On general res flow mechanics
Vic
Join Date: 2010-11-20 Member: 75106Members
Join Date: 2010-11-20 Member: 75106Members
<div class="IPBDescription">a friendly debate</div>Looking for feedback on 2 issues I keep pondering about with the res flow in NS2:
1. RT count: 12 RTs on Docking (if I counted well) means completely skewed timings on everything post early game and quite long games otherwise. Can't really say this is bad, but I have a hunch it might be.
2. Infinite res from an RT. Once again, leading to really long games in my opinion. There's a reason why SC2 has finite minerals/gas, to require expansion and to allow a comeback for the losing player if he manages to kill and lock down the mining expansions. Then again, on one hand, if you get locked down to a hive/cc with no/low RT flow, it might ruin all the fun for the losing team, on the other it might allow for faster game end.
As I said, I have mixed feelings about these, so if you have any insights I might have overlooked please do chime in.
1. RT count: 12 RTs on Docking (if I counted well) means completely skewed timings on everything post early game and quite long games otherwise. Can't really say this is bad, but I have a hunch it might be.
2. Infinite res from an RT. Once again, leading to really long games in my opinion. There's a reason why SC2 has finite minerals/gas, to require expansion and to allow a comeback for the losing player if he manages to kill and lock down the mining expansions. Then again, on one hand, if you get locked down to a hive/cc with no/low RT flow, it might ruin all the fun for the losing team, on the other it might allow for faster game end.
As I said, I have mixed feelings about these, so if you have any insights I might have overlooked please do chime in.
Comments
- Its not the total number of RTs on a map that counts, but the number you can feasibly defend from your starting spawn (since this is the most crucial part of the match). As such, distance from tech to res nodes and the location of chokepoints are what really determine the res flow rate/tech timing.
For 2:
- The key difference between SC1/2 and NS1/2 that breaks res depletion is that the base unit in NS1/2 is free (marine/skulk). That's why in SC1/2, running out of res ends stalemates, but in NS1/2 it wouldn't, as you can still keep pumping out marines/skulks indefinitely. Even worse, since the main siege-breaking weapons/classes cost res, res depletion could make stalemates more common and longer, as assault rifle marines and skulks are trying to take out entrenched bases.
- Its not the total number of RTs on a map that counts, but the number you can feasibly defend from your starting spawn (since this is the most crucial part of the match). As such, distance from tech to res nodes and the location of chokepoints are what really determine the res flow rate/tech timing.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
With no leap and early mine+PG rush, this is difficult to deny, particularly in the case of close spawns on Docking.
E.g., aliens spawning in Tram and marines in Terminal. Rines got a PG in Ball Court, all the RTs to there (6 RTs v 3!) and they were contesting East Wing and Maintenance. Even though we killed 3 of their RTs, they've had them back up in no time (nano construct) and due to the long travel time and mines it was impossible to deny their position. Maybe this is a problem with these particular spawns, but I still feel they got too much of an advantage for what would have meant in Summit an equal number of RTs (3v3)
<!--quoteo(post=1951432:date=Jul 14 2012, 12:37 AM:name=ScardyBob)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ScardyBob @ Jul 14 2012, 12:37 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1951432"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->For 2:
- The key difference between SC1/2 and NS1/2 that breaks res depletion is that the base unit in NS1/2 is free (marine/skulk). That's why in SC1/2, running out of res ends stalemates, but in NS1/2 it wouldn't, as you can still keep pumping out marines/skulks indefinitely. Even worse, since the main siege-breaking weapons/classes cost res, res depletion could make stalemates more common and longer, as assault rifle marines and skulks are trying to take out entrenched bases.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Good point. I didn't have strong feelings about this either. I guess in SC2 you can afford to have a lot of res on the maps and thus require expansion instead of bunkering in, since you're supply capped in the number of gathering units you can have and thus the res flow anyway.
Yeah, in my opinion it's the biggest difference.
In Starcraft you expand slowly, consume areas and proceed further. It's good strategical play, but at the same time playing the role of a single unit involves a lot of guard duty and/or attacking strong fortified positions.
The NS styled all over the place expansion allows units to be more active and have more varied and even fights. It's not necessarily always as strategical and all that, but it has got some beauty and trickery of its own and it's also a very good way for creating varied skirmishes that the melee vs ranged setup needs.
---
I don't know if you could combine the expiring resources with NS styled all over the place expansion, but I feel it would often lead to rather unsatisfying games where one team gets into big disadvantage and shortly after starved out once the early 'safe and easy res' starts to run low. Basically the expiring resources would put huge emphasis to the bunch of heavily contested nodes, which then again leads to more stationary gameplay and guard duty we see in Starcraft.
Upgrades are currently free. Also differentiate between tres and pres, a cap for one might be more viable than a cap for both.