EDIT: If you wish to find Q&A's by other sites, go here. At the time of this writing, only ours is up, but more will come along I'm sure.
If you recall the topic about the special Q&A submissions about 2 weeks back, I just got an email with the answers Almost all of the questions were answered, so thanks to everyone for coming up with such interesting questions!
Personally, I'm happy with pretty much every answer, especially #10, assuming it's saying what I think it is - now you can finally watch reps while eating!
Hope you all enjoy, and thanks to Blizzard for answering almost every question we sent in, and answering them well =]
1 Q: How's the current balance and what balance issues have you faced?
A:One of the design challenges we are currently dealing with relates to the Dark Pylon, which doesn’t seem to have enough energy tension between probe buffing and acting as an energy reserve for caster units. With Mules, Terran players have a clear strategy decision every time they chose to call down a Mule, instead of saving for a comsat scan. Similarly, Queens have to use their energy carefully, choosing between expanding creep, producing more larva, and protecting her base as a base defender. Dark Pylons on the other hand, are relatively cheap to produce at 150 minerals, provide Pylon power, allow warp-in and proxy play, cloak units, and act as an energy well for casters in strategic positions, while also supporting an economy with macro resource collecting benefits.
2 Q: The new lower tier availability of mass mobility such as phase prisms and nydus canals seems to prompt for an even greater need for timely 'snipe' abilities for players, but with removal of units like the scourge, Blizzard seems to go in opposite direction. The games of SC2 I played so far clearly presented me with the problem of being forced to deal with the consequences of certain types of harass or assault while I saw them coming a mile away, in contrast to being able to effectively prevent them. There were for example, no efficient ways of 'sniping' enemy observers and nomads to kill their stealth detection or destroying their medivac dropships before they dropped or finishing off that phase prism before it could deploy and warp-in a dozen or more units into my base. How does Blizzard view these issues and aim to prevent a purely reactionary type of gameplay?
A:It is true that in StarCraft II, the races have become comparatively more mobile than the original StarCraft. To deal with the new threats mentioned above, scouting and vision have become an even more crucial part in gameplay, as well as building placement to defend against such incursions. Observers are now lower on the tech tree compared to the original StarCraft. Missile turrets can be upgraded with larger range and hit harder as well. Sensor towers can provide early warning of incoming attacks. Additionally, Zerg base defense is now mobile, allowing for quicker adaptation to deal with incoming threats
At higher levels, an RTS will always have some reactionary play, though in some cases you can react preemptively as well, which could force the opponent to react in another way. With these new methods to both scout and defend, it will help a player deal with opponent decisions on attacking more potently. It is true, with all the new mobility mechanics, it is more likely that you’ll have to pull your probes more often and dodge attacks, but at the same time, with better defenses and new abilities like the Queen’s Razor Swarm, warp-in, and many more – you’ll be able to make the enemy pay a much higher price in performing these attacks as well.
3 Q: In StarCraft, there are certain upgrade thresholds where some units start to perform vastly better against certain units. For example, + 1 attack zealots kill zerglings in 2 hits instead of 3, or +1 armor marines can take 3 lurker hits instead of 2. These elements add another layer of depth to the game by making upgrades a crucial part of strategy. Do these thresholds exist in StarCraft II, and is the game being designed with them in mind?
A:While we don’t try to develop too many of these relationships, there are times we do try to make more rigid balance points like these when we see the need for them. Examples: 1. Zealot –Zergling relationship is still there 2. Roach vs. Zerglings have this relationship- 3 shots to kill before, and 2 shots after (then gets countered by +1 armor by zerglings) 3. Reapers scale better than most other units in the game as they normally do 4+4dmg but get +2 per attack upgrade since they fire twice(25% per upgrade compared to the normal 10%) 4. Marine dies in 1 hit to baneling, 2 hits after combat shield upgrade 5. Marauders get just under the shield of Immortals (counters them early game), but as both sides get more upgrades, the relationship becomes muddier and goes in favor of the Immortals. (Immortals with 3 shield upgrade takes only 7 damage per hit currently) 6. The Colossus kills Marines in 1 shot until they get either armor or combat shields, after which they take 2 shots to kill.
4 Q: In the original StarCraft, upgrades would give different units different degrees of improvement, such as a fully upgraded zergling gaining a total 60% attack increase, compared to a dragoon that would gain 30%. In comparison, Warcraft III upgrades were designed so that the percentage improvement per upgrade was approximately the same for each unit. Will upgrades scale in this manner in StarCraft II as well?
A:Yes, StarCraft II will follow an upgrade system similar to that of the original StarCraft. Many of the new upgrades really help in almost creating a new type of unit out of a previous one. For example, in early game Stalkers can kite Zealots and easily handle them with micro. When Zealots gain charge, they will easily catch those Stalkers and tear them up. Similarly, when Stalkers get blink, they can continue to micro and use terrain advantages to fight those Zealots. On that same note, Zerglings with their attack speed upgrades make it a far deadlier unit, in line with the original StarCraft. As a design philosophy, we really wanted to make several upgrades allow a shift to the balance of power, creating new battle scenarios as players tech up.
5 Q: In SC and WC3 you can dodge attacks using dropships/zeppelins, or with teleportation spells (ie. blink), or even just superior mobility (in the case of lurker spines). Can projectiles (and lurker spines in particular) be dodged in SC2?
A:Yes, certain projectiles/abilities like the Lurker spines, Psi Storm, nukes, and the newly-introduced Hunter Seeker missiles can be dodged.
6 Q: Are submerged supply depots any different than regular supply depots other than the way that units can pass overtop when they are submerged? I.E. Does the opponent need detectors or anything to see/attack them, do they have the same health, armor, and additional supply count as un-submerged supply depots? Are there any benefits to not having supply depots submerged(other than walling purposes)?
A:The only difference between a submerged supply depot and a raised supply depot is the ability to path (or not path) over it.
Map Editor Questions
7 Q: Is it possible to create maps which wrap around? So that the right edge leads back onto the left, creating a spherical space?
A:Yes, it is currently possible to create a map in which units can move from one side to the other, though there isn’t coding provided yet that would allow units to shoot from one side to the other.
8 Q: We have heard many times that the map editor is capable of almost anything, but does this hold true for melee as well? Will you be able to implement map related features, such as different types of terrain (slowing, damage over time, energy regenerating, etc.), portals, or bridges and such, for ladder/melee maps?
A:Yes, players will be able to create special areas on the map as mentioned, though players will probably have to create them using invisible objects with those properties rather than have those properties be tied with the actual visual texture itself.
