechanic. The UI convention is for rally points to autoload so that would mean that you could rally units into a drop pod. Not sure how to deal with this. Anyone have any thoughts?


Ideally, I think we need a base action that includes targeting but in decision making way. Hmmm
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
armed_
Profile Joined November 2008
Canada443 Posts
February 05 2009 04:49 GMT
#52
Have drop pods act as an addon when they're ready(make a launching mechanism extend out of the CC or something, I unno), so they simply aren't there to rally to most of the time.

I think someone mentioned this already, but I can't be bothered to go back and look.
Liquid`Jinro
Profile Blog Joined September 2002
Sweden33719 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-02-05 05:25:28
February 05 2009 05:22 GMT
#53
I think someone brought this up before, otherwise yay go me! But probably go whoever thought of it first (actually I realized I have TWO ideas):
1) Give the Barracks 2 rally points - 1 regular and 1 "send current unit to drop pod" (and you have to choose drop pod as you can have several).

2) Have the rally point reset to the building everytime a drop pod is launched (as the Drop Pod essentially dies, this makes sense, it's like if you rally to a unit and it dies, the rally changes to wherever it last was).

So it goes-> Rally to Drop Pod, units enter automatically, Rally Point resets to the building. Now you either re-rally to the drop pod or enter them manually. Basically treat each drop pod as a new, indvidual unit.
Moderatortell the guy that interplanatar interaction is pivotal to terrans variety of optionitudals in the pre-midgame preperatories as well as the protosstinal deterriggation of elite zergling strikes - Stimey n | Formerly FrozenArbiter
Osmoses
Profile Blog Joined October 2008
Sweden5302 Posts
February 05 2009 06:23 GMT
#54
I dunno, giving barracks two rally points just for the sake of drop pods seems kinda unnecessary. How hard can it be to just dragselect some units and right click the drop pods, much like you do when loading dropships. Surely that little window of going back to base can't be a bad thing?

Though if you do want a rally point, the way they just said it works seems good enough doesn't it? They go to the drop pod and once it's full they just stop outside.
Excuse me hun, but what is your name? Vivian? I woke up next to you naked and, uh, did we, um?
Liquid`Jinro
Profile Blog Joined September 2002
Sweden33719 Posts
February 05 2009 06:47 GMT
#55
Read Archer's post above mine for the problem.
I think #2 in my post is probably the best way to have it work.

The problem is basically that you don't have to go back to base as a rally point to a drop pod will autoload the unit. A secondary rallypoint would force you to reset it constantly, and an expiring rally point (as the drop pod "expires" after each usage) would basically just mean you have to enter units into the drop pod manually, or re-set the rally point continuously.
Moderatortell the guy that interplanatar interaction is pivotal to terrans variety of optionitudals in the pre-midgame preperatories as well as the protosstinal deterriggation of elite zergling strikes - Stimey n | Formerly FrozenArbiter
armed_
Profile Joined November 2008
Canada443 Posts
February 05 2009 13:12 GMT
#56
Making them appear as an add-on achieves the same thing and seems much more natural to me. Barracks is rallied to drop pod, drop pod launches, and then the launching add-on disappears into the CC or whatever so naturally since it's no longer there the rally either disappears or gets set to the ground or something.
Liquid`Jinro
Profile Blog Joined September 2002
Sweden33719 Posts
February 05 2009 13:14 GMT
#57
On February 05 2009 22:12 armed_ wrote:
Making them appear as an add-on achieves the same thing and seems much more natural to me. Barracks is rallied to drop pod, drop pod launches, and then the launching add-on disappears into the CC or whatever so naturally since it's no longer there the rally either disappears or gets set to the ground or something.

Ah I wasn't sure what you meant but forgot to ask for clarification. Either works for me.
Moderatortell the guy that interplanatar interaction is pivotal to terrans variety of optionitudals in the pre-midgame preperatories as well as the protosstinal deterriggation of elite zergling strikes - Stimey n | Formerly FrozenArbiter
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
February 06 2009 01:18 GMT
#58
Nice!

I have to admit when I heard about that rally points autoload I thought this mechanic might be done for. Then you guys posted that we can just make it an add-on and I thought "that will never work" so I spent a day thinking about it and realized "hey wait, that will work." Its actually a great idea. I am going to compile a little more feedback from other sites and then update to 4.0.

Before I do I just want to get your guys opinion on a alternative mechanic from InRaged's Terran Mobile Base (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=86992)


ArcherofAiur's Mobile Terran Base 2.0 (inspired by InRaged)

-Barracks that Lift-off can be produce units which are automatically put in a drop pod.

-Barracks can launch drop pods in a certain range (siege tank range? Sensor tower range?).

-Factory can transfrom into Thor.

-Starport that is lifted-off can produce units directly (like the Starbase could).

-Engineering bay can upgrade in air.






