Strategy in SC2

[CelestialBadger]

Earlier today when I was browsing through this section I got to thinking about all of the arguments we've had in the past over strategy/micro in SC versus WC3, and got to thinking:

It's pretty obvious that Blizz is moving in a sort of WC3 direction at least with SC's graphics engine. In the past, whenever we've argued about strategy between the two games, everyone on the SC side has gone on about how units in SC have less hp and such and thus it takes more skill to effectively micro. Personally, I believe that the longer a unit is alive, the more you're going to have to pay attention to it; it's going to take more skill to micro an army the longer it's alive. I think Blizz has learned a lot about balancing out units and gameplay since they released their earlier RTS's like WC1/2 and SC, and I'm just wondering what everyone's opinion is on the direction SC will be headed as far as unit balance and overall gamplay strategy goes. If Blizz ends up beefing up the units in SC2, what will you guys have to argue about between WC3 and SC2? It'll basically just boil down to story elements...

Just a thought.

 

[B)ushid(o]

Blizzard, itself, has said that the main difference between WC and SC was that WC was micro-oriented, while SC was macro-oriented. WC has a slower pace, while SC has a faster pace.

SC2 already looks like it'll be driven even further into fast-paced gameplay w/ units like Reapers and Stalkers. Thus, base defense is already totally different. Fixed defensive positions look like they're going to be at a larger disadvantage in SC2's greater emphasis on fast-paced gameplay.

Even if Blizzard were to beef up SC2 units, it still won't have the emphasis on heroes that WC has.

 

[Wing Zero]

base defense does seem useless now especially for protoss seeing that they can warp as long there is a pylon near by.

 

[Ntrik_]

It was useless before too.. I personally used cannons for detector wise before I got observer..

 

[Vadriel]

It looks to me like Blizzard is emphasizing mobility in general for SC2. Bases appear to be able to be raided quickly and effectively, but so too can they be set up quickly.

Terrans have always had the liftoff command to move their buildings around, and I'm guessing there will end up being something to help a little bit with quick transportation.

Zerg Nydus Worms, if they are indeed as good as they appear, offer the chance for Zerg to suddenly pop up and start spawning anywhere on the map. This is great for early resource center buildups, and base relocation. Pop a Drone through a Nydus Worm, start building, and save yourself as your base gets raided.

Protoss have the Phase Prism, which combined with Warp In pretty much lets them build any damn place they want to, any damn time they want to.

Mobility has been greatly upgraded, both with units and structures. Overall, it makes the gameplay seem a lot more like a "strike and parry" sort of system, with a lot of going back and forth as to who's dominating at any given time.

 

[Emperor Pan I]

The game looks more based on Sc than wCIII. From the gameplay demos, units look like they die quicker than a WCIII unit would. Starcraft is primarily based on large scale combat and resource management. You lose a few units, no big deal you have a 200 supply limit, and units don't take up much supply.

Warcraft III is about short term and small scale combat. Tier 1 units already take 2 supply, and you only have 100 limit. You lose a grunt, that's 40 exp to the enemy hero. A big loss to your army. You need to micro to keep every unit alive as long as possible. You lose a hero that is massive exp to the enemy hero, the loss of any xp from killing units after your hero dies, a drain on your resources to rebuild him, and a long period to do so.

WCIII you basicly throw 5 workers on a mine, and forget about it. You can't have more, and less gains you nothing. Sc generaly requires more careful planning on the number of workers and such. Different game mechanics.

 

[PauseBreak]

Mass battles = Macro economy (in most cases)

They game will differ greatly from WC3 main for that reason. Blizzard already stated that the game will stay true like the original with the Macro themes.
Lets hope hero's stay a WC3 thing, or we will be looking at another Micro game. Unless Blizzard does something completely different with hero's I can't see it staying Macro.

 

[Emperor Pan I]

They've already said the hero aspect is the other branch of RTS WCIII which isn't how SC is being designed.

 

[Vadriel]

They even went further to make it all sorts of macro by expanding the max unit selection...now you can have literally everything you've got all storming the battlefield at once.

That's one thing I loved in Total Annhiliation that made me sad for SC: having literally hundreds of warriors moving across the field with one click.