Technical Questions
9 Q: What, if any, function will the F2 through F4 keys have in StarCraft II? Has there been any thought of adding additional keys (F5 through F8) to serve as location hotkeys?
A:We are working on this now and will give the community an update when the roles of those keys have been decided.
10 Q: Will observers and replays have a player's view option, not just see what they have selected but actually move the screen to what they are viewing?
A:Yes, viewers will be able to watch from any player’s perspective.
11 Q: Will people be able to join games after they've started (as an observer) and will you be able to boot observers (or people that abuse the ping function) from games?
A:No, players will not be able to join after a game has started, though we have yet to decide how to handle observers in a game and who has the right to boot players.
-------
Oh and let me know how you feel about the formatting, I can change the answers into regular non-italic font if you prefer.
Q: Is it possible to create maps which wrap around? So that the right edge leads back onto the left, creating a spherical space?
A: Yes, it is currently possible to create a map in which units can move from one side to the other, though there isn’t coding provided yet that would allow units to shoot from one side to the other.
I like the answer to number 7 but it raises more questions. Will the screen be able to move in such a way that it shows half right side of the map half left side? Is there a way to change the minimap so that it reflects the map as continuous instead of the flat square it is now (ie: make a more globe-like minimap that changes as look at different sides of the map).
I think the answers right now are obviously no as the ability for units to attack isn't present but I'm still hopeful.
Man there were some damn good questions submitted as always, I wonder what the other fansites got, hopefully some of the questions will have decent depth
Q: We have heard many times that the map editor is capable of almost anything, but does this hold true for melee as well? Will you be able to implement map related features, such as different types of terrain (slowing, damage over time, energy regenerating, etc.), portals, or bridges and such, for ladder/melee maps?
A:Yes, players will be able to create special areas on the map as mentioned, though players will probably have to create them using invisible objects with those properties rather than have those properties be tied with the actual visual texture itself.
.
hmm I wonder if they actually meant, that it is possible on non-ums maps aswell. It seems that he just answered the generally possibility of such things.
The Map Editor should just be released as a separate game. Sheesh, I'd pay $30 bucks for it alone ;p On a serious note, I'm really glad they decided to keep upgrade thresholds.
This is one of the best Q&A's to date imo. Big thx to TL and to Blizz.
I was extremely pleased to see that Blizz is very aware of the Dark Pylon's shortcomings and are working on it. It was the only 1 of the 3 "macro" mechanics that seemed a little weak to me. Wow, it made me feel good to read that.
Q: We have heard many times that the map editor is capable of almost anything, but does this hold true for melee as well? Will you be able to implement map related features, such as different types of terrain (slowing, damage over time, energy regenerating, etc.), portals, or bridges and such, for ladder/melee maps?
A:Yes, players will be able to create special areas on the map as mentioned, though players will probably have to create them using invisible objects with those properties rather than have those properties be tied with the actual visual texture itself.
.
hmm I wonder if they actually meant, that it is possible on non-ums maps aswell. It seems that he just answered the generally possibility of such things.
Maybe UMS and Melee will have no seperation at all?
Sounds like unlike the original, they are putting a lot of effort into the AI for SCII. Sounds very fun. Maybe now making the jump from playing against the comp to playing on BNet will not be so daunting.
EDIT: FA, you may want to put this info into your OP since it came out at roughly the same time and doesn't really deserve its own thread.
Someone needs to tell them to make 1v1 maps that adjust based on the MU the map is used with. So MU on each map can be fixed without affecting the other MUs. Like a main will be different for once race. Possibilities could range from choke side to mineral count to cliffs that can be dropped on or not, etc etc.
The overall map will be the same whatever the MU is but some parts of the map have multiple versions which depend on the races that are used. One could have a specific main for each race and you will always get that main no matter what.
And then you can also have 2 starting locations on a map where there are 4 spots. But the spots that don't get used don't have an empty main but some other terrain feature.
Q: We have heard many times that the map editor is capable of almost anything, but does this hold true for melee as well? Will you be able to implement map related features, such as different types of terrain (slowing, damage over time, energy regenerating, etc.), portals, or bridges and such, for ladder/melee maps?
A:Yes, players will be able to create special areas on the map as mentioned, though players will probably have to create them using invisible objects with those properties rather than have those properties be tied with the actual visual texture itself.
.
hmm I wonder if they actually meant, that it is possible on non-ums maps aswell. It seems that he just answered the generally possibility of such things.
Maybe UMS and Melee will have no seperation at all?
They will, we can only hope they allow us to customize the melee map options more though.
I'd like to know if the AI cheats... e.g. just gets more money or anything like that. Or if the AI simply micros/macros like a god and scouts, using scouted information to counter correctly, reverting to super safe builds in the case of having its scout blocked etc... This is the kind of AI we need.
On April 16 2009 07:39 FrozenArbiter wrote: Maybe UMS and Melee will have no seperation at all?
That is very likely. Ladder maps are whatever Blizzard decides what the AMM will use for the season. All other maps will be custom games.
On the flipside I hope they come with something different, if its exactly like wc3 it will be a bit boring after awhile. Also, I hope they use something like the old wc3 AMM, that it was harder to lvl up and lvls meant something(if we have levels, so to speak), not the newer one where mass gaming will level you up anyways.
it's threads like these that make me happy for Blizz and TL
11 Q: Will people be able to join games after they've started (as an observer) and will you be able to boot observers (or people that abuse the ping function) from games?
A:No, players will not be able to join after a game has started, though we have yet to decide how to handle observers in a game and who has the right to boot players.
damn I was really hoping that people could join existing games as both players and observers. Being able to join as players for team melee maps (oooh i hope they're still adding this.. I fear they don't have any plans.. we should remind Blizz!) and UMS maps (like micro tourney) would be cool. Not to mention the obvious join as observer would make even more sense and be such a nice feature.
I wonder why they gave such a strong 'No this is not going to happen' answer? I can't see any reasons why they wouldn't allow this possibility, I don't think it should be difficult to implement.. they had it for Diablo 2 .. is it because the games will be hosted by the game creator rather than by Blizz's server?
On April 16 2009 06:53 FrozenArbiter wrote:
10 Q: Will observers and replays have a player's view option, not just see what they have selected but actually move the screen to what they are viewing?
A:Yes, viewers will be able to watch from any player’s perspective.
this makes me very happy, but I really really hope we can also see the player's cursor as well. just seeing the player's screen and selection without what he is actually doing with his mouse, selecting/box selecting, giving move/attack commands, and being able to tell if he's clicking to select or using hotkeys, would all be nice to be able to see.
_______________________
I've a random question for anyone who's been following SC2 closely:
Did Blizz ever mention anything about being able to watch replays over Battle.net?