How does this compare with our Drop Pod Mechanic?
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
armed_
Profile Joined November 2008
Canada443 Posts
February 06 2009 01:48 GMT
#59
On February 06 2009 10:18 Archerofaiur wrote:
How does this compare with our Drop Pod Mechanic?

It's much more complicated/harder to balance and doesn't force as much screen switching? ;P
Osmoses
Profile Blog Joined October 2008
Sweden5302 Posts
February 06 2009 02:26 GMT
#60
On February 06 2009 10:18 Archerofaiur wrote:
-Barracks that Lift-off can be produce units which are automatically put in a drop pod.

-Barracks can launch drop pods in a certain range (siege tank range? Sensor tower range?).

-Factory can transfrom into Thor.

-Starport that is lifted-off can produce units directly (like the Starbase could).

-Engineering bay can upgrade in air.

I'm not really crazy about any of the ideas in the mobile base thread. Using drop pods to deploy units just so you can do it while it's flying around, it feel so forced. The biggest flaw is the question WHY you would bring your facilities to the front where they can get destroyed in case of a failed offensive. The second flaw is that it just doesn't seem like a fun or even interesting mechanic (to me).
Excuse me hun, but what is your name? Vivian? I woke up next to you naked and, uh, did we, um?
Liquid`Jinro
Profile Blog Joined September 2002
Sweden33719 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-02-06 11:27:56
February 06 2009 11:24 GMT
#61
On February 06 2009 10:18 Archerofaiur wrote:
Nice!

I have to admit when I heard about that rally points autoload I thought this mechanic might be done for. Then you guys posted that we can just make it an add-on and I thought "that will never work" so I spent a day thinking about it and realized "hey wait, that will work." Its actually a great idea. I am going to compile a little more feedback from other sites and then update to 4.0.

Before I do I just want to get your guys opinion on a alternative mechanic from InRaged's Terran Mobile Base (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=86992)


ArcherofAiur's Mobile Terran Base 2.0 (inspired by InRaged)

-Barracks that Lift-off can be produce units which are automatically put in a drop pod.

-Barracks can launch drop pods in a certain range (siege tank range? Sensor tower range?).

-Factory can transfrom into Thor.

-Starport that is lifted-off can produce units directly (like the Starbase could).

-Engineering bay can upgrade in air.






How does this compare with our Drop Pod Mechanic?

I'd assumed all along that the Drop Pod thingy would be an addon haha

I think I posted about having the Drop Pod be a Rax addon earlier in this thread and I'm not sure what I think about it.. Having (an option possibly) for units produced to auto-enter the drop pod seems natural but does remove some of the "back to base" of this mechanic.

On the plus side it does make the mechanic more likely to be used a lot (although I imagine it'd be used regardless.

Factory transforming into Thor I like I'm a sucker for anything involving walking buildings!

Oh overall I prefer Drop Pods btw, just because it's simpler, more likely to make it into the game.. And it's cool(er?)
Moderatortell the guy that interplanatar interaction is pivotal to terrans variety of optionitudals in the pre-midgame preperatories as well as the protosstinal deterriggation of elite zergling strikes - Stimey n | Formerly FrozenArbiter
maybenexttime
Profile Blog Joined November 2006
Poland5540 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-02-07 12:00:58
February 07 2009 11:46 GMT
#62
On February 05 2009 13:35 Archerofaiur wrote:
I asked on BNet and this was Dustin's answer.

"In the current build you can rally a Barracks into a Bunker or a transport. Units rallied in this way move successfully to the bunker or transport and enter. If the transport is moving, the rallied unit will chase the transport until it catches up and then the rallied unit loads. "

Source:
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=14910132147&sid=3000


So this does through a monkey wrench in the mechanic. The UI convention is for rally points to autoload so that would mean that you could rally units into a drop pod. Not sure how to deal with this. Anyone have any thoughts?


Ideally, I think we need a base action that includes targeting but in decision making way. Hmmm


We need to come up with as many potential ways to create/launch a Drop Pod as possible. Then choose the best one gameplay wise.

My idea:

Each CC has a Drop Pod socket/slot (1 by default, you can upgrade it to 3 after you reach certain tech; the upgrade could be either at CC, E-Bay or that building you need to reach; it could be either a global or an individual upgrade). You can rally units to the Drop Pod but only when it's already finished (units are rallied to the socket and not the Pod). The enemy would be able to kill already finished Pods. You could launch the Pod anywhere within the Sensor Tower radius (maybe there would be two separate radii or you'd have to transporm the Tower somehow to acccess Pods, whatever works best).

Producing a Drop Pod looks like this:

1) You place the Drop Pod in the socket like you do with add-ons (Planetary Fortress cannot use Drop Pods).

2) When it's finished, you load units into it.

