Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24

Thread: Higher ground

  1. #11

    Default Re: Higher ground

    I'm surprised that TL didn't noticed this creates a fight to destroy/defend spotters, and the the guy on higher ground can get the upper hand easier.

  2. #12

    Default Re: Higher ground

    Just to throw this out there and provide more proof of "Terran Highground Ignorance/Dominance": If my spotters were tied up elsewhere and something had the highground through a secondary pass which I wanted to use with a ground force, I would grab a ghost w/ cloak and an available nuke and often wouldn't need a spotter, if you know what mean.
    I am a master tactician. It is my execution that keeps getting me killed.

  3. #13

    Default Re: Higher ground

    Quote Originally Posted by 0neder View Post
    Randomness is what made SC1 so exciting. It's a risk. The player chooses to take the risk or not, so that is not really random.

    Also, having no high ground mechanic makes it extremely difficult to tech while defending with few units. Something you could pull off if good enough in SC1, but almost impossible in SC2.
    Is randomness fun? Sometimes.
    Is it good for competitive gaming with money rewards? NO.

  4. #14

    Default Re: Higher ground

    Randomness still exists but it is almost completely Playercontrolled. Since there is no perfect information Players sometimes need to make educated guesses. Also Players are still Human and even the best still make mistakes. That should be enough in a competative game.

    There might be an Argument that defense is too weak in SC2 but that doesn´t mean High Ground is the problem. It also limits Maplayout more than necessary.

    The argument that old HG is needed for weaker Players to beat stronger ones is also unconvincing. HG is an advantage for the Player that chooses the Engagement Area which usually is the aggressor aka stronger one.

  5. #15

    Default Re: Higher ground

    Quote Originally Posted by DemolitionSquid View Post
    Hell, if there's any race who clearly outclasses the others in "defense advantages," its Terran. Maybe Terran needs less defensive ability, or the other races more?
    I would not mind the other races getting better defensive abilities. Right now the Zerg defense is fairly worthless. There's all sorts of great potential with the crawlers being able to uproot, but since they're so weak you almost never see it.

    The Terran wall in is certainly a frustration for me. Unless you have spotters there's no way you can take them on. That might not be an option that early in the game. I usually just end up waiting until I get air attackers.
    ________
    Vape info
    Last edited by TWD; 09-14-2011 at 09:05 PM.

  6. #16

    Default Re: Higher ground

    Quote Originally Posted by 0neder View Post
    Randomness is what made SC1 so exciting. It's a risk. The player chooses to take the risk or not, so that is not really random.
    There should be no randomness in this game. I'm fine with how it is now.

  7. #17

    Default Re: Higher ground

    Say you have 50/50 chances of hitting a tank on higher ground, is it possible that if you get 10 shots on it that you would miss them all? Well let's see, you have 1/2 chance of missing so (1/2)^10 is the probability of missing 10 times which equal to 0.09% chances which is not a lot. Even though it really depends on the situation, you would expect to get around 50% of your usual DPS overall in a battle. This won't be true if you're trying to harass with only a few units though (which is the concern here) because you'll obviously have less shots. My point? Having it random give you a slight advantage while defending but wouldn't change anything in a big battle.

    If you're really obsessed with randomness though, you could always just give a constant 50% damage reduction.
    Last edited by sandwich_bird; 03-19-2010 at 03:12 PM.

  8. #18

    Default Re: Higher ground

    Having it random give you a slight advantage while defending but wouldn't change anything in a big battle.
    If that were the case, why did the high ground advantage in SC1 matter?

    Again, the most important question is whether you want a high ground advantage that is always advantageous or not.
    "When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up." - C. S. Lewis

    "You simply cannot design a mechanic today to mimic the behaviour of a 10-year old mechanic that you removed because nearly nobody would like them today." - Norfindel, on the Macro Mechanics

    "We want to focus the player on making interesting choices and not just a bunch of different klicks." - Dustin Browder

    StarCraft 2 Beta Blog

  9. #19

    Default Re: Higher ground

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas View Post
    If that were the case, why did the high ground advantage in SC1 matter?

    Again, the most important question is whether you want a high ground advantage that is always advantageous or not.
    Sorry, I can see the confusion there. I meant it wouldn't really change anything if it's random or not in a big battle. I didn't want to say that it doesn't give you any advantage.
    Last edited by sandwich_bird; 03-19-2010 at 03:37 PM.

  10. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    373

    Default Re: Higher ground

    My problem with the current mechanic is that it's too extreme in either direction: on high ground you're either untouchable, or it means nothing.

Similar Threads

  1. High Ground Mechanics Modification.
    By flabortast in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 03-16-2010, 02:12 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •