StarCraft® II

My map-making retirement with feedback

Posts: 16
Blizzard really needs to read this thread if they haven't already. Even if you do not agree with his points, you have to concede that these are REAL issues with the game right now, and they pose bigger problems than "X race has no option to do Y that Z race does" etc. and so new units get introduced.

Look at these issues Blizzard... FIX the fundamentals of this game, then add new units for funsies.
Edited by Grippe on 9/26/2012 3:15 PM PDT
Reply Quote
Posts: 9
"broodwar was a great game. go play it?" 'Go eff yourself pal', that is all that comment says to me. It shows exactly what kind of person you and him are for him saying it and you supporting it.

If SC:BW was a baboon, SC2 would be his big shiny blue butt. Cuz sure, its part of the baboon and its flashy, but on closer inspection, it STINKS.
Z

Lol, this actually made me laugh because it shows quite a lot about the person you are. Thank you for the laugh by the way. It shows what kind of people we are? Really? It shows we are the kind of people who don't trash a game with terrible unit pathing, limited building and unit selection, and poor unit AI, just for the sake of making a game thats more interesting to watch. There are other, and much better, ways to go about doing that. I never said SC2 was there, I don't believe that it is. I love to level criticism at Starcraft2 for the things it does sub par; the deathball being just one of them. But I can't support bringing back limited unit selection and !@#$ty AI/UI just for the sake of it. Game designers know when making an expansion, to fix those kinds of problems, and thats exactly what they did and I applaud them for doing so. Now, they need to fix other problems that perfect unit pathing and multiple building/unit selection create, which I believe they will. Does this make me a bad person for not wanting a game made in 2010 to have the same AI/UI that a game in 1998 had? I hope not.
Reply Quote
Posts: 797
"broodwar was a great game. go play it?" 'Go eff yourself pal', that is all that comment says to me. It shows exactly what kind of person you and him are for him saying it and you supporting it.

If SC:BW was a baboon, SC2 would be his big shiny blue butt. Cuz sure, its part of the baboon and its flashy, but on closer inspection, it STINKS.
Z

Lol, this actually made me laugh because it shows quite a lot about the person you are. Thank you for the laugh by the way. It shows what kind of people we are? Really? It shows we are the kind of people who don't trash a game with terrible unit pathing, limited building and unit selection, and poor unit AI, just for the sake of making a game thats more interesting to watch. There are other, and much better, ways to go about doing that. I never said SC2 was there, I don't believe that it is. I love to level criticism at Starcraft2 for the things it does sub par; the deathball being just one of them. But I can't support bringing back limited unit selection and !@#$ty AI/UI just for the sake of it. Game designers know when making an expansion, to fix those kinds of problems, and thats exactly what they did and I applaud them for doing so. Now, they need to fix other problems that perfect unit pathing and multiple building/unit selection create, which I believe they will. Does this make me a bad person for not wanting a game made in 2010 to have the same AI/UI that a game in 1998 had? I hope not.


i never said to put anything in or out of sc2, such as unit selection or pathing. I just said it sucks. But yeah nice wall of text where you try to put words in other peoples mouths to win an argument that i never made. It must be nice living in LaLa land.
Reply Quote
Posts: 672

This list isn't complete, this is what i remember at this moment.


Please don't finish it, for I think this is the most pompous bit of writing I have seen today and I am an English teacher.


So tell me, how does being an english teacher (a silver one at that) give you the ability to refute what arguably the best map maker in the business is saying?
Reply Quote
Posts: 3,739
He's saying he knows a thing or two about pompous writing.
Reply Quote
Posts: 9
09/26/2012 04:16 PMPosted by BattLeSCVs
i never said to put anything in or out of sc2, such as unit selection or pathing. I just said it sucks. But yeah nice wall of text where you try to put words in other peoples mouths to win an argument that i never made. It must be nice living in LaLa land.


09/26/2012 03:27 PMPosted by PunOfASentry
"broodwar was a great game. go play it?" 'Go eff yourself pal', that is all that comment says to me. It shows exactly what kind of person you and him are for him saying it and you supporting it.


