Can we have 1 week without inherent Lift-Off?

[Joneleth]

Please?

Just to see how it works out.



Let that one week be played only with new "island" maps, and make Terrans Research Lift-Off if they want it. Make it cost 150 Minerals, or 100 Minerals and 100 Gas, and/or require an Engineering Bay.

OR give all Terran buildings an Energy bar that's [very-]slowly used up while they're flying, and once it runs out, they drop and get destroyed if on unbuildable ground,.



This's not a complain against Lift-Off, just a way to work around [one of?] the complaints against island maps, 'cause I really hope those won't be sacrificed in the Ladder just to cover up that imbalance in the favor of Terrans.

[Yaz]

Island maps are a joke, fun but not made for a real game so I don't think anything is going to be balanced around them.

As to terran lift off, there's no reason to change it. If anything the game simply needs a way for one team to propose a draw and the other team to accept it. If they don't accept then so be it but neither side won so neither deserves a free win by limiting the basic ability of terran buildings to fly.

[Joneleth]

Island maps are a joke, fun but not made for a real game so I don't think anything is going to be balanced around them.Why not? What makes a "real game?"

[Idkanything]

Ahhhh if only the original "starbase" concept made it into game, where the starport could fly and turn into a mobile troop trainer - I could only imagine the whining that would go on if that unit existed lol


Lift off is a joke - its an ability that gives terran a bit of flexibility just learn how to play against it and its no issue. You can't try to race a terran to base destruction - if he's stomping you and you're trying to stomp back - turn around and go defend yourself. If you have the better army anyway - you'll kill what he has - then roll right back into his base and finish things off - or at the very least rebuild and get air while he flies around.

Please stop posting complaint threads about an ability that terran have always had and will always have. That would be like forcing protoss to research shields instead of all of their units/buildings starting with them. research shields for research lift off is a trade I'm completely willing to make lol

[Yaz]

Why not? What makes a "real game?"

A real game is one where the full balance of all strategies, units and timings can be put to use. Not one where the majority of them are cut off by bad map design.

Island maps can be fun to play now and then but they are not balanced and not a good show of skill. It would be like having a competition but putting rules such as no rushing or no using units X Y & Z.

[Joneleth]

A real game is one where the full balance of all strategies, units and timings can be put to use. Not one where the majority of them are cut off by bad map design.
A real game is one where the "balance" does not rely on map design. You're modifying the play-field to cover up the deficiencies of the participants.

I assume you consider every single ladder map having bases on high ground with one or two ramps leading up to them, other such chokepoints, and "natural" expansions, as "good" map design?



A perfectly-balanced system would allow all kinds of interesting terrain to be put into play. Not one where the majority of map designs are cut off by bad balance design, leaving little difference between ladder maps beyond the starting positions and tileset:

http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=23425466465&sid=5000

[Blasius]

A real game is one where the "balance" does not rely on map design. You're modifying the play-field to cover up the deficiencies of the participants.


Wrong, every RTS game relies on balanced maps for balanced gameplay.


I assume you consider every single ladder map having bases on high ground with one or two ramps leading up to them, other such chokepoints, and "natural" expansions, as "good" map design?


uh, yeah of course.


A perfectly-balanced system would allow all kinds of interesting terrain to be put into play. Not one where the majority of map designs are cut off by bad balance design, leaving little difference between ladder maps beyond the starting positions and tileset:

http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=23425466465&sid=5000

no, the maps should be balanced around the gameplay, not the other way around.

[Zasz]

I don't understand all the QQ with Lift Off.

1. Don't get in a situation where the Terran can force a stalemate with Lift Off.

2. ???

3. Profit!

[Joneleth]

Wrong, every RTS game relies on balanced maps for balanced gameplay.

uh, yeah of course.

no, the maps should be balanced around the gameplay, not the other way around.er, no. If your units can perform reliably well only on just one particular type of map then they're not really "balanced."

There's a lot of strategies required in succeeding on an "islands" map that just do not come into play on the usual high/low-ground terrain that you see on the Ladders.

As it is, Blizzard has mostly been playing catch-up with the Korean or ICCup standards instead of trying something fresh (not counting the Xel'naga towers and the high-yield minerals) as far as map design is concerned.

I don't understand all the QQ with Lift Off.I don't understand all the QQ with island maps either.

[Joey]

A real game is one where the "balance" does not rely on map design.



In this case I think terran should start right next to their opponent, as SCV's can kill any worker 1v1.




So why are maps with an island on it not a real map? Scouting an issue for people when playing against terran these days?


Seems balanced to me, considering you can get drop units relatively quickly without much of a problem.





As long as we don't see that one map from war3 that circulated the 4v4 AT ring make it's way back in here, I'm sure we'll be fine with an occasional island inside maps here and there.


ALSO - if you are doing TvT and you are dealing with a locked off island that is heavily guarded, you should know that a ghost nuke can hit any island in the current maps, and as far as I know, it's intended.

