|
Thinking a bit about Starcraft 2 (okay a lot since i don't have beta T-T) I've been thinking about how it took so long for sc to turn into the fast expansion game it is right now (pretty much all non build orders that arent considered 'cheesy' or 'all-in' involve an expansion very early in the game). In starcraft 2 the more I think that people will be trying to rush to this sort of play with their knowledge from starcraft, and the less it will work...
My main reason for thinking this is the intelligence of workers (ie: only needing 2 per mineral patch for it to be fully saturated). In starcraft 1, if for example you were playing a PvP and you wanted to 4-gate goon all-in someone, you would cut probes at x amount of probes whilst the other person would be constantly producing them. The attack hits well before the other person tries to expand, but because of much better probe saturation, if the person is going gate robo gate and holds his ramp with a reaver in time, that person is in a good position to win the game via a better economy off just 1 base.
This situation in starcraft 2 tho, if one person does some sort of 1-base timing attack at the other person, if the other person is constantly building workers in anticipation of expanding and the game going longer, he is not only at the disadvantage of spending hundreds on workers that, when still 1-base vs 1-base, do not give him any sort of economical lead and any hope of coming back into the game by defending his choke, the other person can simply keep up army wise, and win the game easily from there.
Has anyone else thought about this and put it into practice in play? Although right now its hard to judge from beta, has anyone experienced having a tough time against this type of play? I could be completely wrong and maybe theres something missing from my logic, but perfect worker AI in starcraft 1 would drastically change the way games are played, what (if anything) changes in starcraft 2 to balance this out?
edit: the build in this thread is a good example of the type of play I'm reffering to, which i think will be more powerful than it was in starcraft 1. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=113453
|
Vatican City State1872 Posts
you have to learn to crawl before you can walk.
|
In this case you have to learn how to rush before you not. :D
Naw i just think longer macro games will come out when we get a bit more maps and ways to defend, harass and build become more apparent to more people.
|
True, but it's beta. Everyone's going to use what they're currently familiar with, and that's low tech.
|
Early BW was nothing, but 1 base play with 2 gate rushes etc. etc.
There is no standart and safe build yet, so seeing both players expand and play safe just doesn't happen. SC2 is also more aggression orrientated now anyway with all the cliff jumping, teleporting units into the battlefield through warpgate/nydus etc.
|
Nono i get that right now the game will definitely involve more low-tech/econ games and stuff because people simply dont know the most optimal way to play safe etc. etc. It would be that case if they were to release starcraft 1 for the first time ever right now.
I'm trying to discuss the possibility it may never change from that because of the way only 2xminers per mineral patch makes 100% worker saturation, rather than the almost limitless case in sc1 ><
|
Nobody knows what they're doing yet.
|
Fists years BW was the same.
|
I have noticed in streams that FE builds are very rare. It's quite natural that the game doesn't get to the super macro stage (where BW is, with people calling everything that isn't 3 base cheese) when it's brand new, and I think it will evolve in that direction pretty fast once things get standardised.
|
one thing that would "fix" the particular issue in PvP you described would be to just have many more mineral patches in the main (like twice as many) but have each crystal contain less minerals (so that the same total minerals are present). This way, having more probes is better in a similar way to sc1.
|
Imo one of (if not THE) biggest reasons why FE is so sucessful in sc1 is that workers can glitch units at ramps and chokes and what not. Since all the units in sc2 have perfect pathing they would just rightclick in the FE players base and watch as all their units run by.
|
On February 23 2010 19:43 AcrossFiveJulys wrote: one thing that would "fix" the particular issue in PvP you described would be to just have many more mineral patches in the main (like twice as many) but have each crystal contain less minerals (so that the same total minerals are present). This way, having more probes is better in a similar way to sc1. A post relative to the main area of discussion i was looking for, thank you!
And you right, this would definitely fix the issue, a nice logical way of making a 'macro' map so that the player preparing for mid-late game has a chance over the timing attack player.
|
2 workers per patch is not 100% saturation. Adding a third worker per patch gives you roughly 200 minerals extra per minute on a base with 8 patches, so while you get severe diminishing returns for having more than 2 per patch, you do get some small benefit. So yes, cutting workers after 2 per patch is a strong strategy, but people will find ways to stop those timing attacks while still getting an economic lead. What you also have to keep in mind is that base defense has been buffed in Starcraft 2 to compensate for the stronger harassment: - workers have better AI, so using them to fight is more viable - zergs have queens to help fight or to heal crawlers or key units - +30% movementspeed on creep helps zerg units get into position faster to defend against attacks or harassment - cannons have more hp/shields - terran wall in is stronger due to dropable depots - bunkers give +1 range and are salvageable - radar towers give you advance warning against harassment/attacks
|
bunker always have given +1 range, in BW too.
|
Melbourne5338 Posts
just going to say that a lot of my zvp now are longer games as I aim for broodlords because roaches and hydras and mutas are rather ineffective against a zeal/stalker/immortal blob. however i am often expanding and reexpanding after my old expansions get found and destroyed. similar to 'refugee protoss' but i have broodlords/corrupter instead of carriers.
|
Think of it this way: D- starcraft games don't end up in long macro games. just 1 person making more units and winning. Just give the game time. Everyone sucks at it right now and has no idea what builds work and don't. If it turns out the game itself makes macro games impossible m sure something will be done. I think Blizzard released the BETA to have the game tested by players, not for shits and giggles
|
I think it's because we haven't yet found out what is the best combination of units for all the matchups and some of the best overall builds. Until we do that, there will be a lot of weird plays off one-base and you have no choice but to try to either find a good fast expanding build (haven't seen one yet) or go with the flow.
|
ramps are much easier to break imo, also maps are tiny
|
Sometimes long macro games happen, depending on how agressive/defensive the players are. And most strats are more or less early pushes at this moment.
Try playing greedy, and rely on as few units as possible to defend and you'll have long games! I tend to be very defensive, so my games are about 18-25 mins. I just played a 50 min ZvT wiith good 'ol BW unit combinations.
|
On February 23 2010 22:07 pachi wrote: just going to say that a lot of my zvp now are longer games as I aim for broodlords because roaches and hydras and mutas are rather ineffective against a zeal/stalker/immortal blob. however i am often expanding and reexpanding after my old expansions get found and destroyed. similar to 'refugee protoss' but i have broodlords/corrupter instead of carriers. Broodlords are hilarious! i find mass ling muta to work well against zeal stalker immortal i just avoid direct conformational and just harss him make them get spread out.
|
|
|
|