In defense of lasers - Page 5
Forum Index > SC2 General |
Hot_Bid
Braavos36362 Posts
| ||
InRaged
1047 Posts
On June 20 2007 15:40 IntoTheWow wrote: ahaha. That was random :j | ||
crazie-penguin
United States1253 Posts
On June 20 2007 20:43 Hot_Bid wrote: i wonder if they'll have the same sort of thing in team games where if a player leaves you can control his units and you get his money I pray that they will include these as well as the money transfer feature. It would open up a lot of new strategical options. | ||
dronefromhell
Canada199 Posts
| ||
[X]Ken~D
377 Posts
On June 20 2007 20:43 Hot_Bid wrote: i wonder if they'll have the same sort of thing in team games where if a player leaves you can control his units and you get his money OMG. It makes me think of a new series of 2v2 Star Brain where some beginner can pair up with Boxer ;] High APM would have a huge impact when your teammate leaves and you have to control your army and theirs. I think it has a bigger effect in SC2 than in WC3 when it becomes 1v2. Team APM anyone? | ||
FreeZEternal
Korea (South)3396 Posts
| ||
Scorpion
United States1974 Posts
| ||
prOxi.swAMi
Australia3091 Posts
On June 19 2007 15:50 rS]taCat wrote: Warp Rays, Colossuses (Colossi) and Soul Hunters all seem very high up on the tech tree. Seeing two Colossi fire at each other would probably be as likely as seeing Reavers vs. Reavers in PvP nowadays (yes, I'm aware Reavers still exist). And as for originalities sake, dude, what the fuck, Protoss right now have 3 units (Dragoon, Photon Cannon, Arbiter) that use the exact same attack projectile. That's original, right? No one cares about that, and I'd say an energy ball is about as creative as a laser is. It's not a matter of "oh look, all these units fire lasers." It's a matter of what the units are used for. Colossi and Warp Rays both fire lasers, but they're used for the complete opposite thing - Warp Rays to take out large, heavy targets, and Colossi to take out multiple weak ones. As for the micro aspect - who's to say that there won't be Colossus micro? Strafing up and down a cliff, taking potshots at Zerglings? I'm assuming that Colossi won't fire when given a move command, but hey. Just because they don't do a straight 20 damage outright doesn't mean that the 5-6 damage they do for the split-second that they're firing isn't valuable, either. Plus, Immortals and Stalkers are still there for those that want the whole burst damage aspect, anyway. I think that the addition of continuous damage (of which there were three users in the original Starcraft - High Templars, Science Vessels, and Defilers) as a major army standpoint could pull whole new levels of strategy, and with that, micro from the players of Starcraft 2. well said | ||
Mooga
United States575 Posts
On June 19 2007 15:50 rS]taCat wrote: As for the micro aspect - who's to say that there won't be Colossus micro? Strafing up and down a cliff, taking potshots at Zerglings? I'm assuming that Colossi won't fire when given a move command, but hey. Just because they don't do a straight 20 damage outright doesn't mean that the 5-6 damage they do for the split-second that they're firing isn't valuable, either. Lasers do not require a lot of micro because of its continuous rate of fire. Due to this fact, the advantage that one can gain through manipulating a unit is minimal, especially when compared to burst fire. Burst fire has a "cooldown period" where the weapon is not outputting damage, and one can take advantage of that by repositioning the unit (or any other type of micro) and still output full damage. On the other hand, if one moves a laser unit, the laser will stop firing (preventing full damage), which discourages tactically repositioning the unit and encourages less micro. Also, where's the fun in lasers? I mean, isn't it more exciting to see if that last dragoon is going to get its last shot of to finish off that hatchery? For me, lasers take out the fun and anticipation of seeing if I can get that last shot in to win the game. | ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
| ||
lamarine
584 Posts
On June 30 2007 16:51 Mooga wrote: Lasers do not require a lot of micro because of its continuous rate of fire. Due to this fact, the advantage that one can gain through manipulating a unit is minimal, especially when compared to burst fire. Burst fire has a "cooldown period" where the weapon is not outputting damage, and one can take advantage of that by repositioning the unit (or any other type of micro) and still output full damage. On the other hand, if one moves a laser unit, the laser will stop firing (preventing full damage), which discourages tactically repositioning the unit and encourages less micro. Also, where's the fun in lasers? I mean, isn't it more exciting to see if that last dragoon is going to get its last shot of to finish off that hatchery? For me, lasers take out the fun and anticipation of seeing if I can get that last shot in to win the game. lasers also have cooldown... u can see it 10min movie : warp ray killing one BC wait a little before it starts ti hit anither one.... | ||
lamarine
584 Posts
| ||
MaNNeRDex
United States169 Posts
On June 19 2007 11:37 Zanno wrote: suspectible Lol. | ||
Funchucks
Canada2113 Posts
If you don't think they're going to need micro, you just don't have any imagination. Warp rays shooting the wrong target will be a disaster. The star relic laser is going to be near-useless unless targetted at badly damaged high-hp units near other units. Soul hunters look like a mass hit-and-run harassment unit with mobility as their main asset, and the whole pack is going to need to be focused, steered, and kept in formation. The colossus's weapon looks pretty light on micro, but it's a big, expensive, highly mobile unit with special vulnerabilities, and you're going to be thinking a lot about where it belongs and how to keep it near swarming little enemies to torch but away from heavy hitters and anti-air. | ||
Mooga
United States575 Posts
Warp rays need the continuous beam ... but I hope they are unique to starcraft 2 and we don't see anymore of those types of units. | ||
Crackling
11 Posts
| ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On June 30 2007 19:52 Crackling wrote: Thank you so very much for spelling defense correctly. -ce / -se Nouns ending in -ce with -se verb forms: American English and British English both retain the noun/verb distinction in advice / advise and device / devise, but American English has lost the same distinction with licence / license and practice / practise that British spelling retains. American English uses practice and license for both meanings. Also, American English has kept the Anglo-French spelling for defense and offense, which are usually defence and offence in British English; similarly there are the American pretense and British pretence; but derivatives such as defensive, offensive, and pretension are always thus spelled in both systems. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_and_British_English_spelling_differences#-ce_.2F_-se This is something I've always wanted to know, good thing you reminded me :O | ||
FA_Leinad
Germany48 Posts
| ||
Funchucks
Canada2113 Posts
| ||
| ||