EPTNo fix to clumpy unit movement - Page 15
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 HotS |
|
SoulWager
United States464 Posts
| ||
|
ultratorr
Canada332 Posts
| ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On November 20 2012 03:20 SoulWager wrote: I don't think units die too fast, just that there is too little benefit to be gained from micro. If I were designing pathing, I'd give units a natural tendency to separate from each other, kind of like mutalisks in BW(but still with a hard boundary), and reintroduce BW style magic boxing, so if you box a small group of units and amove across map, their target locations will be the same formation as the start of the move command. They will clump somewhat when moving around corners or through chokes, as well as if you tell them to move a short distance relative to the spread of the group. There is "too little benefit to be gained from micro" simply because "brute force" [superior numbers] outweighs micro easily and you cant micro whole packs of units [apart from stutter-step or blink maybe]. Cutesy play goes down the drain when there are masses on the battlefield and thats a real shame and one of the reasons why the clumped unit movement and the unlimited unit selection needs to go. Seeing a BW pro win in a "2 Zerglings vs. 2 Zerglings" battle with BOTH his Zerglings still alive is MUCH more exciting than seeing 30 Banelings roll over a troop of Marines. Skill is admired, brawn isnt. | ||
|
Apolo
Portugal1259 Posts
| ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On November 20 2012 06:31 Apolo wrote: If you don't like it's movement pathing, the battles ending too fast, etc, just don't buy the game. It's the best way to make them wake up. I for one, won't be buying it, unless it gets much better than WoL, which so far, doesn't seem to be the case. Thats a really stupid comment, because I happen to like the game, but it could be better ... MUCH better. Clumped unit movement and high concentrations of infantry NEGATE MICRO by making it less efficient or simply impossible to focus on few units which is why these mechanics simply limit the game. Its about the same as "dont watch Star Wars I if you hate Jar Jar Binx". Its still the same universe and it kinda belongs to the story AND it has its ok-parts ... and its the same for Starcraft 2. Oh and the last reason for "dont like it dont buy it" is the fact that you kinda form your opinion about problems AFTER making the purchase. Of course if you never think about things you wont find any faults with it ... | ||
|
SarcasmMonster
3136 Posts
On November 20 2012 04:23 ultratorr wrote: I'm not sure if anyone noticed, but all the HotS scenes showing the battles in HotS have unclumped movements, and the battles looked AWESOME. i saw these in the BWC. Funny how Blizzard makes the game look cool like that, but refuses to implement it in the actual game. Browder's already agreed in the Frodan interview that unclumping is better for spectating. Too bad that's not good enough of a reason for Blizz to put more effort into this. | ||
|
MikeMM
Russian Federation221 Posts
On November 20 2012 02:34 Deckkie wrote: Didnt he also make RA2? arguably the best game of the series? I dont know of the pathing is a absolute problem. Units do die too fast in this game however. All deciding 30 second engaments is less than optimal. If this is due to the pathing it is a serious problem. It is however also possible that the units are just too high dps. Sometimes I feel like they made this game on normal speed, after realising this was too easy (and or slow) they changed it too fastest. And now there is a game where everything dies, and half the games are decided with a single missclick. Has RA2 or C&C had any success as eSport? | ||
|
Doc Daneeka
United States577 Posts
On November 20 2012 06:31 Apolo wrote: If you don't like it's movement pathing, the battles ending too fast, etc, just don't buy the game. It's the best way to make them wake up. I for one, won't be buying it, unless it gets much better than WoL, which so far, doesn't seem to be the case. the majority of people who buy this game do not care about stuff like this. blizzard will sell, for all intents and purposes, the same amount. even if this whole community "votes with their wallets" and boycotts HotS, it will be a drop in the bucket. the only pull this community has is in the esports scene, and that's only because blizzard cares enough to listen. people here forget esports is a niche past-time, and sc2 is a niche within that niche... | ||
|
ultratorr
Canada332 Posts
| ||
|
bole
Serbia164 Posts
We dont whont to make a change to pathing because Look Pro ppl whont to they unites stand clamp up and he give exemple.... Example was : Look Terran marines You want them to stay together and be clumped up !!!! YES but if you are terran !!!! If you are ZErg or Protoss you want to spreed your army Browder and when you spreed it you whont to stay in that Formation and dont get clump up agean... Because of Clump up range have a lot advantage compare to MALE UNITES like zealots and zerglings becous they dont have ability like ultralisc to break balls !!!!! | ||