If so, it would be nice if the game host could have some options within the game to load other replays whenever they'd like without having to re-create for each rep.
Q: Is it possible to create maps which wrap around? So that the right edge leads back onto the left, creating a spherical space?
A: Yes, it is currently possible to create a map in which units can move from one side to the other, though there isn’t coding provided yet that would allow units to shoot from one side to the other.
I think I'm going crazy.
Looking at the way he phrased it, I think he just means you can make locations that stretch all the way down the sides of the map, and when units enter it they will appear on the other side of the map. You can prob do something just like it in SC1. Remember this is PR, not brutal honesty. They are probably phrasing a lot of things to make them sound more appealing than they actually are.
holy shit, I am so excited about number 7. That would allow for some really cool maps and some really interesting gameplay. Great questions, and great answers. Best Q&A in a very long time.
On April 16 2009 07:53 Diomedes wrote: Someone needs to tell them to make 1v1 maps that adjust based on the MU the map is used with. So MU on each map can be fixed without affecting the other MUs. Like a main will be different for once race. Possibilities could range from choke side to mineral count to cliffs that can be dropped on or not, etc etc.
The overall map will be the same whatever the MU is but some parts of the map have multiple versions which depend on the races that are used. One could have a specific main for each race and you will always get that main no matter what.
And then you can also have 2 starting locations on a map where there are 4 spots. But the spots that don't get used don't have an empty main but some other terrain feature.
On April 16 2009 07:53 Diomedes wrote: Someone needs to tell them to make 1v1 maps that adjust based on the MU the map is used with. So MU on each map can be fixed without affecting the other MUs. Like a main will be different for once race. Possibilities could range from choke side to mineral count to cliffs that can be dropped on or not, etc etc.
The overall map will be the same whatever the MU is but some parts of the map have multiple versions which depend on the races that are used. One could have a specific main for each race and you will always get that main no matter what.
And then you can also have 2 starting locations on a map where there are 4 spots. But the spots that don't get used don't have an empty main but some other terrain feature.
How do you deal with people that play random? Do you just treat that as an additional race?
In relation to question 8, remember a while ago we had a thread about stuff like the xel'naga tower and we were saying there should be stuff like xel'naga bridges that require psi units to activate them and they materialise? You could realise this by putting a row of invisible (even to detectors) invincible supply depos that submerge when certain units are near the trigger.
This only applies of course if they don't have awesome stuff like that already in the editor (which I think they will) this is just an alternative solution
On April 16 2009 07:53 Diomedes wrote: Someone needs to tell them to make 1v1 maps that adjust based on the MU the map is used with. So MU on each map can be fixed without affecting the other MUs. Like a main will be different for once race. Possibilities could range from choke side to mineral count to cliffs that can be dropped on or not, etc etc.
The overall map will be the same whatever the MU is but some parts of the map have multiple versions which depend on the races that are used. One could have a specific main for each race and you will always get that main no matter what.
And then you can also have 2 starting locations on a map where there are 4 spots. But the spots that don't get used don't have an empty main but some other terrain feature.
How do you deal with people that play random? Do you just treat that as an additional race?
Once the game decides what race they'll spawn as it puts them in the appropriate place
great questions. as for #10, it would be pretty awesome if it was possible to do a split screen with both players POVs. seeing the actions from both players on the same battle simultaneously would be amazing. this is probably just wishful thinking though
In #10 I'm not so sure that means that every replay has a FPVOD of every player, I think it just means you can turn off vision of the other player like in SC1, but in SC2 you can at least see their actions on-screen (such as movement commands), but I think you still will need to control the camera. I only say this because it seems like it'd be really hard to have an exact FPVOD of every player with every replay, and so if they actually had that they would say it and not "Yes, viewers will be able to watch from any player’s perspective."
I feel #2's answer COMPLETELY does not relate to the question at all. I don't see the answer to the question "clearly presented me with the problem of being forced to deal with the consequences of certain types of harass or assault while I saw them coming a mile away"
Have we ever gotten a straight answer about B.net latency? I am really hoping they will increase the "polling rate," so to speak, so that we don't have to resort to third-party servers for advanced micro.
Awesome, great answers, I especially liked 2, 3 and 10. I guess they must have really boosted Collossi as well seeing as how they can apparently one-shot unupgraded marines oO
A very nice Q&A, but the answer to Q2 kind of disappointed me. They didn't really answer the question although I assume that they mean there won't be units like scourge. Blizzard sort of seems to be missing the point of the question.
As an aside: have the TL admins noticed any sort of a spike in registrations to this website since you were the first to be linked (directly linked, I might add) by Blizzard?
1. What strategies/units are being used in different matchups? In BW terran for example uses exclusively mech against protoss, could you give some brief examples of what it's like in SC2 right now, and how it has evolved during development?
8. Are there still plans for making the editor available during the beta period?
14. Will there be backwards compatibility for watching older replays on newer versions of sc (for example by keeping all the patch data of previous versions backed up)? Will we be able to watch replays online with friends? If so can replay games be host publicly instead of private only?
15. Are there any plans to allow players to save a game state from a replay or immediately play from that point? In a similar manner, will there be a "Save on disconnect" feature, allowing players to resume games where one player disconnects, in the way they would a saved game?
On April 16 2009 13:23 OnceKing wrote: A very nice Q&A, but the answer to Q2 kind of disappointed me. They didn't really answer the question although I assume that they mean there won't be units like scourge. Blizzard sort of seems to be missing the point of the question.
yea, they really danced around this question. i was disappointed as well.
I don't think they avoided any question. They purposely did not giving a straight answer because it would probably give away more than they wanted. I doubt they didn't answer straight because they didn't understand the question. Some people at TL think the Blizzard guys are retarded or something and can't understand a question but it's probably just that they don't want to give you the most detailed answer in the world.
On April 16 2009 13:23 OnceKing wrote: A very nice Q&A, but the answer to Q2 kind of disappointed me. They didn't really answer the question although I assume that they mean there won't be units like scourge. Blizzard sort of seems to be missing the point of the question.
yea, they really danced around this question. i was disappointed as well.
IMO that answer was goodish actually - yeah, no scourges, but instead more detection. I duno, I think it can work.
On April 16 2009 13:23 OnceKing wrote: A very nice Q&A, but the answer to Q2 kind of disappointed me. They didn't really answer the question although I assume that they mean there won't be units like scourge. Blizzard sort of seems to be missing the point of the question.
yea, they really danced around this question. i was disappointed as well.
IMO that answer was goodish actually - yeah, no scourges, but instead more detection. I duno, I think it can work.