3) The you select pick the destination point. It takes a while, say 5 seconds, for it to reach the point, during which the Sensor Tower can be destroyed, making the Pod not arrive - just like with Nukes. An indicator of a Pod having been launched and of how much time's left could be a countdown texture similar to the one used in Armies of Exigo's Freeze spell.

That's 3 screen changes. You could access Drop Pods through the CC or hotkey them individually, since accessing them via CC wouldn't let you pick specific Pods (pressing the "Launch Drop Pod" hotkey would select Drop Pod #1 unless it wasn't there, then it'd simply select the Pod next in line. you know what I mean).

To differentiate it from the Dropship, it'd only be able to carry small or medium units (infantry, SCVs, Hellions, etc.) but would be able to carry more of them (let's say 2 or 4 more small slots, i.e. 1-2 more Hellions or 2-4 more Marines than a Dropship) . It'd also cost ~50 minerals (+ Tower) to prevent it from being abused early on.


Pros of this implementation:

- solves the issue with rally points
- rewards screen changing
- adds lots of potential tactics/strategies
- improves the infamous Terran Push in an interesting way
- allows for various interactions (anticipating and intercepting Drop Pods, proxy Sensor Towers to Drop units in enemy's main from a distance, killing Drop Pods in Terran's base, etc.)
- easily balanced


Differences from Warp-In:

- transports already produced units
- requires mineral investment
- requires build time
- limited by number of CC's
- "bundles" units in one spot
- drop Area much larger than Pylon field
- Drop Pods can be killed before they're launched


Differences from the Medivac:

- limited by number of CC's
- can be intercepted by destroying the Sensor Tower
- the Sensor Tower warns the opponent about an incoming Drop Pod (additionally, it's seen by the opponent on the minimap without the need of LOS)
- carries only small or medium units but more of them
- cannot re-load the units and transport them further


edit: Seems like armed_ came up with the add-on idea before me. ^___^


On February 06 2009 20:24 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 06 2009 10:18 Archerofaiur wrote:
Nice!

I have to admit when I heard about that rally points autoload I thought this mechanic might be done for. Then you guys posted that we can just make it an add-on and I thought "that will never work" so I spent a day thinking about it and realized "hey wait, that will work." Its actually a great idea. I am going to compile a little more feedback from other sites and then update to 4.0.

Before I do I just want to get your guys opinion on a alternative mechanic from InRaged's Terran Mobile Base (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=86992)


ArcherofAiur's Mobile Terran Base 2.0 (inspired by InRaged)

-Barracks that Lift-off can be produce units which are automatically put in a drop pod.

-Barracks can launch drop pods in a certain range (siege tank range? Sensor tower range?).

-Factory can transfrom into Thor.

-Starport that is lifted-off can produce units directly (like the Starbase could).

-Engineering bay can upgrade in air.






How does this compare with our Drop Pod Mechanic?

I'd assumed all along that the Drop Pod thingy would be an addon haha

I think I posted about having the Drop Pod be a Rax addon earlier in this thread and I'm not sure what I think about it.. Having (an option possibly) for units produced to auto-enter the drop pod seems natural but does remove some of the "back to base" of this mechanic.

On the plus side it does make the mechanic more likely to be used a lot (although I imagine it'd be used regardless.

Factory transforming into Thor I like I'm a sucker for anything involving walking buildings!

Oh overall I prefer Drop Pods btw, just because it's simpler, more likely to make it into the game.. And it's cool(er?)


Units rallied to the add-on (I prefer to call them sockets or slots since them and Scans shouldn't be mutually exclusive, imo) would gather around the add-on and not enter the Pod when it's finished (two different entities). On the other hand, units rallied to an already finished Drop Pod would enter it, but at that point you're better off launching the Pod - waiting for rallied units to finish and then enter the Pod would be a massive waste of time. ;]
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-02-08 00:41:42
February 08 2009 00:35 GMT
#63
This video from ESL shows the range of the Sensor Tower for all curious.





It looks about 1/8th or 1/16th of that map. A bit bigger than the size of a base. I think this is the perfect size for the Drop Pod mechanic.
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
Osmoses
Profile Blog Joined October 2008
Sweden5302 Posts
February 08 2009 07:24 GMT
#64
I think it seems a bit too big. Imagine playing on any map at all, setting up shop in the middle of the map and still be able to drop pods in the middle of the enemy's mineral line. If you spawned next to each other on, for example, python, then you could just build a sensor tower in your main base and start spamming drop pods.
Excuse me hun, but what is your name? Vivian? I woke up next to you naked and, uh, did we, um?
maybenexttime
Profile Blog Joined November 2006
Poland5540 Posts
February 08 2009 11:47 GMT
#65
Well, there could be two different radii then, as already said.
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-02-08 16:34:06
February 08 2009 15:42 GMT
#66
On February 08 2009 16:24 Osmoses wrote:
I think it seems a bit too big. Imagine playing on any map at all, setting up shop in the middle of the map and still be able to drop pods in the middle of the enemy's mineral line. If you spawned next to each other on, for example, python, then you could just build a sensor tower in your main base and start spamming drop pods.



