|
I've been thinking about LotV and the design choices Blizzard is making, and I feel as if the game is begging for some form of strengthened highground advantage.
It seems to me that given the larger basecount and starting worker count that reducing the volatility of the game through a strengthened highground advantage would be advantageous to players of all levels. Low level players would die less to all-ins and would have an easier time defending large attacks, while high level players would find ways to gain skillful advantages through clever unit positioning.
People often bring up that this would increase turtling, however I disagree - while it is true that defensive playstyles would be strengthened, at the same time you would be able to defend your own bases with fewer units, thus freeing up army for sending out to engage.
I feel as if it would generally be a great change, and don't think that highground advantage necessarily = RNG. There are plenty of ways to do it that do not involve any randomness, and the possibilities this would create for map design are quite vast.
What do you think?
Poll: Would you like to see highground advantage strengthened in LotV?Yes, however no RNG please. (60) 42% Yes, and I would like it to be like BW. (51) 35% No. (33) 23% 144 total votes Your vote: Would you like to see highground advantage strengthened in LotV? (Vote): Yes, and I would like it to be like BW.
(Vote): Yes, however no RNG please.
(Vote): No.
|
Depends on the advantage to be honest.
|
Bisutopia19137 Posts
The brood war style worked. No one complains about it ever in the current scene. SC2 should have it.
|
Does not have to be like BW, but, like said above, it worked well in BW. When it comes down to it, a loss will not be due to the RnG aspect of missing a shot.
|
We have 50% damage reduction (with properly scaled armor) implemented in Starcraft Improved - that might interest you.
The original idea (and implementation) is actually quite old, check out the original thread by urashimakt - which is over 3 years old:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-maps/335595-mod-high-ground-advantage
I doubt Blizzard has plans for that in LotV. This does promote positional, slower play. Many things might require rebalancing if that was introduced.
|
668 Posts
If they desire battles 'everywhere' around the map, They have to have high ground advantage or defenders advantage through stronger splash damage for all races.other you can win by using a deathball and crashing ur army into your opponent's
|
On July 18 2015 15:59 doihy wrote:
If they desire battles 'everywhere' around the map, They have to have high ground advantage or defenders advantage through stronger splash damage for all races.other you can win by using a deathball and crashing ur army into your opponent's
In order to really disencourage it you need an effect where few units can be insanely strong against a larger group of enemies so you can split out your units all over the map. Highground doesn't really accomplish, but an ability like Dark Swarm does.
|
On July 18 2015 16:39 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2015 15:59 doihy wrote:
If they desire battles 'everywhere' around the map, They have to have high ground advantage or defenders advantage through stronger splash damage for all races.other you can win by using a deathball and crashing ur army into your opponent's In order to really disencourage it you need an effect where few units can be insanely strong against a larger group of enemies so you can split out your units all over the map. Highground doesn't really accomplish, but an ability like Dark Swarm does.
I disagree with that. If a few units can be insanely strong against a larger group of enemies at any point in time and space - then what prevents you from incorporating these units into your deathball and push your enemy even harder?
There are ways to make units not scale, but it is not easy to accomplish.
High ground advanatage on the other hand is an immobile feature of a map. You cannot move it with your army. It lets you set up a strong defensive spot with few units, while the rest of your army goes somewhere else.
|
A good thing about high ground advantage is that if you don't want it, you can simply make a map that's flat.
It is optional to every map, and you can use it in any way that you want. It doesn't automatically cause problems to the game.
|
Would love to see BW high ground 
|
What exactly was the BW high ground advantage? A miss chance for the units attacking from the low ground like in wc3?
|
i want RNG. thats the reason its a disadvantage. you dont know. if its some kind of every 3rd hit, you will know.
|
Austria24416 Posts
I don't like randomness at all. There are far better ways to give a high ground advantage (range increase against low ground, even flat damage increase, etc.) that can still be calculated and planned for. Blizzard has said it in the past and it's one of the things I agree with the most - randomness should not be a part of SC2.
|
On July 18 2015 17:38 DarkLordOlli wrote:
I don't like randomness at all. There are far better ways to give a high ground advantage (range increase against low ground, even flat damage increase, etc.) that can still be calculated and planned for. Blizzard has said it in the past and it's one of the things I agree with the most - randomness should not be a part of SC2.
I agree, I'd like range decrease vs high ground to be tested.
|
It shouldn't be RNG, just a damage decrease to attackers shooting at high ground targets. Dawn of War series did something similar with areas of ground classified as 'cover'
|
Can they give decreased range to units on a lower ground attacking higher ground? Makes sense, as well as not RNG- based, and will give attackers a huge advantage as well as micro potential for the defender.
I don't really like the idea of having a flat damage decrease though.
On July 18 2015 17:32 Musicus wrote:
What exactly was the BW high ground advantage? A miss chance for the units attacking from the low ground like in wc3?
Yeah.
|
On July 18 2015 17:38 DarkLordOlli wrote:
I don't like randomness at all. There are far better ways to give a high ground advantage (range increase against low ground, even flat damage increase, etc.) that can still be calculated and planned for. Blizzard has said it in the past and it's one of the things I agree with the most - randomness should not be a part of SC2.
I dont see why its bad. BW imo was more of a grey than a black and white game. And it didn't stop the game from being bad. If things become too black and white, you end up with high volatility which is SC2 e.g the [i]simple[i/] damage system.
I would actually welcome more greys into this game. And plus even if its random, its still an advantage. By how much? we dont know but the advantage is there. To me, it becomes more of a probability thing than a flat number. It creates tension and i.e. drama of what will happen.
But if we say, give a certain flat bonus of some sort, that player will ALWAYS have the upper hand if he/she was the one controlling the critical map positions. The other player if not reacting quickly enough will have to sustain heavy losses to go through such positioning (or around which might also be disadvantageous). Its almost a forgone conclusion. But with abit of randomness, you can't be certain high ground advantage will 100% help you. Again creates the tension and risks. The advantages are there i.e. not 100% random but you can't be 100% sure.
People can relate to these scenarios because not everything is black and white but contrary to that. It happens in real life. I think it would be pretty beneficial to the game and create those "sc" moments ala spider mines WTF good bye half the tank line!?!
Reason why they also need to redo the damage system like how WC3 -> TFT.
|
On July 18 2015 18:12 Estancia wrote:
I don't really like the idea of having a flat damage decrease though.
Why not? Could you elaborate?
On July 18 2015 18:19 YyapSsap wrote:
But if we say, give a certain flat bonus of some sort, that player will ALWAYS have the upper hand if he/she was the one controlling the critical map positions. The other player if not reacting quickly enough will have to sustain heavy losses to go through such positioning (or around which might also be disadvantageous). Its almost a forgone conclusion. [...]
People can relate to these scenarios because not everything is black and white but contrary to that.
I see the first part as a contradiction to the second part. Even if there is a flat bonus for high ground, the real game is not so black-and-white. High ground gives you a bonus in one spot of the map. The opponent can push it through overwhelming forces, or use air to break the initial defense, or attack the position from a better angle, or use colossi, reaper, blink, drops, nydus, to bypass a cliff, or avoid it alltogether... there are always multiple solutions.
In bigger battles RNG is not going to change that either! Really weird results are improbable. What will happen you can predict with quite high accuracy.
|
if u want bw high ground system then u prolly need its vision system too.
|
I don't understand why it is necessary? It's already so hard to attack up a ramp. This would just kill any early game aggression. Also would give an large advantage to terran that can easily bypass highground with mass medivacs. And 3rd and 4th bases which actually need a little defensive help are on the low ground anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