What I wrote in the first post, the one you responded to, talks about unit selection and pathing. You either didn't read it, or skimmed it, thought "he says BW isnt perfect, must BM herp derp", or just decided any post relating SC2 to BW means BW is the much better game and anyone who thinks otherwise, !@#$ them. I'm not sure which of those 3 you are, but regardless;
You respond to a post about "unit selection and pathing". I retort your comment that SC2 is not whatever childish analogy you made. Then go on to talk about what I said in the post in the first place. And yet I'm not talking about anything relevant? Try reading next time, it might help you out in the future.
Ill add this just to help you out;
TLDR: Try reading the posts you respond to before claiming I'm putting words in your mouth. I even quote you in it.
Reply Quote
Posts: 2,275
09/26/2012 01:00 PMPosted by Ephixia
Obviously SC2 isn't currently BW 2.0 ...although I have to ask the question why shouldn't it be? I think if you asked most professionals they would overwhelmingly say that BW was a better game than SC2. What's wrong with trying to make SC2 as good or better than the original? It is supposed to be the successor. I'm not saying remake BW in SC2 I'm saying try to take all the greatness BW had and improve upon it with SC2. Settling for just "good" and not "outstanding" doesn't seem very logical to me.


I find myself agreeing with this very much
Reply Quote
Posts: 9
09/26/2012 04:28 PMPosted by CarrotJuice
ability to refute what arguably the best map maker in the business is saying?

Hes apparently a mapmaker that knows very little about how to design a game. He might design maps very well, but no game designer will ever implement poor mechanics for the sake of "good" gameplay. There are others ways of doing it. You don't put in mechanics from a game in 1998 into a game made in 2010. I don't care if he's the best player in the world or mapmaker. You dont sack unit pathing, unlimited unit selection, smartcasting, and every other "Broodwar" mechanic, or lack of mechanics, to make the game better. Half of his "reasons" are The game is not Broodwar. Starcraft2 is not Broodwar 2.0 and it shouldn't be.
Reply Quote
Posts: 797
i never said to put anything in or out of sc2, such as unit selection or pathing. I just said it sucks. But yeah nice wall of text where you try to put words in other peoples mouths to win an argument that i never made. It must be nice living in LaLa land.


"broodwar was a great game. go play it?" 'Go eff yourself pal', that is all that comment says to me. It shows exactly what kind of person you and him are for him saying it and you supporting it.


What I wrote in the first post, the one you responded to, talks about unit selection and pathing. You either didn't read it, or skimmed it, thought "he says BW isnt perfect, must BM herp derp", or just decided any post relating SC2 to BW means BW is the much better game and anyone who thinks otherwise, !@#$ them. I'm not sure which of those 3 you are, but regardless;
You respond to a post about "unit selection and pathing". I retort your comment that SC2 is not whatever childish analogy you made. Then go on to talk about what I said in the post in the first place. And yet I'm not talking about anything relevant? Try reading next time, it might help you out in the future.
Ill add this just to help you out;
TLDR: Try reading the posts you respond to before claiming I'm putting words in your mouth. I even quote you in it.


You are doing it again. Just so we are clear, I never said i agree or disagree 100% with everything in his post. I never personally referenced "changes needed". I never said anything of the sort. I also don't care if i make remarks about animal butts and make people think i'm immature. Don't add crap to your response about game mechanics if its not part of your response to one specific thing. Dude just stop trying.
I'll add this just to help you out:
TLDR: You Fail.
Edited by BattLeSCVs on 9/26/2012 4:46 PM PDT
Reply Quote
Posts: 2,284
Hello everyone, I posted yesterday a blog on teamliquid.net about my retirement:
http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=371545

Many people wanted to know the reasons of my lack of interest in this game, I post them here so the ones who are mainly concerned can read them. I reduced my subjective opinion as much as possible.

- A-move units with zero micro needed to do a lot of damage: colossus

- Units that forces a very specific counter otherwise you have high chances to lose: colossus->viking/corruptor

- Units push themselves, even enemy units, this causes to never be sure if your unit wall is ling proof

- Moving units have a smaller footprint than a static one moving ball armies are even smaller.

- The perfect pathing combined with unlimited selection, i think they must do unlimited selection with worse pathing to make more space between units OR perfect pathing with limited selection.

- Inability to move units between 2*2 buildings and bunkers. Supply depots wouldn't be needed at the bottom of main ramp.

- The spammable low tech anti-micro skills: forcefield and fungal , you can't counter them once you get caught. With brood war statis, you can save the units and about lockdown, it's hard to pull off and it's on only one unit.

- Smartcast, if there was no smartcast, spells could be much stronger because you would have to select spellcasters one by one. This could create comeback situations.

- Comebacks are only very rarely possible.

- The high number of workers needed per base, this causes to not need many bases spread out on the map. The high income rate is a big factor as well of not taking more than 3 bases.

- No highground advantage, the one in sc2 is only present in early game and is an illusion in the rest of the game. It causes terrain to not have much meaning.

- The big range of units compared to their radius, the consequence is too many units shoot at the same time and thus the dps rate of the army is huge.

- The dps rate causes players to not micro a lot

- There is no multiples battles occuring at the same time, and no, harass and drops are a different thing. The high dps rate causes that as well.