Well, it was more of a remark than an actual question (not in the way it was phrased, but in it's content). I think the answer was decent, but that question should be sent to the devs to look into it perhaps. I think it's the best question in the batch. I trust blizzard anyways though, so I guess the way they though it up will be just as epic.
About the replay question: I hope this won't work like it did in WC3 where the screen follows whatever the player has selected (even if his screen isn't actually where the selected item is). This function (unless it was changed later on) was pretty frustrating in WC3 since your screen was just boucing around for split seconds (and it actually moved from point A to point B, rather than just changing locations as it would if you clicked on the mini-map). Blizz's answer is pretty vague. They just say you can follow whatever is selected. Anyways, the closer we can get to an FPreplay , the better. The ideal situation would be seeing everysingle action as though the game were being played, by the player, on your screen.
I am very disappointed by answer 11. I don't think Blizzard realizes the e-sports potential of having observers being able to join at any moment.
It would be really nice if you just want to watch some games to see a list of players who are currently playing, so you can just go in and kibbutz. If lag is a concern, they don't even have to have the players in the same room per se. It would be a nice thing to make high level ladder an affair with an audience and some prestige (though I guess if high level players were under a microscope every time they played it wouldn't be as good).
I diagress, but the main point is it wouldn't be difficult to add.
It would be especially nice for UMS role playing games as well.
Its just a nice feature all around, and I'm sad to see them shut the door on it so hard.
As an aside: have the TL admins noticed any sort of a spike in registrations to this website since you were the first to be linked (directly linked, I might add) by Blizzard?
No, infact we should probably get some kind of block up to protect us from the scourge of the b.net forums.
On April 16 2009 21:13 GeneralStan wrote: I am very disappointed by answer 11. I don't think Blizzard realizes the e-sports potential of having observers being able to join at any moment.
it would have to be managed carefully , it could distract the players say if laggers joined mid game or people kept leaving and joining quickly.i would say give kicking powers to someone but who? it couldnt be a player or he may kick off his opponent if he is being beaten in the game.
As for the new map features, I really hope those things will be implemented as standard tools in Map Editor. I know some of these can already be done in WC3's editor, but I honestly could care less about them if you have to resort to Troy-like gimmicky tricks in order to make them work. ;/
Why can't they simply start gradually implementing the more interesting features suggested by the community after the launch of beta? ;; It's not like they have to balance anything, and making some textures/models look up to par shouldn't be too time consuming, seeing as most of the modeling, etc. is more or less finished.
On April 16 2009 11:10 OmgIRok wrote: I feel #2's answer COMPLETELY does not relate to the question at all. I don't see the answer to the question "clearly presented me with the problem of being forced to deal with the consequences of certain types of harass or assault while I saw them coming a mile away"
Yeah my question got dodged :D. Guess its a bit to game technical for the person anwering it.
Great that they are doing this kind of thing though regardless and most of the questions were really good and the answers really satisfying. Good stuff!
On April 16 2009 11:10 OmgIRok wrote: I feel #2's answer COMPLETELY does not relate to the question at all. I don't see the answer to the question "clearly presented me with the problem of being forced to deal with the consequences of certain types of harass or assault while I saw them coming a mile away"
Yeah my question got dodged :D. Guess its a bit to game technical for the person anwering it.
Great that they are doing this kind of thing though regardless and most of the questions were really good and the answers really satisfying. Good stuff!
Ehh, aren't they basically saying "Yes, wou will have to deal with the consequences - HOWEVER! You'll have more time to prepare for said consequences with the new scouting etc".
On April 17 2009 00:37 FrozenArbiter wrote: Ehh, aren't they basically saying "Yes, wou will have to deal with the consequences - HOWEVER! You'll have more time to prepare for said consequences with the new scouting etc".
^ this. Since you'll have more mobility yourself, you can squash any drop attempt if you see it coming since you'll be fully prepared for it.
On April 17 2009 00:37 FrozenArbiter wrote: Ehh, aren't they basically saying "Yes, wou will have to deal with the consequences - HOWEVER! You'll have more time to prepare for said consequences with the new scouting etc".
^ this. Since you'll have more mobility yourself, you can squash any drop attempt if you see it coming since you'll be fully prepared for it.
Which is terrible since youll still have to fully commit against it, theres no easy to beat a drop or phaseprism option such as scourges or that fast 1 wraith or some golliaths.
That drop WILL unload unless you are heavily invested in flyers. Even then with a flew flyers you cant stop that phaseprism from just setting up and warping in anyway. I'm still heavily hoping for some scourgelike unit or ability that will alow Z to deal easier with it, plus smartcasting and a Tier2 Ghost I was hoping they would still have lockdown do deal with these kind of threats. P I'm a bit at a loss at, esp since corsairs also disappeared.
Plus try playing SC1 as Z without scourges and try to kill an observer to increase the effectiveness of your lurkers and stop a P dead in his tracks or to kill sciencevessels in ZvT without plague and scourges anymore. Good luck.
Warp-in is like a tier 2 Recall not even to mention a quick fix to stop those overlords/overseeers to start those nydus worms in your base. Unless you have a large amount of units in your base at all times and even then you WILL get warped, wormed, dropped. When playing TvP in SC2 you cant just go straight pure metal due to costs and unit inefficiency compared to SC1. Marine marauder ghost was a really good way to open up and add metal support/switch in mid/lategame. Especially with the slowgrenades and the marine upgrades (shield and you start with increased range already compared to SC1). Except that when they just sit 2 phaseprisms over highground at either side of your base (think reaver drop speed/timing gamemoment wise) there is nothing you can do to stop those units from warping in except by making a starport and getting some Vikings which is totally out of the way of anything you wanted to do and is for the rest useless against P untill they come out with the lategame warpprisms and carriers.
Its detracting from positive and smoothe gameflow and forces too easily that you have to leave a chunk at home to deal with the warped in units or to build (at that point in the game) useless building/units to deal with it breaking your gameflow, builds, etc.
Plus as a Zerg having to deal with observers, nighthawks, medivacs, phaseprisms, carriers (with even longer range!), warpprisms... just... t_t. The scourge is just a too essential unit in my opinion to counter these things. I'm hoping the Queen will provide a good harass counter with its spells and mobility but that still leaves you with no good and easy way except for a pricy investment in mutas or corruptors (which I hope they pumped up 200% cause they sucked so hard they were useless due to no ground attack at all and corruption being way way way to weak, no antiground attacks working and nonpermanent corruption... just weaken the effect and make the corrupted units permanent no lame broodling in SC1 effect)
There needs to be a fast and (cost) effective way of dealing with these kind of theats when you see them comming. Scourges, lockdown, EMP (against recall in SC1), fast 1 wraith (wont stop a warpin though), some ranged golliaths have all been excellent solutions, albeit a bit impractical in the case of lockdown cost/tech and nonsmartcasting wise, to stop harass. I feel a sore hole in SC2 to cover this.