To get at their mineral line you would still need to build the tower right outside there front door and they would be able to see it. Sensor towers can be used for this if you can defend them (like if you move your siege line that far) but if you really want to do some mineral harass reapers are the way to go.

You do raise a point about the sensor tower in general. On maps with proximal starting locations your sensor tower could possible see some of the opponents base. I wonder if this could give tech information.
Now python is kind of a special map. Not all of the BW maps are going to be balanced in SC2. In this case it is the map more than the mechanic that needs balancing. I can imagine with all the new race features we are going to see allot of factors come into play in map balancing.
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
February 10 2009 01:03 GMT
#67
I've updated the OP with everyones feedback. Is everyone ok with this version or are there things you think should change? I have started modeling this in the Warcraft 3 editor so speak now or forever hold your peace.


Terran Macro Mechanic: Drop Pods 4.0


-After Engineering Bay a Command Center can build up to 4 Drop Pod Add-ons. Cost and build time are the same as an SCV (50 minerals, 18 seconds).

-Infantry can be ordered into the Drop Pod (5 slots). SCVs, reapers, ghosts, maruaders and marines cound as infantry. Units can be rallied into Drop Pod.

-Player hits launch hotkey and selects drop location. Can drop anywhere within a Sensor Tower's range. The entire Add-on is launched and a new one must be build for it to be used again.
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
IdrA
Profile Blog Joined July 2004
United States11541 Posts
February 10 2009 01:24 GMT
#68
this will do nothing to replace real macro, where you have to go back and do stuff every 30 seconds. 4 times per cc max?

also why is it called a macro mechanic, it has nothing to do with unit production
http://www.splitreason.com/product/1152 release the gracken tshirt now available
Liquid`Jinro
Profile Blog Joined September 2002
Sweden33719 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-02-10 01:38:00
February 10 2009 01:36 GMT
#69
Honestly, even if it won't be directly analogous to SBS it will be better than pure MBS. It's not a BW macro mechanic but it's a macro mechanic if you apply a broader definition. It does give more room for a faster player to benefit AND it helps bring along a type of gameplay that helps alleviate the effects of MBS/automining.

Anyway, it'd work like.. Go back, rally all rax to newly built addon (or go back and enter units into newly built addon), place pods. It'd be possible to just have 1 add-on per rax or something but honestly, then you'd have to do like 1 marine per drop pod.. ? Doesn't that seem kinda, ehhhhh, stupid? Like, I know it's not about realism but .. ONE? ;;

So if you want to be perfect you'd ship a new batch of units as soon as they are done, ie once every 30 seconds. No?

And, let's be honest, Drop Pods are cool Oh and it beats the snot out of the gas mechanic.
It's about time terrans get some payback for all those recalls imo.
Moderatortell the guy that interplanatar interaction is pivotal to terrans variety of optionitudals in the pre-midgame preperatories as well as the protosstinal deterriggation of elite zergling strikes - Stimey n | Formerly FrozenArbiter
IdrA
Profile Blog Joined July 2004
United States11541 Posts
February 10 2009 01:58 GMT
#70
i dunno what definition of macro you're using, but it is entirely unrelated to bw 'macro', which is whats important here because one of the major concerns with mbs is that it will kill various playstyles as unit production is no longer a time consuming task (so oov will become obsolete)

as far as that is concerned, no mechanic that doesnt directly directly relate time spent on a task to how many new units you have does not solve the problem.

as for the screen changing aspect of the problem, the current version still isnt a good fix because he has it limited to 4 addons per cc. that wont last very long, and it wont be regular useage. if it were unlimited addons and you could do it every 30 seconds or whatever, then ya it would address that part of the problem.
http://www.splitreason.com/product/1152 release the gracken tshirt now available
Osmoses
Profile Blog Joined October 2008
Sweden5302 Posts
February 10 2009 02:59 GMT
#71
No, this mechanic won't solve the problem, it's merely a neat functionality that might provide a little more depth, filling a small part of the huge macro void which will be left with the implementation of, among other things, MBS. Though even if there were unlimited addons launchable every 30 seconds, it still seems to me that the edge it provides is not good enough to warrant their use if that time could be spent microing instead.

MBS is in SC2, and it is there to stay. I don't think there's even a slight chance of it being removed. So the fact that making units and filling your expansions with workers has become as simple as pressing a couple of hotkeys is something we just can't get around. If we want SC2 to be as fast paced as SC1, Blizzard either needs to keep coming up with more of these small cornerstones or revamp the resource or unit production system greatly. I personally had issues from the get-go with how the minerals were lined up so conveniently along with the gas at the different expansions when I first started playing SC1 in 97. Perhaps this is the time to make resource gathering a bit more realistic/involved? I might make an unpopular thread about it later.

