PDA

View Full Version : Mixed vs. Pure Forces



Lupino
05-16-2009, 01:30 PM
A thought came to me while reading the Siege Tank thread. One of the reasons the ST has become, to some, "nerfed" was to prevent the overwhelming strategy in TvT to Mech and just throw walls of STs at each other.

I agree that anything which shakes up gameplay and prevents a setting in stone of certain builds is good; I'm of a mind that a player should have great choice in how he plays the game, and not be penalized for playing a certain way. At the same time, I am a fan of focusing on certain builds, like going all air for Protoss or all Mech for Terrans because, hell, the image of dozens of armored killing machines rolling across the desert blasting everything to hell is just so damn cool! :D

So my question is, should it be possible for players to play and win going on exclusive builds (Protoss Air, Terran Mech, etc.) or should the game focus on forcing the player to adopt units from different builds (current example, Terrans wanting all infantry can only have medics by building a Starport for Medivacs)

Nicol Bolas
05-16-2009, 01:56 PM
What constitutes an "exclusive build"?

You say that using a StarPort in an all-infantry build makes it no longer all-infantry. So is an "exclusive build" based on production buildings? How does that work for the Zerg, who only ever have one production building?

DemolitionSquid
05-16-2009, 01:57 PM
It's pretty obvious that there is still mass-ability in SC2. Its just not as effective. Hydras, Roaches, Stalkers, MnM, Mech. They'll all be seen, but they'll be noticeably different.

Perfecttear
05-16-2009, 02:02 PM
So my question is, should it be possible for players to play and win going on exclusive builds (Protoss Air, Terran Mech, etc.) or should the game focus on forcing the player to adopt units from different builds (current example, Terrans wanting all infantry can only have medics by building a Starport for Medivacs)
The point of going with an exclusive build is to save money, example: if you go for a barracks build you don't need multiple factories and factories researches or vehicle upgrades. And as the game is currently designed, you are not supposed to research everything, you have to make choices ,going with either upgrade a or upgrade b, or you are at a big disantvantage. So yes exclusive builds will be a part of starcraft2.

.

unentschieden
05-16-2009, 03:21 PM
Perfecttear is right, going exclusive is about saving resources. You are trying to minimise your investments. Unit variety costs extra resources for production facilities (Zerg being a notable exception) Upgrades and Tech Buildings.
But in a balanced game exclusive builds are supposed to be vulnerable. Itīs about considering if the advantage from specializing is bigger than the disatvantage of a glaring weak spot. A variety of strategical options DOESNīT exclude massing. They just have to make shure that itīs ONE strategy not THE strategy.

Whanhee
05-16-2009, 04:19 PM
Making choices in what tech paths a player is going to take is going to be integral to the game but hopefully it won't be as strict as perfecttear put it. Being able to switch your strategies rapidly to counter an opponents strategy is critical in any rts. But one of the great things about sc in my opinion is that units weren't specialist or at least they mostly weren't. Choosing one tech over another (generally) did not mean that you were at risk of losing to a build that countered yours.

I think that even in sc2 there will be builds revolving around one or two units being massed with a few supporting units. It all comes down to unit synergy. If two units cover each others weaknesses, massing them together would become a very good strategy.

RamiZ
05-16-2009, 05:33 PM
I think that even in sc2 there will be builds revolving around one or two units being massed with a few supporting units. It all comes down to unit synergy. If two units cover each others weaknesses, massing them together would become a very good strategy.
Yeah i Agree but it also depends what is enemy going...like in SC BW, going STs and Vultures vs Protoss was a must, STs is killing everything and Vultures are defending STs with Mines and with their number, Zealots and Dragoons didnt have a chance vs that force, but if you add just few Shuttles and one Arbiter, that can be the end, since Zealot Bombs are well known for destroying more Tanks with 4 Zealots then with whole army...So i like mixed units way more then just massing one type of units or mostly one type...

Norfindel
05-16-2009, 08:10 PM
It's very possible that massing Stalkers or Hydralisks is going to be powerfull by it's own, but if the balance is right, it should be something that will make that homogeneus army a wrong choice.
Early game, Zealots and Zerglings had higher damage output per cost. Later, High Templars, Immortals and upgraded Roaches mixed in can turn the battle.
I hope there are now more ways to go, instead of some of BW's semi-fixed matchups, like Terrans going metal vs Protoss, and infantry vs Zerg.

RamiZ
05-17-2009, 01:34 AM
I hope there are now more ways to go, instead of some of BW's semi-fixed matchups, like Terrans going metal vs Protoss, and infantry vs Zerg.
Yeah it will be until Blizzard balance the game, and then all players will find cookie-cutter strategy vs special builds, but even so in SC BW you still got some new builds like nowadays Terrans like to use Mech vs Zerg, but it also depends on map, blah blah etc...

Pandonetho
05-17-2009, 12:24 PM
Terran in BW are starting to use metal more against Zerg.

RamiZ
05-17-2009, 04:08 PM
Terran in BW are starting to use metal more against Zerg.

Yeah and not just that, but also some weird new strategies, like double port Wraiths continuing to M&M with Tanks, or fast Valkyries with M&M....Well Terrans have to do something, cuz in last few Months they were utterly destroyed by the Zerg players, they have to counter that Mutas with something ;)