This is an issue that just grinds my gears. I hope I get a shot at the Beta so I can voice an educated opinion on these issues and provide some suggestions and critique.
On April 16 2009 11:10 OmgIRok wrote: I feel #2's answer COMPLETELY does not relate to the question at all. I don't see the answer to the question "clearly presented me with the problem of being forced to deal with the consequences of certain types of harass or assault while I saw them coming a mile away"
Yeah my question got dodged :D. Guess its a bit to game technical for the person anwering it.
Great that they are doing this kind of thing though regardless and most of the questions were really good and the answers really satisfying. Good stuff!
Ehh, aren't they basically saying "Yes, wou will have to deal with the consequences - HOWEVER! You'll have more time to prepare for said consequences with the new scouting etc".
Well really I think Nyvone's question was on the point that you couldn't stop the drop even had you scouted it if you had no units available to stop it. It wouldn't exactly be practical to build static defense everywhere, would it? The entire point of the question, I think, was to make units that could stop it immediately.
I don't think Nyovne's question was dodged at all, I think it was well answered. They said they wanna make up the lack of scourges with more scouting and mobility. And I don't understand why do you think that cannot be balanced.
Its detracting from positive and smoothe gameflow and forces too easily that you have to leave a chunk at home to deal with the warped in units or to build (at that point in the game) useless building/units to deal with it breaking your gameflow, builds, etc
Plus as a Zerg having to deal with observers, nighthawks, medivacs, phaseprisms, carriers (with even longer range!), warpprisms... just... t_t. The scourge is just a too essential unit in my opinion to counter these things.
How can you know such things? We don't know how good our alternative anti air are gonna be. It's all a matter of how the balancing goes, numbers will change a lot, we're not even on beta yet. As you said it yourself "they pumped the damage of the corrupter by 200% because it sucked", how can you know they won't become half decent snipers after release? 3 or 4 Hydras was killing nighthawks absurdly fast on that battle report. Plus we can MOVE our spore colonies now.
I don't see anything wrong with their idea of toning down drop sniping. It just a matter of balancing the numbers. I honestly think scourges should have changed one way or the other, while I do think it's fun as hell to watch them in action. I must admit, that are many strategies that could be fun but are never used against zergs because scourges hard counters it so bad. If nerfing our anti-air ends up producing more strategy variety overall than I am all for it.
edit: btw I just reminded of a game not so long ago that the terran made a valk tvz, and whoever was commenting said something like "this might actually be a good strategy, valks are good for this and that, this could open a whole new branch of strategies for tvz and it... oh nvm they got scourged..." That's what I think about scourges...
Yeah number 10 is amazing. Being able to FPVOD games with a simple replay will be *such* a useful tool for players who seek to teach others how to play effectively.
The part of the answer to #2 that I didn't like was that it didn't seem to address what I thought was the most important premise of the original question, which is:
"I have played [a version] of SC2 and when I played it I was unable to stop the aforementioned harassment attacks despite knowing that they were coming well ahead of time, how are you planning to address this"?
I guess I was hoping for some acknowledgment that it was in fact a problem at one point (or still is and they are working on fixing it) or an explanation on why they don't think it is a problem or maybe some specific examples on how exactly you would counter some of the attacks mentioned in such a way that would leave you ahead, since ultimately that is what a failed harass should do, it should leave the successful defender in an advantageous position proportional to the amount or resources spent by the attacker trying to get his harass off.
regarding #2 and zerg needing something to snipe air units: Toying with the idea of zerg (maybe the queen?) having the ensnare ability, but on top of slowing units down it also binds them together so that they cannot run far from each other or spread out. That might help slow down scouted and incoming drops, so that hydras can go mop up.
Might be a bad idea tho, i haven't really considered how it tips the delicate scale of balance.
On April 17 2009 00:37 FrozenArbiter wrote: Ehh, aren't they basically saying "Yes, wou will have to deal with the consequences - HOWEVER! You'll have more time to prepare for said consequences with the new scouting etc".
^ this. Since you'll have more mobility yourself, you can squash any drop attempt if you see it coming since you'll be fully prepared for it.
Which is terrible since youll still have to fully commit against it, theres no easy to beat a drop or phaseprism option such as scourges or that fast 1 wraith or some golliaths.
That drop WILL unload unless you are heavily invested in flyers. Even then with a flew flyers you cant stop that phaseprism from just setting up and warping in anyway. I'm still heavily hoping for some scourgelike unit or ability that will alow Z to deal easier with it, plus smartcasting and a Tier2 Ghost I was hoping they would still have lockdown do deal with these kind of threats. P I'm a bit at a loss at, esp since corsairs also disappeared.
Plus try playing SC1 as Z without scourges and try to kill an observer to increase the effectiveness of your lurkers and stop a P dead in his tracks or to kill sciencevessels in ZvT without plague and scourges anymore. Good luck.
Warp-in is like a tier 2 Recall not even to mention a quick fix to stop those overlords/overseeers to start those nydus worms in your base. Unless you have a large amount of units in your base at all times and even then you WILL get warped, wormed, dropped. When playing TvP in SC2 you cant just go straight pure metal due to costs and unit inefficiency compared to SC1. Marine marauder ghost was a really good way to open up and add metal support/switch in mid/lategame. Especially with the slowgrenades and the marine upgrades (shield and you start with increased range already compared to SC1). Except that when they just sit 2 phaseprisms over highground at either side of your base (think reaver drop speed/timing gamemoment wise) there is nothing you can do to stop those units from warping in except by making a starport and getting some Vikings which is totally out of the way of anything you wanted to do and is for the rest useless against P untill they come out with the lategame warpprisms and carriers.
Its detracting from positive and smoothe gameflow and forces too easily that you have to leave a chunk at home to deal with the warped in units or to build (at that point in the game) useless building/units to deal with it breaking your gameflow, builds, etc.
Plus as a Zerg having to deal with observers, nighthawks, medivacs, phaseprisms, carriers (with even longer range!), warpprisms... just... t_t. The scourge is just a too essential unit in my opinion to counter these things. I'm hoping the Queen will provide a good harass counter with its spells and mobility but that still leaves you with no good and easy way except for a pricy investment in mutas or corruptors (which I hope they pumped up 200% cause they sucked so hard they were useless due to no ground attack at all and corruption being way way way to weak, no antiground attacks working and nonpermanent corruption... just weaken the effect and make the corrupted units permanent no lame broodling in SC1 effect)
There needs to be a fast and (cost) effective way of dealing with these kind of theats when you see them comming. Scourges, lockdown, EMP (against recall in SC1), fast 1 wraith (wont stop a warpin though), some ranged golliaths have all been excellent solutions, albeit a bit impractical in the case of lockdown cost/tech and nonsmartcasting wise, to stop harass. I feel a sore hole in SC2 to cover this.