 

[betaalpha5]

honestly thought i only care about 2 things
power overwhelming and the gathering i just want the storyline i can worry about beating it without cheats later

 

[Vadriel]

Pfft. I like those cheats but honestly my two most-used ones are Show me the Money and Operation Cwal. Usually I don't even bother with Show me the money, I'm just really damn impatient about buildtimes.

 

[Taligaro]

I never played any of the WC games, so I'm not going there.

I will say that SC DOES have heroes though. Raynor, Duke, Kerrigan, Duran, etc... They may not be some uber unit that can wipe things out fast, but they do have longer attack ranges then the upgraded counterpart units, Marine/Vulture, Tank/BC, Ghost, and Ghost. I know this because I used to(and still do from time to time) make mods for SC and I noted that the Heroes have a longer range then the normal units. Lets take the Tank and Duke's Tank for example...

The normal tank has a range of 24(in siege mode) while Duke's tank has a range of 26. Granted, not that much, but enough to give him a slight edge over the normal tanks.

I want Blizzard to keep the hero units like Raynor, Zeratul, and Kerrigan in the game. It wouldn't be SC without them in my opinion. Okay, not for MP use, I want them to be kept for SP missions! Zeratul has always been my favorite unit in the whole game, after the Archons. That is another thing, I want them to KEEP the Archons and Dark Archons in the game in some form. Maybe in SC2 you can create a "Twisted Archon" where a High Templar and a Dark Templar are able to merge into a freaky Archon type unit that attacks and does spells like MC and Feedback. That I would LOVE to see!

Thats just my opinions.

Oh yeah, and cheats. Though I only ever used Operation CWAL, I want to see cheats in SC2, just in case. LOL

 

[Emperor Pan I]

WC never had uber wipe out everything heroes.

I doubt they will keep both High Templars and Dark Templars. I was thinking after going through the game again that perhaps the whole Tassadar thing should be explored more. How he was taught the Dark energies of the Dark Templar and combining it with his teachings of the High Templar. Perhaps the Protoss could sport some templars with a similar combination of sides.

 

[CelestialBadger]

I wasn't even considering heros when I made the OP. I feel like most serious SC players would throw a fit if Blizzard tried to make SC as hero-oriented as WC has become. I'm sure they'll keep the kind of heros that SC1 used, but it would be very surprising if they tried to move those heros in a more WC3 direction.

I was thinking more along the lines of survivability of units as it relates to balance. I never really got into SC much from a strategic standpoint, but in WC3 there are really clear strategies for taking out certain units, where to place certain units as you attack to make it more difficult for you opponent to kill them, as well as pretty clear strategies for microing to do more damage over a longer period of time.

Personally, I think with an increased unit selection, micro would become just as important as macro. On a macro level, you'll need to be able to maintain your bases and pump out as many units as you can and adapt to what your opponent is doing, but if SC2 sees units that are more capable of dealing with different kinds of attacks and unit abilities, it's going to be just as important to control your units effectively during each individual attack.

 

[RyanXWing]

Hopefully, like in WC, when you have a spellcaster selected with other units you can still select some of the spells. Thats one thing I really liked about Warcraft.

 

[Lizardbreath]

I think starcraft 2 is more realistic IMHO with the less HP. IN warcraft 3 you can attack bases with single units and do large amounts of damage even if you are being hit with 50,000 arrows. In Starcraft after a short span the bullets/acid/lazer swords kill you, thus making it more war like.

 

[Emperor Pan I]

I think starcraft 2 is more realistic IMHO with the less HP. IN warcraft 3 you can attack bases with single units and do large amounts of damage even if you are being hit with 50,000 arrows. In Starcraft after a short span the bullets/acid/lazer swords kill you, thus making it more war like.

that is grossly inaccurate, and disgusting.

 

[Guest]

They should have kept the twelve unit selection imo.

Its gonna stay:
Protoss: Micro is the most important
Zerg: Micro does little, macro is most important
Terran: Somewhere in between.

 

[Ntrik_]

They should have kept the twelve unit selection imo.

Its gonna stay:
Protoss: Micro is the most important
Zerg: Micro does little, macro is most important
Terran: Somewhere in between.

Micro is important for every races.. lmao

 

[Emperor Pan I]

I think he means the greater emphasis on micro is with Protoss etc. Micro is important for everything, but Protoss is fundamentally required a greater deal of micro with less units than say a zerg can produce.