I'm thinking a company of Blizzard's standards probably got dozens of qualified people just sitting around thinking shit like this up, along with their progamer assistants... But seeing as how the best we've heard from them so far was the gay gas-mechanic, I'll admit I'm a little worried. So lets keep brainstorming, one day someone might just get lucky and put forth one of those "holy shit!" ideas. Of course, when that day comes, the idea will most likely be shot down by the community because it will cause SC2 to become "too different" from SC1.

SC1 is good in large part thanks to it's outdated UI. If all the features of SC2 were implemented in SC1, the game would practically play itself. The features are already in. You can't have it both ways. SC2 is not SC1 blah blah.

That being said, whatever Drop Pods do or do not solve, they should still be in the game, because Drop Pods are bitchin.
Excuse me hun, but what is your name? Vivian? I woke up next to you naked and, uh, did we, um?
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-02-10 04:41:08
February 10 2009 04:22 GMT
#72
On February 10 2009 10:58 IdrA wrote:
mechanic that doesnt directly directly relate time spent on a task to how many new units


Idra brings up a good point. The BW macro system is structured so that by completing tasks you gain new units. However, Single Building Selecting alone does not give you new units. Single building selection merly gives you access to the production slot. To explain better lets use the "Macro Cake Analogy"


Macro Cake Analogy

In Starcraft when you want to make a cake (unit) you first need to get your ingrediants. You must gather some flour (minerals), eggs (gas), and sugar (supply). You then mix (camera shift, selection and hotkey) these three things together in a pan (production slot).



Now Starcraft 2 has automated the mixing. What the Drop Pod mechanic allows you do to is mix (camera shift, hotkey and add-on placement) up some frosting (Teleportation) after the cake is made. And really, who doesn't like frosting?
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
IdrA
Profile Blog Joined July 2004
United States11541 Posts
February 10 2009 05:11 GMT
#73
-_-

you didnt address my point
at all

i said its a problem that this has nothing to do with how many new units you're getting. making a pointless analogy doesnt change that. im aware it does partially fix some of the problems, i said that in my last post. but it doesnt deal with one of the biggest problems with the whole thing.
http://www.splitreason.com/product/1152 release the gracken tshirt now available
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-02-10 05:24:20
February 10 2009 05:20 GMT
#74
Well, if you want I am all for exploring macro mechanics that give production advantage for camera shift and targeting tasks. However I would like to stay focused on Drop Pods for this thread. Feel free to make a new thread if you have some cool ideas.


Edit: Sorry, I didn't want to sidetrack the thread.
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
IdrA
Profile Blog Joined July 2004
United States11541 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-02-10 05:22:50
February 10 2009 05:22 GMT
#75
only being allowed to select one building at a time?

i refuse to theorycraft half assed solutions to a problem that shouldnt even exist.

i really hate it when people edit content of their post
you asked me if i had any suggestions.
http://www.splitreason.com/product/1152 release the gracken tshirt now available
Osmoses
Profile Blog Joined October 2008
Sweden5302 Posts
February 10 2009 05:50 GMT
#76
Relevance or not, that cake anology was pretty neat. Made me feel little.

Idra, hate to say it, but the problem exists. We tried being outraged about it, it didn't work. Nothing we can do now but theorycraft.
Excuse me hun, but what is your name? Vivian? I woke up next to you naked and, uh, did we, um?
Liquid`Jinro
Profile Blog Joined September 2002
Sweden33719 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-02-10 11:53:56
February 10 2009 11:44 GMT
#77
On February 10 2009 14:22 IdrA wrote:
only being allowed to select one building at a time?

i refuse to theorycraft half assed solutions to a problem that shouldnt even exist.

i really hate it when people edit content of their post
you asked me if i had any suggestions.

But you realize that's basically saying "I'm gonna sit on my ass until beta and pray that they'll actually remove MBS if they need to"?

I mean, I'm pretty sure removing MBS is like their last, last, last, LAST hope solution and that they'd exhaust every other alternative before doing so.

Furthermore, the stylistic differences should be able to come from gameplay choices, no? Playing an aggressive style vs a more passive style should just both be viable options, the BoxeR players go for one style, the macro players another - it wasn't 4sz5sz6sz etc that made YellOw different from Starcraft_Side, nor BoxeR from Oov -_-

Oov players wouldn't be gone, they'd just have their drop pods @ the frontlines / defending their expansions with zero delay for every production cycle, while the micro player wouldn't.
Maybe it wouldn't be the same different styles but it's not the same game.. And honestly, I know we've been over this already, but there really aren't a whole lot of stylistic differences anymore.. Not big ones anyway.