This is an issue that just grinds my gears. I hope I get a shot at the Beta so I can voice an educated opinion on these issues and provide some suggestions and critique.
All of this is pure speculation. You dont know the game, the macro, the units, thus you cant say how easy or how hard it will be to beat e.g. a prism drop.
It grinds my eyes to see that you think you can conclude so much, based on mere speculations.
Have you ever thought about the fact that maybe the game will mainly play around the extreme mobility, which in turn will give very fast pased games and require even more multitasking, because "normal sc1'esque" herassment will also be viable.
On April 17 2009 00:37 FrozenArbiter wrote: Ehh, aren't they basically saying "Yes, wou will have to deal with the consequences - HOWEVER! You'll have more time to prepare for said consequences with the new scouting etc".
^ this. Since you'll have more mobility yourself, you can squash any drop attempt if you see it coming since you'll be fully prepared for it.
Which is terrible since youll still have to fully commit against it, theres no easy to beat a drop or phaseprism option such as scourges or that fast 1 wraith or some golliaths.
That drop WILL unload unless you are heavily invested in flyers. Even then with a flew flyers you cant stop that phaseprism from just setting up and warping in anyway. I'm still heavily hoping for some scourgelike unit or ability that will alow Z to deal easier with it, plus smartcasting and a Tier2 Ghost I was hoping they would still have lockdown do deal with these kind of threats. P I'm a bit at a loss at, esp since corsairs also disappeared.
Plus try playing SC1 as Z without scourges and try to kill an observer to increase the effectiveness of your lurkers and stop a P dead in his tracks or to kill sciencevessels in ZvT without plague and scourges anymore. Good luck.
Warp-in is like a tier 2 Recall not even to mention a quick fix to stop those overlords/overseeers to start those nydus worms in your base. Unless you have a large amount of units in your base at all times and even then you WILL get warped, wormed, dropped. When playing TvP in SC2 you cant just go straight pure metal due to costs and unit inefficiency compared to SC1. Marine marauder ghost was a really good way to open up and add metal support/switch in mid/lategame. Especially with the slowgrenades and the marine upgrades (shield and you start with increased range already compared to SC1). Except that when they just sit 2 phaseprisms over highground at either side of your base (think reaver drop speed/timing gamemoment wise) there is nothing you can do to stop those units from warping in except by making a starport and getting some Vikings which is totally out of the way of anything you wanted to do and is for the rest useless against P untill they come out with the lategame warpprisms and carriers.
Its detracting from positive and smoothe gameflow and forces too easily that you have to leave a chunk at home to deal with the warped in units or to build (at that point in the game) useless building/units to deal with it breaking your gameflow, builds, etc.
Plus as a Zerg having to deal with observers, nighthawks, medivacs, phaseprisms, carriers (with even longer range!), warpprisms... just... t_t. The scourge is just a too essential unit in my opinion to counter these things. I'm hoping the Queen will provide a good harass counter with its spells and mobility but that still leaves you with no good and easy way except for a pricy investment in mutas or corruptors (which I hope they pumped up 200% cause they sucked so hard they were useless due to no ground attack at all and corruption being way way way to weak, no antiground attacks working and nonpermanent corruption... just weaken the effect and make the corrupted units permanent no lame broodling in SC1 effect)
There needs to be a fast and (cost) effective way of dealing with these kind of theats when you see them comming. Scourges, lockdown, EMP (against recall in SC1), fast 1 wraith (wont stop a warpin though), some ranged golliaths have all been excellent solutions, albeit a bit impractical in the case of lockdown cost/tech and nonsmartcasting wise, to stop harass. I feel a sore hole in SC2 to cover this.
This is an issue that just grinds my gears. I hope I get a shot at the Beta so I can voice an educated opinion on these issues and provide some suggestions and critique.
All of this is pure speculation. You dont know the game, the macro, the units, thus you cant say how easy or how hard it will be to beat e.g. a prism drop.
It grinds my eyes to see that you think you can conclude so much, based on mere speculations.
Have you ever thought about the fact that maybe the game will mainly play around the extreme mobility, which in turn will give very fast pased games and require even more multitasking, because "normal sc1'esque" herassment will also be viable.
I base this on give or take 70 games played tyvm, allthough an older build, nothing introduced or changed up to this point that has been made public changed anything concerning the issues I stated and experienced if not made them worse.
And lol @ more multitasking hahahahahha, integrated rally commands, MBS, infinite squadsize and especially the interaction of said implementations. Ahaha oh god more multitasking, try playing the game and then come back to me.
On April 17 2009 14:43 Plethora wrote: The part of the answer to #2 that I didn't like was that it didn't seem to address what I thought was the most important premise of the original question, which is:
"I have played [a version] of SC2 and when I played it I was unable to stop the aforementioned harassment attacks despite knowing that they were coming well ahead of time, how are you planning to address this"?
I guess I was hoping for some acknowledgment that it was in fact a problem at one point (or still is and they are working on fixing it) or an explanation on why they don't think it is a problem or maybe some specific examples on how exactly you would counter some of the attacks mentioned in such a way that would leave you ahead, since ultimately that is what a failed harass should do, it should leave the successful defender in an advantageous position proportional to the amount or resources spent by the attacker trying to get his harass off.
Thanks for saying in a summier way what I failed to express in my rant.
Not to nitpick, but couldn't the answer about watching reps from a players' perspective mean the we can only do what we can do in War3, where the game automatically centers on units that receive orders once they receive them, allowing you to watch the replay without touching the mouse or keyboard, but getting a vastly different view from what the player saw while playing the game?
Wouldn't have they gone into greater detail of true FPReps were implemented?
Q: We have heard many times that the map editor is capable of almost anything, but does this hold true for melee as well? Will you be able to implement map related features, such as different types of terrain (slowing, damage over time, energy regenerating, etc.), portals, or bridges and such, for ladder/melee maps?
A:Yes, players will be able to create special areas on the map as mentioned, though players will probably have to create them using invisible objects with those properties rather than have those properties be tied with the actual visual texture itself.
.
hmm I wonder if they actually meant, that it is possible on non-ums maps aswell. It seems that he just answered the generally possibility of such things.
Maybe UMS and Melee will have no seperation at all?
