|
On August 19 2017 13:26 BronzeKnee wrote: Let's be careful that stating this patch overcomplicates things. Removing things like the MSC simplifies things. Also the Widow Mine isn't anymore complicated than it was before for the player to control, and it is easier to counter. That overall is a simplification.
nah, the rules governing the Widow Mine unit are more convoluted than ever. there are plenty of units becoming more complex in this patch. this does not mean i side with everything the OP says but his point about increasingly convoluted//complex unit behaviours is a good one.
i play 2v2s with some Silver thru Plat guys who work in the IT department of my #1 customer. these guys all have full time jobs and wives etc. we play WoL and they prefer WoL because its simpler. i prefer LotV but every else plays WoL so when i 2v2 i play WoL.
|
So I agree with OP.
But I think we need to reach a point where the game is 1. really fun (for all levels of play), and 2. really open/diverse in strategy from game to game (which has a lot of things under its umbrella, such as making units not hard-counter each other as much)
Until we reach that point I am 100% in support of large game-destroying patches. Once we get there, then you can put the brakes on.
|
I couldn't agree with you more, Poke.
We saw the beginnings of this in WoL. People complained that Protoss was too A-Move. All of their units synergized pretty well together, simply because they all had (about) the same move speed. Stalkers didn't need a lot of attention, and were just good ranged units. Blink micro was cool and interesting.
Zealots bunched up under colossi, and it all just rolled around together. Blizzard saw that, and said, "we need to protoss more ability heavy."
They then turned around and gave almost every single protoss unit some kind of ability (void ray alignment, disruptor shots, shade ability) or nerfed the units so badly that you never see them in a real competitive environment (rip colossus.)
Changing everything so they all have a wild assortment of tags, that change, just make things needlessly complicated.
Hellions are mech units, unless they transform, then they're mech AND bio. Oh, AND they get more HP when in hellbat mode. Then they lose those HP in hellion mode. I understand the reasoning behind it (make them little front line tank units) but these HP & tag changes make no sense from a consistency perspective.
With the way things are going, they might as well just change everything so it looks like this: "Zealot does 16 damage to zerglings, 11 damage to drones, 14 damage to SCVs, and 13 damage to probes." There's a needlessly complex set of rules that goes into a lot of these things that, frankly, do not need to be there.
And as an aside, one thing that I don't like about the constant comparisons to LoL & DOTA: these games have mechanics to prevent wildly OP characters & strats. If something comes out as incredibly OP, there's the hero ban system, where each side would just pick the OP character, and prevent them from being used.
Unfortunately, with SC, you don't have that option at all. You just have to sit back and deal with [pick your flavor of the month that you hate, be it 5raxreaper, swarm hosts, proxy oracles, mass queen, whatever].
On August 20 2017 05:18 Fatam wrote: So I agree with OP.
But I think we need to reach a point where the game is 1. really fun (for all levels of play), and 2. really open/diverse in strategy from game to game (which has a lot of things under its umbrella, such as making units not hard-counter each other as much)
Until we reach that point I am 100% in support of large game-destroying patches. Once we get there, then you can put the brakes on.
With regards to things like this - I have thought for a long time that SC2's issue is that damage is dealt too quickly.
If you aren't babysitting your army to make sure that you stim and split from those banes, or if you miss the raven turret in your mineral line, or that mine drop, you're screwed. You just lost the game.
If we toned the attack speed of EVERYTHING down just a little bit, it wouldn't seem as insane and unforgiving as it is.
Edit: which means I kind of agree with you Fatam, since the hard-countering is largely based upon how fast all the damage gets dealt, if you counter someone. If someone doesn't split their marines vs. a group of banes, the marines are just erased from the game in a matter of seconds.
|
it's much easier to control different types of units together in unison in starcraft 2, therefore it's alright for units to have multiple control quirks to them. + unit production/rally is easier while doing multiple things at once. + unlimited units in hotkeys. + smartcasting, rather than spending time in battle selecting and casting multiple spells. + units are more than likely to follow in on what you want them to do via AI. all of these things and similar lend to having more complicated units, but one of the major issues being the pacing of the game shoots up, and static defenses are generally a waste of money as they do not buy you very much time.
if you are likely to screw up control while devoting time to it as is the case in starcraft 1, the casual player won't do these strategies or won't be aware of them. simplicity can be very important in meta play in sc1 because it helps a lot with controls during the game. - hotkeys using simple units (eg. hydras in PvZ) makes it easier to rebind and execute with than with multiple groups of different types/spellcasters. - slower overall pacing, meaning you have time to preplan and react well. - spellcasters and gas units being generally stronger in part because they are not so simple.