And as Osmoses said, even if it's not a perfect solution, it should be in the game because it's worth having on its own merits - regardless of macro benefits, of which there are plenty (ie largely provides screen switching type multitasking).
Moderatortell the guy that interplanatar interaction is pivotal to terrans variety of optionitudals in the pre-midgame preperatories as well as the protosstinal deterriggation of elite zergling strikes - Stimey n | Formerly FrozenArbiter
IdrA
Profile Blog Joined July 2004
United States11541 Posts
February 10 2009 12:04 GMT
#78
until i see something that seems to suit the purpose i will indeed be counting on them removing the easy mode features during beta. i dont see it as that big a leap of faith since they havent had any competent players play testing it yet and so havent gotten real feedback from people they can believe. when the top 50 people in the beta ladder are telling them theres a problem theyll listen. now, theyre free to experiment.

the fact that there arent many stylistic differences anymore, and that people dont really like that, should just encourage us all the more to aim for creating room for those differences in sc2. ive never said drop pods shouldnt be in the game, im just saying it shouldnt be called a macro mechanic and shouldnt be considered a solution for mbs.
http://www.splitreason.com/product/1152 release the gracken tshirt now available
maybenexttime
Profile Blog Joined November 2006
Poland5540 Posts
February 10 2009 15:17 GMT
#79
On February 10 2009 10:24 IdrA wrote:
this will do nothing to replace real macro, where you have to go back and do stuff every 30 seconds. 4 times per cc max?

also why is it called a macro mechanic, it has nothing to do with unit production


You have some pretty narrow-minded idea of macro.

In BW, macro consists of various tasks, such as: unit production, building structures, expanding, researching upgrades, etc. You seem to consider only the mechanical, strictly related to unit production and/or improving one's economy tasks as "macro."

What we're trying to do here is coming up with a set of macro mechanics (be it unit production, placing structures, economy management or pretty much any base related task that requires player's attention) which on their own are not as attention demanding, but combined can replace the attention requirements of SBS/manual-mining macro from BW.

Additionally, there have been suggested several mechanics that try to mimic manual-mining is a way, while removing any "mindless APM" and adding to the game's depth in some way. An example of that could by the Mineral Mechanic by myself & FrozenArbiter.


On February 10 2009 10:58 IdrA wrote:
i dunno what definition of macro you're using, but it is entirely unrelated to bw 'macro', which is whats important here because one of the major concerns with mbs is that it will kill various playstyles as unit production is no longer a time consuming task (so oov will become obsolete)

as far as that is concerned, no mechanic that doesnt directly directly relate time spent on a task to how many new units you have does not solve the problem.

as for the screen changing aspect of the problem, the current version still isnt a good fix because he has it limited to 4 addons per cc. that wont last very long, and it wont be regular useage. if it were unlimited addons and you could do it every 30 seconds or whatever, then ya it would address that part of the problem.


I'd say that the biggest problem is that you can macro remotely - not that you can produce units remotely.

Imagine that you place Drop Pods like add-ons. This solves imo the biggest problem with SC2 macro - the fact that it does not require player's attention, leading ti differences in playstyle. This is why this mechanic would require attention:

1) You need to build Sensor Towers in places you want your Drop Pods to have access to (frontlines for reinforcements, island and regular expansions - for safer SCV transportation and reinforcements and in main).

2) You need to manually place Drop Pod "add-ons" (and do something else while they're being built)

3) You have to load units into the Pods.

4) You have to pick the destination point within the Sensor Tower network.

5) You need to constatly repair and/or rebuild your Sensor Towers and expand your network.


This definitely does require attention. And it can be used in many ways, with varying degree of involvement, leading to different playstyles.

Maybe this mechanic isn't necessarily connected to unit production (although it can be), it definitely is a macro task that requires attention, and it DOES influence the number of units you can produce - just indirectly (e.g. you can claim/defend expansions thanks to it or transfer workers mroe safely, etc.) Also, what stops Blizzard from implementing this AND a mechanic that mimics manual-mining (like the Mineral Mechanic).
SyphllusSteve
Profile Joined September 2008
2 Posts
February 15 2009 15:14 GMT
#80
I love this idea. This mechanic would bring a new level of strategy to the game. My question is how long would it take from when you initiated the drop pod take off untill your troops have arrived on the battlefield. Depending upon how long your troops are tied up I believe this ability can be very useful. As such I think it should be given a fairly high resource cost.
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-02-17 02:38:04
February 17 2009 02:35 GMT
#81
On February 16 2009 00:14 SyphllusSteve wrote:
I love this idea. This mechanic would bring a new level of strategy to the game. My question is how long would it take from when you initiated the drop pod take off untill your troops have arrived on the battlefield. Depending upon how long your troops are tied up I believe this ability can be very useful. As such I think it should be given a fairly high resource cost.


Currently the mechanic is set up to be instantaneous.