They didn't in wc3 so obviously they wont in sc2.
The only reason it had any separation in sc1 is because it tracked stats for melee maps but not for UMS maps, otherwise there is no reason to.
Q: Is it possible to create maps which wrap around? So that the right edge leads back onto the left, creating a spherical space?
A: Yes, it is currently possible to create a map in which units can move from one side to the other, though there isn’t coding provided yet that would allow units to shoot from one side to the other.
I think I'm going crazy.
Looking at the way he phrased it, I think he just means you can make locations that stretch all the way down the sides of the map, and when units enter it they will appear on the other side of the map. You can prob do something just like it in SC1. Remember this is PR, not brutal honesty. They are probably phrasing a lot of things to make them sound more appealing than they actually are.
Have you played with the teleporters in wc3? Basically they work like a pathing node and units paths automatically through them if going through it is the shortest distance, which makes them seem a ton more seamless than the clunky starcraft teleporters.
It could very well be that they improved this further again and now allow you to make areas bound together instead of having discrete points like wc3.
I can see how one can fail a drop and be at a significant disadvantage in a few ways.....
Terran: Terran still get mines, though there is an harass window before nighthawks that one might simply have to camp at base if one goes a ground only build unless going for a timing push. Lack of Air to ground from the robo tech tree means mines can not be cleared outside of suicide units as is now, and that is simply too expensive against what is likely a low energy ability that can be spammed like hell. Besides, we know terrans don't really use snipe abilities (unless you are boxer) against drop tricks, but simply more turrets and more AA units which they still have. If the phase prism is slow (and it probably would be far slower than a speed shuttle), an patrolling vikings would eat it for lunch long before it is close to base and newly improved terran air and lack of corsair might mean they can actually go for air builds themselves as opposed to using them only for niche support and a starport would probably become a near mandatory buildings (for infantry-medivac, nighthawk detect/support, viking AA and banshee harass to force cannons which wouldn't be used against reaper due to mines)
Zerg: banelings is the zerg mine rise out of the ground and thats the end of that. In any case, zerg can just nydus back and not be at an disadvantage if the protoss tries to use phase prism tricks. A few loaded units plus one round of production is no match for entire army warping there instantly via nydus. Without uber imba tricks like cliffed tanks, cloaked units or insanely fast and damaging strike groups that also avoid all the info-lings/lords on the map, drop harass stuff like that just don't work. Protoss no longer having corsair means Zerg can always contest the air and transport builds are doomed when mutas comes around. The protoss would need to fight for air superiority with tooth and nail before they can have free regin of prism movement which is countered by nydus movement.
Its detracting from positive and smoothe gameflow and forces too easily that you have to leave a chunk at home to deal with the warped in units or to build (at that point in the game) useless building/units to deal with it breaking your gameflow, builds, etc
Plus as a Zerg having to deal with observers, nighthawks, medivacs, phaseprisms, carriers (with even longer range!), warpprisms... just... t_t. The scourge is just a too essential unit in my opinion to counter these things.
As far as I'm concerned, nothing transports can do can beat a (SC1) mutalisk harassment and no transport build can beat a mutalisk stack.
In SC1, mutalisk harassments can and do keep terran players stuck in their base spamming missile turrets while waiting for a hard counter more often than not. Having to build a viking to beat prism harassment is no more flow breaking than having to build sci vessels to beat mutalisk harassments. Mutalisks can also be everywhere that is not the map edge, while phase prism and their ground units need space to deploy and would workn't against a good simcity with enough AA/small arms surrounding well cliffed seige tanks. Drop harass just don't work on maps where everywhere you drop ends up on a mine, reaper mine or concentrated seige blasts.
Since immortals don't have AA and stalkers are relatively bad against terran (can't dodge seige blasts and gets shot if in range to shoot marines and most of its cost is in blink), I fully expect protoss early-mid game armies to have little AA. Because of this, terran air units are actually quite safe. It might be entirely possible that in the future, it is terrans that drop the protoss as opposed to vice versa since colossus is no reaver and building a sizable stalker army to protect prisms from even a handful of vikings is too expensive, and protoss would rather tech speed-zeal templar instead of this one shot prism business since no uber reaver comes out of it. If the protoss do go for robotics tech first, then terran can go air to counter since air units counter ALL of the protoss robotics tech, and an army of banshees mixed with a few vikings would kill everything in the protoss army that is not a stalker. (while airmobile infantry kills the stalkers while laughing haha u aint got no storm/speedzeals and thats the end of that)..... the only way protosses can make the build works is to kill the marines with colossus and shoot the air with stalker, and with a unit combo like that, prisms aren't really needed since they all cliff walk. Only if the terran goes factory heavy while protoss goes robotics would the whole prism thing come into play....and being stuck with slowlots and no storm and no tank sniping reavers against biomech isn't exactly nice...having the prism probably just prevent the protoss getting rolled silly as 12 range tanks snipe the colossus (with the I can't transport dodge slow firing animation) while marines cleans everything else....
As for zerg having to deal with air units, without corsairs means Zerg can happily spam mutalisks (if they are anywhere near as strong as SC1) and just roll everything that is not protected by cheap/splash ground to air (thor/archon) and they wouldn't be at anywhere ground units aren't. Imagine corsair reaver without the corsair... or dropships against 2hat muta....that is just too funny. The alternative for the opposing races is to spam heavy air of their own, and it ends up like muta vs 2port wraith since no one have reliable air splash units (nighthawk missile can probably be dodged given its speed) only works if one wins the air battle decisively and still have left over money for stuff like that.
Without corsairs, I think protoss going robotics (phase prism) first is just asking to autolose via mutalisk against zerg. They would probably have to get templar tech and some archons or serious, serious mass of phoneix (we are talking about comparable to the zerg numbers, not 6 and call it a day) before prism tricks would work at all, and only against someone whose nydus network one manages to snipe before the entire zerg army rolls back.
Its detracting from positive and smoothe gameflow and forces too easily that you have to leave a chunk at home to deal with the warped in units or to build (at that point in the game) useless building/units to deal with it breaking your gameflow, builds, etc
Plus as a Zerg having to deal with observers, nighthawks, medivacs, phaseprisms, carriers (with even longer range!), warpprisms... just... t_t. The scourge is just a too essential unit in my opinion to counter these things.
As far as I'm concerned, nothing transports can do can beat a (SC1) mutalisk harassment and no transport build can beat a mutalisk stack.
You should ask Chill about how it looks when one or two nydus worms pop up in your base (same tech as mutas) and someone unloads between 1 and 200 psi of zerg into your base.
