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.
03-19-2010, 07:50 AM
#11
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.
03-19-2010, 10:57 AM
#12
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.
03-19-2010, 10:58 AM
#13
03-19-2010, 11:41 AM
#14
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.
03-19-2010, 12:44 PM
#15
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.
03-19-2010, 12:46 PM
#16
03-19-2010, 03:10 PM
#17
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.
03-19-2010, 03:19 PM
#18
If that were the case, why did the high ground advantage in SC1 matter?Having it random give you a slight advantage while defending but wouldn't change anything in a big battle.
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
03-19-2010, 03:31 PM
#19
03-19-2010, 04:10 PM
#20
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.