Something I'm not liking about SC 2

Hi,

I'm not sure this post is in the right taste for the forum. So mods feel free to delete it if you see fit.

Well the main thing I want to say is in SC 1 sure units have their strengths and weaknesses but on the whole most had a general purpose quality as well. Like in one situation for example wraiths in a mixed group would be the best scenario but if you only had marines and no wraiths for the group then they could get the job done, not as effectively though.

But in SC 2 each on the units strengths and weaknesses are so accentuated to the point that if you had none of a particular unit to get the job done, you'd have to go and make some more as others would just get slaughtered. That slight general purpose quality of the units seems in my eyes to be slowly dying.

I think almost everything else in SC 2 is just spectacular. Just this one little point is annoying me. If someone wants to point me in the right direction with the latest Blizzcon builds of SC2 and prove me wrong, by all means do so. I'd just like to see what everyone's perspective is on this.

Thanks.

 

But didnt they (the blizz team) say that they wanted to make this game, so that each unit will be unique and will have a purpose?
I mean thats what they are forcing us to do, instead of just massing one unit, they are trying to make us build many different types of units.

i remember in sc1 i hardly used the scout, queen and the valkerie. I just massed out on a couple of units. For example if i was zerg i would just go ling, mutas and hydras. Or if i was protoss i would just go Zealots, dragoon, DT, and maybe reaver drop or archons.....ohh and some HT.

But yeah thats how i played sc1. I could have used every unit i guess, but i didnt.
I think making each unit in sc2 unique further makes this game unique and differernt to sc1 and other games.


if your talking about completely something else, then please clarify

 

Can you make it a tad bit clearer? In my eyes, this is what Blizzard is trying to solve, not to implement.

 

Actually both of you are on the money with what I am trying to say. I realise blizzard is trying to fix this. I'm just not a fan if this direction they are taking. In saying that, I have to agree with you Ace with I rarely if ever used reavers or queens etc.

Yeah it's different to SC 1. Very. Thanks for the imput. It's slightly changed my opinions to this. I'm more accepting of it now.

 

Truthfully, I dont really want it to end up too much like Tiberium Wars where one particular unit was only very effective in destroying another type of particular unit. Its just not very satisfying watching about 20 squads of GDI infantry being taken out by about 10 tanks that were effective aginst infantry.

 

Personally I don't reckon the game will end up like that. Attack Bonuses would probably be the main contributing factor, I guess, but in reality it's just a more balanced version of the old damage system. The bonuses won't (or at least, shouldn't) constitute what that unit can and can't attack. Things like Hydralisks, Siege Tanks and Stalkers, although they have a bonus against Armoured units, will still be useful against other things like Zealots, Marines and Zerglings, and the same goes for bonuses against Light units being useful against Armoured units.

The thing with units like the Colossus, Void Ray, etc, which are specifically designed against massed or powerful units is to stop your opponent massing one specific type of unit. If they simply mass Marines, Zerglings, Zealots, or something, you can mass Colossi, Banelings or Hellions to counter it. If they simply mass Battlecruisers, Thors, Carriers, Motherships, Ultralisks, or something, then you can mass Void Rays, Vikings or Corrupters if it's one of the flyers or Void Rays again, Siege Tanks, Lurkers or Swarm Guardians if it's one of the Ground units.

Although there are units which are simply countered by certain units, they're still useful. It's only when massed when they become useless, which is the player's fault.

 

You mean very much like Wc3 in terms of rock paper scissors? If that's the case, some units will stop not be used most of the time. I tend to make dryads and huntresses, and that works out fine most of the time. When I'm undead, I use cryptfiends and necromancers.

 

I totally agree with ItzaHexGor.
Plus, I dont see how this is bad at all, it just gives the game a new layer of strategy, so the game wont be as planned as Sc1 was. I mean, some games are just way too mechanic. 7th probe builds pylon and scout, 8 zlots out rush, 6 goons 6 zlots go ... and on and on and on...

I mean, this probably will still happen with Sc2, but not thaaaat much

 

First time posting, long time fan...

It seems to me they are modeling the balance based off of World of Warcraft balance, in terms of raiding compositions and arena compositions. However, a problem arises here. There is a chance Blizz did balance these compositions enough so one tactic may become over powered.

 

if that happens, they can always patch.

 

I'm sure massing units will pretty much always work if you have the map control and macro for it. One high templar or lurker may be able to kill 15 marines in it's life span, but that doesn't mean much if the Terran is building 30 (I would hope fully or near fully upgraded) marines for every single high templar built. You still need some detectors but that was true of SC1 too.

I don't think massing will become completely unviable. Just far less viable against a smart opponent. Which, again was true of SC1.

Can you really call that massing? To me massing is building only one or at most two different units. Like medic and marine. Or only hydras. Simply pumping out units isn't massing, it's what you should always be doing. The name of the game is keeping your banked minerals and gas as close to zero as possible. Money you didn't spend won't grant you a victory if all your buildings have been destroyed.

 

well yeah tahts what i meant, lings and mutas combo..or a ling and hydra combo u know what im saying?

yeah i knew that.

 

I get you now. Thought you were talking about all 3 at once. Throw in some defilers and you have a pretty nice diverse force.


In regards to the bank.
Yeah. I honestly don't know why I even said that. I got the wrong impression with the first read? Too tired?

My heads all....fuzzy.

 

all good
=]

 

U must mean things like: the Immortals being took down by a small group of reapers; or the the Yamato Canyon taking down the hole bunch of marines; the banshee missiles doing the same with them. In fact I only noticed 2 things: that stupid (still good-looking) unit, the Mothership, which made things all but balanced in the game(BLACK HOLES?); and the Warp Ray -how come such a unit not kill a marine instantly?yes it expends a lot but more than enough to slay a bunch of them. Bah...I'm confident they'll surprise me. But goind point though.

 

HOLD ON!

First i have to say that warcraft 3 ....not a good multiplayer game like starcraft as far as normal ladder maps go. What i mean is that the warcraft normal maps count on having balanced races. Starcraft did a good job (i mean broodwar) balancing races and over all fairness. Warcraft 3 , only the scenerio maps are fun. Now having that said , on to the next point.
Next i see too often that games become to difficult for some people to play because of over balancing in the way that tiberium wars does(i mean the whole part about units having special affectiveness agains a certian type of unit.)

well if you could understand one bit of this babling, you will be one step closer to understanding why you should just disreguard it lolz

 

I think in the case that you were facing an extremely diverse army, as in an assault involving every unit (in a given faction) your counter would have to also be diverse. Since most players don't do this I wouldn't worry. This way there isn't one super fix-all-problems unit (just add water-> insti-win!)
In the video demos your getting in depth details on what each unit is good for because thats what demos are for. They give you the nitty gritty on each unit.
Does that help?

 

in my opinion, blizzard has come a long way with developing units for special purposes, even in Warcraft 3 , but it's that ability to micro manage and make use of minerals to get a certain job done that makes a really good strategic player. i have no problem with diversity.

 

just mass Stalkers, they beat the crap out of ling and hydra... like the vid that we saw... Yellow vs Sonkie

 

No. They beat the crap out of Lings, Roaches, and Hydras if Micro-managed efficiently. If not, you'll just have yourself a scrap yard. Even Yellow was losing a few while he ported them to the back of the line.