- Protoss early/mid game is balanced around the forcefield and forces them to take a very very close third base, you can't have too many paths leading to it otherwise a protoss can't forcefield everything.

- You can't place a lot of chokes in the middle of a map otherwise forcefields break everything (cloud kingdom is borderline on this subject)

- Every 4 players map with reflection symmetry must have close positions disabled because natural to natural distance is too short, it takes away a lot of diversity

- Units move too fast

- Tiny area control available, only tanks and swarm hosts can do it. Creep does it too but not very much.

- The only choke control unit/spell is the forcefield

- The terrain editor is extremely rigid, especially for ramps.

- The big size of expands, the resource gathering building having a 5*5 footprint

- Forcing 8 minerals, 2 gas expands

This list isn't complete, this is what i remember at this moment.


This guy knows what he's talking about in terms of balance, we should listen to him
Reply Quote
Posts: 9
Obviously SC2 isn't currently BW 2.0 ...although I have to ask the question why shouldn't it be? I think if you asked most professionals they would overwhelmingly say that BW was a better game than SC2. What's wrong with trying to make SC2 as good or better than the original? It is supposed to be the successor. I'm not saying remake BW in SC2 I'm saying try to take all the greatness BW had and improve upon it with SC2. Settling for just "good" and not "outstanding" doesn't seem very logical to me.


When you take what I said out of context, yes, I can see that being entirely reasonable response. I'm not against making SC2 better than it already is. Making it have the mechanics and AI/UI of Broodwar (a game from 1998) is not making it better than it already is. Any game designer, and TotalBiscuit if you'd like to see him as more credible. will say that you dont sack good mechanics for bad ones. IE terrible pathing, clunky and limited unit selection and unit movement/attack. You dont. There are other ways to make the game better.
Reply Quote
Posts: 59
I suck at Sc2 and all, and I only laddered a bit in Wc3 and only played BW campaign, but as a game player, I have to agree with and respect the Op's position on Sc2, and I love Starcraft2.

What sets Wc3 and BW apart from Sc2 is that the skill floor is much lower. BW and WC3 pros look like supermen when they play. Their units never die, micro and macro happen all over all the time- amateur players can barely comprehend what the pros are doing, let alone imitate. In Starcraft 2, there just isn't as much edge for the pros. Plenty of room, we can all agree, but amateurs routinely upset even the toppest of top pros in Sc2, and it feels like a game where anyone can take a game off anyone at Masters+.

A comparison that seems apt in my mind is CounterStrike 1.6 vs Counterstrike: Source. Without a doubt, Source made visual improvements and vastly eased the aiming requirements for various weapons. Headshots, even for a relatively inexperienced Source player, are pretty routine. The pro scene kept playing 1.6 right up until GO came out.

I don't know what changes should/could be made to make Starcraft 2 a great competitive game, but I hope Blizzard takes the Op's ideas to heart because they seem pretty spot on, if a bit overly dramatic.

(Edit: On second thought I hate the idea of reverting UI improvements. That is the quick and easy way to accomplish this goal. I think in the end there need to be more opportunities for skill to carry the day, like more defensive advantage and units that require much more micro to achieve results with.)
Edited by YossariaN on 9/26/2012 4:50 PM PDT
Reply Quote
Posts: 9
09/26/2012 04:39 PMPosted by BattLeSCVs
Don't add crap to your response about game mechanics if its not part of your response to one specific thing.

So dont respond to the OP, thats terrific, thank you for that. I can see why battlenet forums are the scum of Starcraft2 forums. Reasoning and behavior like that.
Reply Quote
Posts: 797
Don't add crap to your response about game mechanics if its not part of your response to one specific thing.

So dont respond to the OP, thats terrific, thank you for that. I can see why battlenet forums are the scum of Starcraft2 forums. Reasoning and behavior like that.


You quoted a specific thing, then proceeded to respond to it, as well as fabricate views for me in your response that i never expressed in order to put forth some sort of argument. So basically the order of events here are: I quoted your response and responded to it, then you in turn, except in your response you included a made up argument that you had 'won'.

If you want to talk about game mechanics i would suggest you respond to someone whom is actually talking about them. Responding to someone about it who is not currently discussing it would be insane.
Edited by BattLeSCVs on 9/26/2012 4:53 PM PDT
Reply Quote
Posts: 2
09/26/2012 04:42 PMPosted by PunOfASentry
Obviously SC2 isn't currently BW 2.0 ...although I have to ask the question why shouldn't it be? I think if you asked most professionals they would overwhelmingly say that BW was a better game than SC2. What's wrong with trying to make SC2 as good or better than the original? It is supposed to be the successor. I'm not saying remake BW in SC2 I'm saying try to take all the greatness BW had and improve upon it with SC2. Settling for just "good" and not "outstanding" doesn't seem very logical to me.