i don't believe sc2 requires simplicity in that same way because the game is less taxing in some ways which allows more details in others. as for defending against aggression, most players are not adequately prepared for what hits them. this can be so difficult in sc2 because everything produces so quickly and efficiently whereas there is a lot of room for mechanical error in sc1.
i just think sc2 by now has trained most players to be lazier and this has more of an effect on players who don't put pressure on themselves to constantly perform at their best. having a slower economy and slower pacing in general made the first game much more a mechanical game foremost after learning basic strategy and tactics. it was also much harder to attack into someone because of AI and ramps (bridges), making for smaller skirmishes and forcing the player to use effective forms of harass.
so no, i don't think simplicity makes for a better game. i believe the level of reward or the feeling received from playing well is much less visible for starcraft 2's engine and gameplay, because it has an otherwise extremely high skill cap that would go beyond human capability. the process of reaching that level (at least for me) is arduous and questionable because you can achieve the same results by trying much less and using better strategy. your opponent, so long as he's at around the same decent level as you are, can react and deflect you with simple low-cost units with enough practice, making it much more difficult for you to be on that next level of creativity.
|
On August 20 2017 05:42 reneg wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2017 05:18 Fatam wrote: So I agree with OP.
But I think we need to reach a point where the game is 1. really fun (for all levels of play), and 2. really open/diverse in strategy from game to game (which has a lot of things under its umbrella, such as making units not hard-counter each other as much)
Until we reach that point I am 100% in support of large game-destroying patches. Once we get there, then you can put the brakes on. With regards to things like this - I have thought for a long time that SC2's issue is that damage is dealt too quickly. If you aren't babysitting your army to make sure that you stim and split from those banes, or if you miss the raven turret in your mineral line, or that mine drop, you're screwed. You just lost the game. If we toned the attack speed of EVERYTHING down just a little bit, it wouldn't seem as insane and unforgiving as it is. Edit: which means I kind of agree with you Fatam, since the hard-countering is largely based upon how fast all the damage gets dealt, if you counter someone. If someone doesn't split their marines vs. a group of banes, the marines are just erased from the game in a matter of seconds.
Yeah, I'm not a "do everything like BW" purist but I do prefer how BW handles counters. You have soft counters and not hard counters because of a lot of things, but one big one is indeed the slower damage. If units are going to be clumped up more due to better pathing then damage absolutely needs to be slower. Slower damage has other nice effects, such as making SC2 worker harass not as ridiculously strong.
|
I agree with the arguments on The Elegance of Simplicity but sadly this is not what SC2 is and it has never been. From the start the game was made to include armies of as many different unit types as possible with as many abilities as possible. If we don't like that, then no patch or lack thereof will change this, only SC3 could.
About the patches themselves, i think it's good that they listen to the player base and they remove things that no one ever asked for or even wanted (MSC, Tankvacs,mass caster armies).
|
On August 20 2017 17:55 Sapphire.lux wrote: I agree with the arguments on The Elegance of Simplicity but sadly this is not what SC2 is and it has never been. From the start the game was made to include armies of as many different unit types as possible with as many abilities as possible. If we don't like that, then no patch or lack thereof will change this, only SC3 could.
About the patches themselves, i think it's good that they listen to the player base and they remove things that no one ever asked for or even wanted (MSC, Tankvacs,mass caster armies).
That's just not true when you take a look at Wings of Liberty. Most common army comps rarely included more than two to three abilities and some abilities are just hitting a button and that's it, no targeting or additional actions required, like Stim, Siege or Cloak. Zerg for example had no abilities to use in fight aside from Funghal -> a-move, maybe manually exploding your banelings if you're the shit. Only quite ability-heavy match-up was TvP, where you had Guardian Shield/Force Field/Storm vs. EMP/Snipe/Stim with two hit-button abilities at the start of the fight (Guardian Shield and Stim), aside from that it was all about army movement and positioning.
|
While I agree with the OP's philosophy, I think with the current state of the game, there is little else one can do.
I personally would love to see a new try on mule / chrono / larva inject removal and even a try to go back to a fixed damage percentage bonus / penalty depending on attack type vs armor type, like in SC1.
All this SC2 changes with individual numbers and unique abilities make the game more like WC3.