One thing that I am noticing with the WC3 model map is that paying for drop pods makes them much less effective then just sending your marines to the enemy base. The best uses I have found are building a tower close to the enemy's base and dropping in there base. I will try lowering the cost closer to zero but right now it looks like paying for a one time use transport mechanic is too much of a detriment. Now I could try changing the map so you don't have to pay any cost at all but then the drop pod mechanic becomes too similar to the nydus worm and warp-in.
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
Liquid`Jinro
Profile Blog Joined September 2002
Sweden33719 Posts
February 17 2009 03:02 GMT
#82
IMO it's different enough - nydus is 2 way and unlimited units, warp-in is 1 unit, 1 way. This would be 1 way with a limit somewhere inbetween 1 and unlimited.
Moderatortell the guy that interplanatar interaction is pivotal to terrans variety of optionitudals in the pre-midgame preperatories as well as the protosstinal deterriggation of elite zergling strikes - Stimey n | Formerly FrozenArbiter
D10
Profile Blog Joined December 2007
Brazil3409 Posts
February 17 2009 05:40 GMT
#83
But you forgot to mention unit variation.

unlimited all kinds of ground zerg units

vs

1 at a time per warpgate gate units

vs

Marines ?
Seems like terrans got the shaft here
" We are not humans having spiritual experiences. - We are spirits having human experiences." - Pierre Teilhard de Chardin
maybenexttime
Profile Blog Joined November 2006
Poland5540 Posts
February 17 2009 06:04 GMT
#84
I was suggesting small-middle ground units. ^_______^
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-02-19 00:14:24
February 19 2009 00:12 GMT
#85



On February 10 2009 10:24 IdrA wrote:

also why is it called a macro mechanic, it has nothing to do with unit production



Idra, just a quick follow up to that debate we were having on whether Macro can be things unrelated to unit production:


Proton Charge, Null Shield, Argus Link, Calldown Extra Supplies, Scanner Sweep, Build Creep Tumor, Razor Plague

It appears that Blizzard favors the "Macro as a gameplay style" definition.


http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
Liquid`Jinro
Profile Blog Joined September 2002
Sweden33719 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-03-14 14:43:22
March 14 2009 14:28 GMT
#86
I couldn't find anything on that in the Q&A archive, only questions unanswered after the removal concerning a comeback. Does anyone have clues or know the official explanation?

- Musza
The role of the drop pod fit very closely with what Medivac Dropships already do even better. Overall, through testing, it was far better to build Medivac Dropships to drop off reinforcements or raid, especially since drop pods still needed to be loaded with infantry as well.

- Karune
Go to post

The original drop pod was quite different from what's proposed in this thread tho, so I'm not sure it's still valid.
Moderatortell the guy that interplanatar interaction is pivotal to terrans variety of optionitudals in the pre-midgame preperatories as well as the protosstinal deterriggation of elite zergling strikes - Stimey n | Formerly FrozenArbiter
IdrA
Profile Blog Joined July 2004
United States11541 Posts
March 14 2009 14:56 GMT
#87
On February 19 2009 09:12 Archerofaiur wrote:



Show nested quote +
On February 10 2009 10:24 IdrA wrote:

also why is it called a macro mechanic, it has nothing to do with unit production



Idra, just a quick follow up to that debate we were having on whether Macro can be things unrelated to unit production:


Proton Charge, Null Shield, Argus Link, Calldown Extra Supplies, Scanner Sweep, Build Creep Tumor, Razor Plague

It appears that Blizzard favors the "Macro as a gameplay style" definition.



how exactly are razor plague, scans, null shield, argus links, and creep tumors macro mechanics?
the proton charge, mules, extra supplies and extra larvae are the macro mechanics. the other things are added to the things responsible for the macro mechanics to create an extra layer of decision making to the process, forcing you to prioritize between macro (proton charge/mule/larvae) and non-macro(othershit). that does not mean othershit is also a macro mechanic. so no, it appears blizzard thinks you were wrong as well.
http://www.splitreason.com/product/1152 release the gracken tshirt now available
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-03-14 16:17:54
March 14 2009 16:12 GMT
#88
On March 14 2009 23:56 IdrA wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 19 2009 09:12 Archerofaiur wrote:



On February 10 2009 10:24 IdrA wrote:

also why is it called a macro mechanic, it has nothing to do with unit production



Idra, just a quick follow up to that debate we were having on whether Macro can be things unrelated to unit production:


Proton Charge, Null Shield, Argus Link, Calldown Extra Supplies, Scanner Sweep, Build Creep Tumor, Razor Plague

It appears that Blizzard favors the "Macro as a gameplay style" definition.



how exactly are razor plague, scans, null shield, argus links, and creep tumors macro mechanics?
the proton charge, mules, extra supplies and extra larvae are the macro mechanics. the other things are added to the things responsible for the macro mechanics to create an extra layer of decision making to the process, forcing you to prioritize between macro (proton charge/mule/larvae) and non-macro(othershit). that does not mean othershit is also a macro mechanic. so no, it appears blizzard thinks you were wrong as well.