When you take what I said out of context, yes, I can see that being entirely reasonable response. I'm not against making SC2 better than it already is. Making it have the mechanics and AI/UI of Broodwar (a game from 1998) is not making it better than it already is. Any game designer, and TotalBiscuit if you'd like to see him as more credible. will say that you dont sack good mechanics for bad ones. IE terrible pathing, clunky and limited unit selection and unit movement/attack. You dont. There are other ways to make the game better.


I didn't take what you said out of context. I read your post and I stand by my response. You tore apart OP for 2 out of the 20 or so problems he listed. I also don't think OP was advocating poor pathing either. He used the term poor pathing but what he is referring to is how brood war units did not clump. OP would like it if the unit to unit footprint was increased. This would allow for the epic BW multi-front battles that occur across several screens and remove a lot of boring a-move deathball problems.

The point is to spread out the DPS and make it so endgame deathballs clash across several screens not just one. This both improves the micro skill cap and makes the battles more exciting to watch.
Edited by Ephixia on 9/26/2012 6:07 PM PDT
Reply Quote
Posts: 155
09/26/2012 12:51 PMPosted by Rolandtoke
Please don't finish it, for I think this is the most pompous bit of writing I have seen today and I am an English teacher.


Maybe there is a reason why English teachers tend to cluster around silver league?

Not to %*#! on your vocation, language is incredibly important and I appreciate a large body of literature, but this is not an English paper and you are quite clearly out of your element. The fact of the matter is that you are quite literally lacking in the technical knowledge required to offer a proper critique of Superouman's opinions here. This isn't to say he is absolutely correct about every one of these points, but to dismiss him as pompous for speaking on matters outside the range of your expertise is just a thinly veiled form of denialism.
Edited by Spinoza on 9/26/2012 7:03 PM PDT
Reply Quote
Posts: 3,324
09/26/2012 02:51 PMPosted by Guest
People are writing off one of the most intelligent, important people in the history of the game, and ignoring his arguments just because they wrongly think he's complaining about being bad at the game.


I responded with all of the obvious mistakes in his reasoning, and he has no response. The OP doesn't seem to want reason, logic, or critical thinking; He want's to complain, get attention, and have blizzard band-aid fix everything he THINKS is wrong, without putting in work to stop it or work around.

Why should anyone have to point out the errors in saying something like:
09/26/2012 12:17 PMPosted by SUPEROUMAN
- The only choke control unit/spell is the forcefield


I can list another 5 spells with clear choke applications and another 3 that specifically help with crowd control.
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,720
This guy has a great grasp of the issues many of of us custom mappers (ie vs melee mappers who just make melee maps) go at great lengths to try to fix many of these issues.

The movespeed one is obvious. SC2 map sizes are smaller then they have ever been in a Blizzard RTS and strategic play as as result has suffered.

The snowballing you seen in almost every game is directly due to the map size and move speed. Space and distance is the number 1 thing that prevents snowballing followed by things like choke points.

This design team is not the same one that made StarCraft 1 and WarCraft 3. They are not the same guys. These new ones have lot learned (yet) the subtleties of strategy yet. Fancy and colorful units is only a small part of the equation. For a true strategy terrain and tactics take a higher place. Not just deathballing.

I would suggest that for these developers to fully understand this stuff they high a professional chess player from the United States Chess Federation as a consultant. Chess is a world wide and an olympic strategy game with over 500 years of theory and experimentation behind it. Because the Blizzard devs lack the knowledge of these subtleties they should higher someone who does.

StarCraft 2 gameplay is extremely dry as a result and I cannot see this game running the full decade its predecessor did. Without extremely well designed, dynamic and interesting gameplay StarCraft 2 will not last as long in esports as long as StarCraft 1 did.
Reply Quote
Posts: 409
09/26/2012 06:14 PMPosted by Spinoza
This isn't to say he is absolutely correct about every one of these points, but to dismiss him as pompous for speaking on matters outside the range of your expertise is just a thinly veiled form of denialism.


I'm currently gold. I started playing a couple of months ago so I don't how I could have suggested this game is in my "range of expertise".

Unfortunately, professor, SC2 is a video game and you're supposed to have fun playing it. Instead, people are sighing and acting like they're ending a long marriage that finally fizzled out, but this is particularly self-righteous. Frankly I'm not concerned with how much of an expert he is in this sub-culture. I'm entitled to say what I have said and you're wasting your words trying to tell me otherwise.
Reply Quote

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)
Submit Cancel

Reported!

[Close]