Nydus worms rape mutastacks at WWI and blizzcon but they changed stuff about the way they are deployed/summoned/cast/created so can't really talk about that. But the concept of tier 2 unlimited transportation to any exit on the map was a bit sick :p.
Plus you are aware that there is no muta stacking in SC2 and they suck guts in hell right -.-
edit: and archons are so bad it hurts, but theyll still be built cause they just look SO COOOOOOL.
Nullifiers rock though, so underused at events but so powerfull.
edit: plus its hylarious to see you theorycraft against people who have actually played a version of the game lol. You just don't take any actual gameflow into consideration but reason on army X vs army Y while thats never the case. I'm adressing what I find to be a fundamental gap in unittype availability.
On April 18 2009 06:49 Chill wrote: It looks orgasmic, that's what.
Damn straight :D. Esp on that spacemap where there was this little piece of the back of each main where there was a "smokescreen" from vents on the floor where your units could just pass through but it blocked line of sight for ground units. So you'd have your overlords puke down some creep, warp that nydusworm in and then flood his main from cover while just rallying all your hatches into the nydus warren loool.
On April 18 2009 06:49 Chill wrote: It looks orgasmic, that's what.
Damn straight :D. Esp on that spacemap where there was this little piece of the back of each main where there was a "smokescreen" from vents on the floor where your units could just pass through but it blocked line of sight for ground units. So you'd have your overlords puke down some creep, warp that nydusworm in and then flood his main from cover while just rallying all your hatches into the nydus warren loool.
Hehe yeah it was tons of fun doing that but people will get the hang of it really quickly and start placing a supply or a pylon there so they can see you comming.
specifically im hoping one of the other sites questions puts them on the spot about LAN functionality , something they have been avoiding confirmation of (whether you will need to connect to bnet to play on LAN or whether the feature is plain not in the game)
On April 16 2009 23:43 Nyovne wrote: Yeah my question got dodged :D
On April 17 2009 02:10 Nyovne wrote: Which is terrible since youll still have to fully commit against it, theres no easy to beat a drop or phaseprism option such as scourges or that fast 1 wraith or some golliaths.
I can understand your not liking how that'll work out, but that's just how it's gonna be. Drops are just not going to be such a hit or miss thing in SC2, it seems.
On April 20 2009 06:35 ReS wrote: The blizzard forum post did not link the other Q&As yet, does anyone have those? (if available)
I believe that thread will be updated almost as soon as the new Q&As get revealed, only time that wouldn't be the case is if there's a time-zone clash I guess.
On April 20 2009 09:45 kakisama wrote: I never quite found out whether sc2 will have variable damage like warcraft. I hope not !
Well, technically there is variable damage, in the sense that many units' damage varies depending on whether they're attacking Light units, Armored units, buildings, biological units, etc.
What you probably meant to ask is whether there is a random component to the amount of damage a unit deals per attack. The answer is no, there is no random component to attack damage.
While on the topic of randomness- there's even less randomness in SC2 than in SC1. What's random about Starcraft, you say? Ranged fire vs. targets in higher ground or under cover (30% miss chance, I believe). In Starcraft, the success or failure of Dragoons and Vultures trying to break up a ramp in the early game (thinking of PvT, TvT) could be significantly influenced by the luck of the draw of whether the shots you take at the units blocking up the ramp hit or miss.
In SC2, not only is there no such thing as cover, but the bonus you get from attacking from higher ground is different than it is in SC1. Attacking from higher ground means the other guy can't see your units and thus can't fight back at all in SC2, because your units in higher ground don't reveal themselves briefly after firing- but if your enemy has some way of gaining vision on your units in the higher ground, then the enemy units in lower ground do not have miss chance when shooting up.
On April 20 2009 08:40 VoriuM wrote: In the battle report we could see the hydralisk has a meelee attack now. Is this attack different from the spines? (as in type of attack/damage)
No. The Hydralisk has ONE attack with two different animations.
On April 20 2009 08:40 VoriuM wrote: In the battle report we could see the hydralisk has a meelee attack now. Is this attack different from the spines? (as in type of attack/damage)
No. The Hydralisk has ONE attack with two different animations.
How do you know this for sure? It IS highly likely, but I haven't seen any official or definite news yet.
On April 20 2009 08:40 VoriuM wrote: In the battle report we could see the hydralisk has a meelee attack now. Is this attack different from the spines? (as in type of attack/damage)
No. The Hydralisk has ONE attack with two different animations.
How do you know this for sure? It IS highly likely, but I haven't seen any official or definite news yet.
Read the thread on this topic and you will see a quote and a link to where Browder confirmed that the only difference in the attacks was an animation.
On April 20 2009 12:08 Zato-1 wrote: While on the topic of randomness- there's even less randomness in SC2 than in SC1. What's random about Starcraft, you say? Ranged fire vs. targets in higher ground or under cover (30% miss chance, I believe). In Starcraft, the success or failure of Dragoons and Vultures trying to break up a ramp in the early game (thinking of PvT, TvT) could be significantly influenced by the luck of the draw of whether the shots you take at the units blocking up the ramp hit or miss.
In SC2, not only is there no such thing as cover, but the bonus you get from attacking from higher ground is different than it is in SC1. Attacking from higher ground means the other guy can't see your units and thus can't fight back at all in SC2, because your units in higher ground don't reveal themselves briefly after firing- but if your enemy has some way of gaining vision on your units in the higher ground, then the enemy units in lower ground do not have miss chance when shooting up.
No randomness makes me happy ^^
I agree that randomness has no place in a competitive game like this, and am glad that they removed it. I am still surprised that they didn't replace the 30% chance to miss with a 30% decrease in damage. That would net the same advantage without the randomness.
I think the main reason a system like this was not introduced is that it would effect weapon and armor upgrades in an unusual way. Making some units less or more effective vs a certain unit depending on height conditions (because of the effects of rounding of the damage). So I guess i'm glad its not in.
On April 25 2009 22:34 DeCoup wrote: I think the main reason a system like this was not introduced is that it would effect weapon and armor upgrades in an unusual way. Making some units less or more effective vs a certain unit depending on height conditions (because of the effects of rounding of the damage). So I guess i'm glad its not in.
Yea exactly, because of the way sc damage works a simple damage increase or reduction % could affect some units differently. Which would be at least bizarre. A unit that does 40 dmg to a unit that has 40 hp, you decrease that damage that unit does by 30% it wouldn't take 30% longer to kill it, it would take twice as long because now it needs two shots instead of one. If high ground was a static % damage reduction it would benefit some units better than others which would be really weird and unnatural.
EPT
Almost all of the questions were answered, so thanks to everyone for coming up with such interesting questions!