Don't worry about. You are not going to convince me and I am not going to convince you and arguing with you is a waste of both our time.



On March 14 2009 23:28 FrozenArbiter wrote:

The original drop pod was quite different from what's proposed in this thread tho, so I'm not sure it's still valid.


This is true. Our drop pod was more accessible. I'd still bet some good money that drop pods are going to be in the single player. So we will see what the final version is.
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
IdrA
Profile Blog Joined July 2004
United States11541 Posts
March 15 2009 00:23 GMT
#89
On March 15 2009 01:12 Archerofaiur wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 14 2009 23:56 IdrA wrote:
On February 19 2009 09:12 Archerofaiur wrote:



On February 10 2009 10:24 IdrA wrote:

also why is it called a macro mechanic, it has nothing to do with unit production



Idra, just a quick follow up to that debate we were having on whether Macro can be things unrelated to unit production:


Proton Charge, Null Shield, Argus Link, Calldown Extra Supplies, Scanner Sweep, Build Creep Tumor, Razor Plague

It appears that Blizzard favors the "Macro as a gameplay style" definition.



how exactly are razor plague, scans, null shield, argus links, and creep tumors macro mechanics?
the proton charge, mules, extra supplies and extra larvae are the macro mechanics. the other things are added to the things responsible for the macro mechanics to create an extra layer of decision making to the process, forcing you to prioritize between macro (proton charge/mule/larvae) and non-macro(othershit). that does not mean othershit is also a macro mechanic. so no, it appears blizzard thinks you were wrong as well.


Don't worry about. You are not going to convince me and I am not going to convince you and arguing with you is a waste of both our time.


idiot
http://www.splitreason.com/product/1152 release the gracken tshirt now available
Liquid`Jinro
Profile Blog Joined September 2002
Sweden33719 Posts
March 15 2009 00:31 GMT
#90
Guh can you two drop it?

Yeah I think Blizzard considers macro to be more than just unit production, no I don't think they consider razor plague etc to be macro mechanics -.-

Now you can both pretend/assume you are right and go back to talking about drop pods.......
Moderatortell the guy that interplanatar interaction is pivotal to terrans variety of optionitudals in the pre-midgame preperatories as well as the protosstinal deterriggation of elite zergling strikes - Stimey n | Formerly FrozenArbiter
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-03-15 00:55:49
March 15 2009 00:55 GMT
#91


One thing I am interested in is different ways you can use the MULE. People have already brought up dropping mules on siege tanks but I am wondering if there are any other crazy tactics you can do with mule drops.
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
Normal
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 48m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Creator 71
StarCraft: Brood War
Hyuk 742
Pusan 414
Soma 369
Stork 280
ZerO 126
Sharp 115
sorry 109
sSak 99
Aegong 36
zelot 30
[ Show more ]
Free 27
Mind 27
yabsab 26
Soulkey 21
JulyZerg 15
IntoTheRainbow 9
Larva 7
ivOry 3
Dota 2
XcaliburYe503
XaKoH 450
Counter-Strike
shoxiejesuss666
x6flipin257
allub81
Super Smash Bros
Mew2King240
Other Games
ceh9723
Pyrionflax329
crisheroes258
SortOf156
rGuardiaN42
ZerO(Twitch)12
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick29571
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 14 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH360
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• lizZardDota2271
League of Legends
• HappyZerGling105
Other Games
• WagamamaTV118
Upcoming Events
Wardi Open
48m
Replay Cast
13h 48m
Sparkling Tuna Cup
23h 48m
WardiTV European League
1d 5h
MaNa vs sebesdes
Mixu vs Fjant
ByuN vs HeRoMaRinE
ShoWTimE vs goblin
Gerald vs Babymarine
Krystianer vs YoungYakov
PiGosaur Monday
1d 13h
The PondCast
1d 23h
WardiTV European League
2 days
Jumy vs NightPhoenix
Percival vs Nicoract
ArT vs HiGhDrA
MaxPax vs Harstem
Scarlett vs Shameless
SKillous vs uThermal
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
2 days
Replay Cast
2 days
RSL Revival
2 days
ByuN vs SHIN
Clem vs Reynor
[ Show More ]
Replay Cast
3 days
RSL Revival
3 days
Classic vs Cure
FEL
4 days
RSL Revival
4 days
FEL
5 days
FEL
5 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
5 days
RSL Revival
5 days
FEL
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

BSL Season 20
HSC XXVII
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
Acropolis #3
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
Championship of Russia 2025
RSL Revival: Season 1
Murky Cup #2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025

Upcoming

2025 ACS Season 2: Qualifier
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSL Xiamen Invitational
2025 ACS Season 2
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
SEL Season 2 Championship
FEL Cracov 2025
Esports World Cup 2025
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.