|
iEchoic
United States1776 Posts
1) Makes the game much more interesting from a spectator perspective 2) Does a little bit to reduce the mechanics gap between Terran armies and Zerg/Protoss armies 3) Potentially weakens AoE (this would obviously need to be balanced) which would make this game less reliant on massing splash damage units 4) Elongates battles due to lower dps from all parties (spread marines do less dps than a tight ball, and they also take less AoE dps). This is a big change, no doubt, but HotS is a perfect time to get it in. | ||
|
cyberamine
Canada5 Posts
My thought here is to make the game more of a chess game and less of speedaholic contest. Btw I play @ 130 apm on blizz seconds and I would love more actions. I'm sure there is alot of reasons why it's unfeasable but just trying to think outside the box here. | ||
|
Firkraag8
Sweden1006 Posts
| ||
|
emc
United States3088 Posts
| ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On November 23 2012 11:47 Firkraag8 wrote: I don't like the idea of changing the way movement is handled as shown in the videos. I see the manual splitting of units as not only fun to watch but also to play. a. Do you think "Joe Bronzeleague" or even "Benny Silver" can do that? Does he have a chance against Banelings? Are Banelings as hard to use as Marine splitting? Casuals ARE IMPORTANT ... b. Clumped up units are a high concentration and this prevents REAL micro from happening, because brute force will win over cutesy micro. You know you have seen REAL micro when there is a battle between 2 Zerglings on one side and 2 Zerglings on the other side and one player moves his units so well that he wins with both his Zerglings still alive. c. Clumped up units have a shifting - and thus unpredictable - balance depending upon their number. - 2 Marines vs. 1 Zealot is different from 40 Marines vs. 20 Zealots. The second group of Marines will kill the Zealots fast enough so only a few of them ever get close enough to swing their blades, but the first one involves a lot of running from the Marines. - Stalkers and Marines have roughly the same dps, BUT since you can stack more Marines in the same space their "clump dps" is higher. Math is against clumped units ... it doesnt make sense no matter how "beautiful" it might look. There will be other micro for unclumped units IMO; MUCH MORE because everyone has to work to get their units as tight as possible and not only the opponent of the Banelings. | ||
|
bole
Serbia164 Posts
On November 23 2012 11:47 Firkraag8 wrote: I don't like the idea of changing the way movement is handled as shown in the videos. I see the manual splitting of units as not only fun to watch but also to play. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90U9RCLOcak Hahaha :D this is like kind of argument that Dustin Browder give.. But did you ever watch WC3 or SC BW ? One of good mechanic that SC2 produced its Banglings vs Marines ...And that is Sad !!! How much micro mechanic you have in WC3 and in SC BW... IN SC BW you can micro almost everything dodge plenty of atc and combinations.... SC2 if you noticed its almost everything about BALL of Mrines splliting and running around ... that is fact... IN SC2 there is 2 More race that need to be explored their micro potencial and that is Protoss and Zerg ... if you are protoss you want your army to stay spreed when you ATC in to terran Ball ..Also if you are zerg you want to your army stay spreed instead of clamp up when atc MARINES BALLS or Protoss .... If you play any of Blizzard games before you know this is bad pathing ...but problem is bigger then it probelm is in spells to ... like Fungel and Force Fealds ....also A move unites Colloss thors ....and on... User was warned for this post | ||
|
Gaius Baltar
United States449 Posts
| ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On November 23 2012 21:51 Gaius Baltar wrote: More than a little perplexed that he said there was no affect at all in their tests. Having played SC1, WC3, SC2, and some of the SC2 test maps people have made, I can say they all feel completely different. Both in terms of enjoyability during micro as well fun viewing, to me the current SC2 pathing is the worst of all the alternatives . Blizzard just tested ONE SMALL MODIFICATION - which probably wouldnt be enough anyways - AND which would have been one of roughly four adjustments necessary to tune SC2 down from the "deathball worship" to "strategic and microable play". 1. unit selection limit = 12 2. forced unit spread with microable stacking 3. removal of all production speed boosts 4. removal of the MULE (the one economic boost which isnt connected directly to production) So they HAD TO fail at finding something noticeable, but it also shows how much they dont know or dont care about the general gameplay. Until they fix this I think they are in "ignorance mode" + Show Spoiler + and you know that ignorance is bliss Less is more Blizzard! KISS | ||
|
TaShadan
Germany1960 Posts
browders games were all huge esport titels with perfect balance + Show Spoiler + NOT | ||
|
Salient
United States876 Posts
Auto-clumping is a horrible aspect of the game. | ||
| ||