However I am afraid that for SC2, the ship of simplicity has sailed. Now some unit re-designs and some other changes, while perhaps just band-aides, can be aides nonetheless.
|
On August 18 2017 20:12 raff100 wrote: I agree with you in part, I dont' want SC2 to turn into a moba, that needs a major update at least once every year to keep the game "fresh", however, there is something big that you are missing: SC2 must be untouched only if its design is fun, which is the main goal of every videogame. You make the reference on two units, tankivac and reaper, that you maybe consider rewarding to master, but you can just surf a bit through the bnet forums, TL or reddit and you'll find that most of the community absolutely hated those things, not because they were "just a bit too good" ,but because they were , according to most of us, just terrible designed. And now that Blizzard finally started to listen to us, we need to support their job. I don't care about pros because ,if the game is fun , new players will take their place anyway
tankivac & reaper is only fun for the user not so much fun for the opponent & spectators sans terran fans
|
On August 20 2017 20:04 Creager wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2017 17:55 Sapphire.lux wrote: I agree with the arguments on The Elegance of Simplicity but sadly this is not what SC2 is and it has never been. From the start the game was made to include armies of as many different unit types as possible with as many abilities as possible. If we don't like that, then no patch or lack thereof will change this, only SC3 could.
About the patches themselves, i think it's good that they listen to the player base and they remove things that no one ever asked for or even wanted (MSC, Tankvacs,mass caster armies). That's just not true when you take a look at Wings of Liberty. Most common army comps rarely included more than two to three abilities and some abilities are just hitting a button and that's it, no targeting or additional actions required, like Stim, Siege or Cloak. Zerg for example had no abilities to use in fight aside from Funghal -> a-move, maybe manually exploding your banelings if you're the shit. Only quite ability-heavy match-up was TvP, where you had Guardian Shield/Force Field/Storm vs. EMP/Snipe/Stim with two hit-button abilities at the start of the fight (Guardian Shield and Stim), aside from that it was all about army movement and positioning. Compared to BW it was more. From 2 core units mm, tank vulture, hidra lurker, etc it got to at least 3: marine maruder medvac, ling bling muta, etc. Protoss got decimated in this department with a philosophy of almost some of everything to make a functional army comp. It's true that T and Z did not have that many abilities, but protoss had on almost every unit. The warning sighs were from WoL and it got worse along the way.
|
I like this post a lot. Simplicity is indeed key. Excellent write-up, also the arguments are great.
|
the mothership core has plagued design decisions for 2 expansions (almost as much as warp in!!) so it's great that they're removing it. we'll see about the other changes..
with regard to dota, i despised how they would really shake up the game every few patches because as a casual player i could take a month off, come back, and have a COMPLETELY different game to learn..
|
the best part is explaining changes like this to someone who is coming back after a couple of years break. adds a lot to the WTF factor.
excellent points.
|
On August 20 2017 17:43 Fatam wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2017 05:42 reneg wrote:On August 20 2017 05:18 Fatam wrote: So I agree with OP.
But I think we need to reach a point where the game is 1. really fun (for all levels of play), and 2. really open/diverse in strategy from game to game (which has a lot of things under its umbrella, such as making units not hard-counter each other as much)
Until we reach that point I am 100% in support of large game-destroying patches. Once we get there, then you can put the brakes on. With regards to things like this - I have thought for a long time that SC2's issue is that damage is dealt too quickly. If you aren't babysitting your army to make sure that you stim and split from those banes, or if you miss the raven turret in your mineral line, or that mine drop, you're screwed. You just lost the game. If we toned the attack speed of EVERYTHING down just a little bit, it wouldn't seem as insane and unforgiving as it is. Edit: which means I kind of agree with you Fatam, since the hard-countering is largely based upon how fast all the damage gets dealt, if you counter someone. If someone doesn't split their marines vs. a group of banes, the marines are just erased from the game in a matter of seconds. Yeah, I'm not a "do everything like BW" purist but I do prefer how BW handles counters. You have soft counters and not hard counters because of a lot of things, but one big one is indeed the slower damage. If units are going to be clumped up more due to better pathing then damage absolutely needs to be slower. Slower damage has other nice effects, such as making SC2 worker harass not as ridiculously strong.
I feel the exact same way. I enjoy BW, I enjoy SC2. I don't want them to be the exact same game, but the unit clumping makes AOE damage SO powerful that it's ridiculous in SC2.
The speed with which light units (workers) can be shredded really makes harass a powerful strategy, to the point where it just causes a snowball.
|
|
|
|