|
Hello, Even if it s probably too late.. I ask you to vote..
Link Zeromus thread : https://tl.net/forum/legacy-of-the-void/482775-a-treatise-on-the-economy-of-scii
Not so long ago, Meavis (member forum) comments my nth complain about impact of the new economy on maps design :
"it's known but accepted, wouldn't have made those changes myself but it seems to be the more popular side of things"
This poll study the popularity of each changes separetly from HoTS to LoTV
Poll: Economy wishesA (2) 3% B (13) 20% C (34) 53% D (4) 6% E (2) 3% F (3) 5% G (2) 3% H (4) 6% 64 total votes You must be logged in to vote in this poll. ☐ A ☐ B ☐ C ☐ D ☐ E ☐ F ☐ G ☐ H
|
Warcraft 3 upkeep gang WW@?
|
On June 03 2020 23:57 algue wrote:Warcraft 3 upkeep gang WW@?
With a slight redesign of the game, a similar W3 upkeep based on the more expensive units (with a supply cost >2) could be an interessant step towards a game with less workers.
|
The side effect of the LotV economy is that it punishes players for not expanding and places them on a clock to obtain additional mineral nodes roughly six minutes (LotV time) after establishing a base in order to not lose mineral income.
2016 foreigner TvZ.
|
I love it right now. 6 worker start was tedious and boring. The WC3 upkeep mechanic was terrible imho. Why would anyone want to get "punished" for having better macro?
|
I do like the BW tradeoff between turtling with a lot of workers on 1-2 bases vs having a few workers on 4+, like in Mech TvZ. Asymmetry in general leads to more interesting games
|
Once again Vision starts a thread and once again almost everyone says that nothing has to be changed, I wonder how he comes up with his ideas and what his great masterplan is...
|
I'm for increasing the max supply, it removes the only problem LotV didn't solve with eco that 3/4 base saturation is the max amount of income you can get.
I think removing the starting 50 minerals that you get at the start of the game could also be interesting, though I can't promise it's an improvement. But basically I think many builds start by building a Probe from the start, since it takes an amount of time for your income to get going at the start of the game. Whereas if we instead solely let the workers do the working, there could spawn a couple of builds from this. Where you use your first 100 minerals on a pylon/depot. Also you can get further with your proxy worker before getting that first 100 minerals.
It begs the question do we want more mind gaming or are coinflip wins something we want to avoid.
Last thing is that putting more minerals on the already bigger minerals could make the game more forgiving and make it more possible to make a come back.
|
On June 04 2020 01:46 watchlulu wrote:Once again Vision starts a thread and once again almost everyone says that nothing has to be changed, I wonder how he comes up with his ideas and what his great masterplan is...
Don t you get boring about half of the maximum population is made of workers ?
Don t answer, i already know it s a yes...
|
LotV economy is fine. No change is needed.
|
B is superior imo. #Bgang
|
|
United States1552 Posts
On June 04 2020 07:31 Luolis wrote: hots eco would be best
Yes, there's been problems with unit balance, but it's remarkable how many people have no idea, or refuse to acknowledge, that one of the biggest contributing causes to Zerg being super op over the past few years is the Lotv economy. In addition, it's a big part of what created the pvt expansion dynamic that made that matchup so difficult for Terrans for so long.
|
United Kingdom20157 Posts
I prefer to watch LOTV eco but play HOTS. I can't play SC2 well enough for strategy and tactics to really matter - instead just being a cluster of trying to multitask, spend money and expand over and over again - unless i schedule myself in to regularly play a lot of games and that puts me off playing at all because i don't like doing that indefinitely.
|
Czech Republic12116 Posts
On June 04 2020 11:45 Mizenhauer wrote:Yes, there's been problems with unit balance, but it's remarkable how many people have no idea, or refuse to acknowledge, that one of the biggest contributing causes to Zerg being super op over the past few years is the Lotv economy. In addition, it's a big part of what created the pvt expansion dynamic that made that matchup so difficult for Terrans for so long. Well people didn't like the boringness(?) of the early game. Not that tastosis isn't shittalking the first 6 minutes now anyway Also I believe people don't mind zerg dominance that much as many are used from the foreign scene.
|
Honestly the moment I noticed they messed with the classic minerals aka all 1500 and add 20 workers is when I quit sc2
I find it hot garbage
|
The fact famous pgm (among others..) weren t in favor of the LoTV economy is now forgotten...
|
I'd be interested to know the breakdown of who voted for what by which race they play.
|
On June 04 2020 23:09 Jockmcplop wrote: I'd be interested to know the breakdown of who voted for what by which race they play. I'm a protoss player mainly, and I voted B.
I voted B because like Mizenhauer, I view the current economic system as being a big factor in why zerg has been so problematic the last few years and why PvT is such a mess. Part of the issue I think is that terran and protoss are forced to expand in the current system just to match zerg's income, but neither race gets any real benefit from it other than not getting behind in their income as they mine out. To boost unit production, both races have to invest in new production and after a while they hit something of a cap in how much production they can do at once based on income. Zerg doesn't have this issue. Expanding to keep income stable for zerg also has the benefit of boosting production. With an economic system that forces quick expanding, it seems obvious that it will tend to favour the race that gets the most benefit from expanding.
I always thought the HOTS economy model was fine. I prefer the slowness of it, but in general I think SC2 needs to be slowed down massively. The ability to come back in this game has all but disappeared and it seems more and more that build order wins are becoming a big factor. In the current season of GSL, it's been quite noticeable how much shorter games have been. I've been watching Tasteless's BW stream a lot lately and there have been many situations where I've seen something happen, my SC2 brain will go "wow he's dead", then he'll somehow come back and win the game through good decision making and play. I wish we could have that in SC2. There are far too many situations in SC2 where the game state goes from stable to either over or one side is irreparably behind in a few seconds or less with no means of countering or fighting back.
|
On June 04 2020 23:09 Jockmcplop wrote: I'd be interested to know the breakdown of who voted for what by which race they play.
I'd be much more interested in knowing the breakdown of who voted for what and the ammount of SC2 they watch vs the ammount they play.
|
|
|
|