Higher ground

[pure.Wasted]

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.

If you actually factor in the way the game is played, however -- ie, the low-grounder brings along a spotter, the high-grounder attempts to kill said spotter -- what that untouchable/nothing distinction translates to is "% free hits" where the % depends on the skill of both players.

As long as the two are somewhere around the same skill level, the battle is likely to give the high grounder a few free hits, then a spotter will nullify that advantage, then the high grounder will destroy spotter and get a few more free hits, and so on and so forth. So it's not like the entire battle is either in one state or the other. It swings back and forth.

[Norfindel]

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.

And what's the problem with that? Those are clear rules. You get attacked from HG, you retreat, bring a spotter, try to keep it alive, or Scan (unlikely now that it costs you a lot of minerals). The guy on HG has to kill the spotter. If the spotter is invisible, he needs detection. If the spotter is air, he needs anti-air. That generates a lot of gameplay.

You don't have to guess (somehow) if your army with a 50% miss chance can still beat the HG army or not.

This is a good one: if your army is composed of 10 Marines and 10 Siege Tanks, who's going to hit it's targets on the first shot? Ideally 5 Marines and 5 Siege Tanks, but that depends on the pseudo-random number generator and the internal order of the units. It could mean 10 Marines and 0 Siege Tanks, or 0 Marines and 10 Siege Tanks. And it won't be perfectly 50% of the units, maybe less than half the units hit their targets on the first shot, maybe more.

[Rake]

I'm glad this has generated some discussion. I thought it was going to die for a bit there.

I have a specific question. Have any beta players had trouble defending?

[pure.Wasted]

I'm glad this has generated some discussion. I thought it was going to die for a bit there.

I have a specific question. Have any beta players had trouble defending?

As T, the only thing I ever genuinely failed to stop was a pure mass of Stalkers. It was a Platinum player, and the first time I ever saw this strat used. He had a couple of Sentries for Shield, but there wasn't a single Zealot in the bunch.

In my particular case the game was unwinnable, but I'm sure that with proper scouting in general that strategy can be easily overcome with more Marauders and an early tank.

edit: I'm pretty sure he didn't have Obs which meant I had high ground advantage... but I'd have to check the replay to make sure.