Dynamic Unit Movement Collaborative Study

For those in support of Dynamic Unit Movement, I think we should do some testing of our own so that we can provide actual evidence of our claims (and disclaims) rather than "theorycrafting" the implications that dynamic movements will have on every aspect of the game. Basically what I mean is go through the scientific process of testing this modification against all the claimed benefits and detriments that might come with it.

Link to Petition

I have summarized many of the claims within the article "Dynamic Unit Movements, Your Thoughts?" below (note a couple of these may be my own additions):

Dynamic Unit Movement will lead to (all else equal):
- an increase or decrease in micro needed in battles (there are claims on both sides)
- a less dynamic Baneling vs Marine relationship
- "Dragoon Dancing" by units (namely stalkers?)
- an indirect nerf all AOE attacks and spells (which would justify a buff to damage and radius)
- a nerf to Protoss in general
- Marines will decrease in effectiveness against mass zerglings
- Melee units in general will perform better.
- Games will require larger maps
- The game will need to be modified so players can see more of the battle on their main screen b/c battles will be larger.
- Spectator value will improve
- Will result in longer battles
- Will result in many separate battles taking place
- Will result in armies getting backed up at ramps
- Reduce the effectiveness of forcefields
- Charge will be stronger, zealots in general will become stronger vs Terran
- Hellions are gonna suck

If there are things you think that should be added to the list, post them and I'll add them in when I can.

Since we have a petition on this would there be people interested in collaborating on pre-testing the effects of this change so that we can assemble a report to submit to blizzard?

Zapdos_Smithh

Canada2620 Posts

May 18 2011 07:32 GMT

A huge thing I believe is that damage-dealing AoE spells will be actually BUFFED. That's right buffed. Why? Let's look at some examples:

-Psi storm
Psi storm is simply not cool in the current state. Sure it does OK AoE damage...I mean that's the point..it's AoE damage, but it's kind of underwhelming. It looks awesome but in reality, due to the uneven damage being dealt in the storm, slight pause while the storm is visually coming down, and in general low damage in comparison to BW (80 in SC2 compared to a massive 112 in BW), it's just not used AS much as it should be. With units not being SO clumped together (of course they still can clump but it's possible to have each unit spread) this would allow for an increase in damage and a more of a WTF moment for spectators as well. Watching a storm currently isn't that exciting, but a higher damage storm would make it a LOT more exciting.

Hunter seeker missile is the same. The clumping just got it nerfed to death. Wasn't hunter seeker one of the most exciting things in beta? Jeez that was awesome. I would like to see that come back and actually be a viable option for Terran.

Fungal is pretty strong atm even though it's actually not THAT much damage, but the stopping effect is what makes it really strong so I can't see much of a change to that unless they reduce the freeze time to like 1 second and increase the damage which imo would be really exciting because Terran could actually micro DURING a battle after being fungal'd rather than "oh shit i didn't position properly, now I'm effed".

Stuff like that would make SC2 so much more exciting. And it's not like units are CONSTANTLY spread now, they can still clump for sure, and generally will when attacking etc....it's just that the option will allow for more decision making in micro which will be great for the game.

SkyCrawler

United States69 Posts

May 18 2011 07:43 GMT

On May 18 2011 16:32 Zapdos_Smithh wrote:
A huge thing I believe is that damage-dealing AoE spells will be actually BUFFED. That's right buffed. Why? Let's look at some examples:

-Psi storm
Psi storm is simply not cool in the current state. Sure it does OK AoE damage...I mean that's the point..it's AoE damage, but it's kind of underwhelming. It looks awesome but in reality, due to the uneven damage being dealt in the storm, slight pause while the storm is visually coming down, and in general low damage in comparison to BW (80 in SC2 compared to a massive 112 in BW), it's just not used AS much as it should be. With units not being SO clumped together (of course they still can clump but it's possible to have each unit spread, this would allow for an increase in damage and a more of a WTF moment for spectators as well. Watching a storm currently isn't that exciting, but a higher damage storm would make it a LOT more exciting.

Hunter seeker missile is the same. The clumping just got it nerfed to death. Wasn't hunter seeker one of the most exciting things in beta? Jeez that was awesome. I would like to see that come back and actually be a viable option for Terran.

Fungal is pretty strong atm even though it's actually not THAT much damage, but the stopping effect is what makes it really strong so I can't see much of a change to that unless they reduce the freeze time to like 1 second and increase the damage which imo would be really exciting because Terran could actually micro DURING a battle after being fungal'd rather than "oh shit i didn't position properly, now I'm effed".

Stuff like that would make SC2 so much more exciting. And it's not like units are CONSTANTLY spread now, they can still clump for sure, and generally will when attacking etc....it's just that the option will allow for more decision making in micro which will be great for the game.

Right Right, I see what your saying. The list I made was for predictions for what would happen if only the Dynamic Unit Movement were implemented and nothing else was changed.

Your thinking is a step ahead. As you say AoE such as storms after this change will be significantly weaker without natural clumping and so it would justify a major buff for many AoE spells to compensate. I hope I was understanding you correctly. I shall add a little bit to that item to make it more clear.

And I definitely would enjoy seeing the return of things like Seeker Missile in a more useful form, but that is getting ahead of ourselves I think.

Gfire

United States1699 Posts

May 18 2011 07:53 GMT

Well, I personally think hellions would be totally fine with only an increase no damage to non-light. Otherwise they would destroy worker lines even faster.... I would assume these changes wouldn't really affect worker lines at all.

They would act somewhat more like vultures again, dealing less splash. So add the spider mines back and they won't be stronger against worker lines but will be actually useful again. Maybe.

Lokian

United States699 Posts

May 18 2011 07:57 GMT

I think people are too used to the new AI. Turning back to BW AI movement will be like dialup compared to cable. Few pros will still play of course, but the big casual player community will feel this lag.

dunno why its called dynamic movement, seems more static since its limiting.

a whole new movement mechanic needs to be developed if people want no-clumping.

like for example, when selecting spreaded units, the selection becomes like 1 unit and moves like 1 unit, keeping the space in-between. of course, adjustments is needed for enviroment pathing but thats easy. when a unit hits a border, it'll just use the current sc2 movement mechanic to move inbetween units. and those that are not will stay the same distance.

keep the fluidity of sc2 movement, but also the spread-effect of selecting spaced units. when moving to a point, units dont converge. but its still easy to create a deathball simply by pointing to the middle of the army. in bw, if u do that, units will get retarded, but with sc2 fluid movement, it'll be good.