[Bibdy]

A real game is one where the "balance" does not rely on map design. You're modifying the play-field to cover up the deficiencies of the participants.



lolwat? So you think they balance everything based on a blank sheet of ground and the maps are put in to distort that balance? So how exactly do Protoss fend off a 6-Zergling rush in an open field map, when they can barely field 2 Zealots before they arrive? Right now you have to build around your choke point and block it off with no less than 2 Zealots. Leave a larger opening and those Zerglings can just waltz on by and and harass your Probes, causing you to run away, costing you minerals.

There's a reason there are 'official' maps in the Leagues, and not just some random bunch of poorly designed crap ones the community made. Map making for League games is serious business. They have to take a lot into consideration when designing it, so that it facilitates a lot of strategies.

[Kralic]

Lift off is great, if you lose because of it, idk what to say.

On a more humourous note: Zerg buildings should be able to burrow and protoss buildings should be able to cloak!

[Joneleth]

Lift off is great, if you lose because of it, idk what to say.

On a more humourous note: Zerg buildings should be able to burrow and protoss buildings should be able to cloak!Same goes for winning because of it, then.

Nice straw-manning though, but nowhere was this about losing because of Lift-Off, unlike all the other threads you see here about such stalemates, which kind of hints at there being some kind of problem with it.

[Kralic]

[quote]Island maps are a joke, fun but not made for a real game so I don't think anything is going to be balanced around them.[\quote]

Dire Straits was an official Ladder map in sc1...

[Krazytrumpet]

"I hate <ability/unit> because it prevents me from winning easily. Please nerf/remove from game!"

[Joneleth]

^ "X helps me win easily but Y will not so Y is a joke." （の＿の）

[Toridas]

I think they should add more lift off to the game! In SC1 engineering bays could lift off but in SC2 they can't :(

[Kralic]

I think they should add more lift off to the game! In SC1 engineering bays could lift off but in SC2 they can't :( Engineering bays were exploited, cheap ways to hover over seige tanks and worker lines to prevent the opponent from selecting them! Since this game is farily new(beta) IM going try my old tactic at making mass overlords and causing my opponent to d/c or crash. it did work in SC1 for the first few years.

[Messana]

Please?

Just to see how it works out.



Let that one week be played only with new "island" maps, and make Terrans Research Lift-Off if they want it. Make it cost 150 Minerals, or 100 Minerals and 100 Gas, and/or require an Engineering Bay.

OR give all Terran buildings an Energy bar that's [very-]slowly used up while they're flying, and once it runs out, they drop and get destroyed if on unbuildable ground,.



This's not a complain against Lift-Off, just a way to work around [one of?] the complaints against island maps, 'cause I really hope those won't be sacrificed in the Ladder just to cover up that imbalance in the favor of Terrans.

Liftoff has been in starcraft since the very beginning, and you're whining about it now? Go fly a kite.

[Joneleth]

I think they should add more lift off to the game! In SC1 engineering bays could lift off but in SC2 they can't :(
There you go! They did acknowledge it as an issue and did give in and change it, even if for just one type of structure.

That's kind of a hack job, IMO.

[Bibdy]

Yes, Engineering Bays lifting off was serious business...I think the reason for that is inconsistency. Why were Engineering Bays allowed to Lift Off and not the Armoury? They're both just separate upgrade buildings. Lift Off was primarily (and now is, in a very literal sense) only for buildings which produced units. The Engineering Bay was pretty inconsistent with that.

I doubt anyone truly misses the ability to move an upgrade building around to the point of frustration.

[Thebaron]

Joneleth, saying Starcraft should be balanced on ANY kind of map is like saying tennis would be balanced if we replaced the net with a giant brick wall. "It's still the same sport, just on a different field!"

How about Hockey in the sand? Sure, you can't hit the puck worth a damn, but you can still make a goal if you try hard enough.

Or we could play baseball with 2 bases spaced a mile apart.

And I can't wait for the day when we can play zero gravity golf!

Stop being stupid.

[Joneleth]

@Thebaron.thebaron

No one suggested flat empty maps. That was in response to the complaints that go too far in the other direction, about island maps being a "joke."

Stop resorting to straw-man fallacies to back a fail opinion without bringing anything constructive into the argument.

[Thebaron]

They ARE a joke. If they were feasible they would be used in tournaments. You just like them so much (because they simplify the game so greatly) that you can't accept that.

And I was talking about island maps. Island maps in SC are like playing football with a giant moat across the middle. Yeah, you can still pass, but you can't run. Now defense has a major advantage and every play is predictable and boring. JUST LIKE STARCRAFT ON ISLAND MAPS.

[Divine]

As much as I kinda enjoy (sometimes loathe) playing island maps, I'm gonna have to agree with it being a joke. This is not to say that the game gives noobs a buffer time to work with (although it kinda does in a way) but staracraft1 and 2 are both fariy ground oriented game with only about 1/4 ~ 1/3 of units being air.

You can say "just use medivac/warp prism/overlord transport" but using the transport is but one part of strategy out of many. In "normal" maps, you can hop over terrains with reapers/collosi, break rock structures to open up a shortcut or just steamroll through their main entrance. You can rush with tier 1 units and on... in normal maps and that's why you need to worry about and defend against tier 1 to get through to tech and expand. Once you take away the initial stage and the terrain factor from the game, you are playing a different type of game with need to balance in a different way. So yes, you will need to rebalance if you wanted to play island maps competitively or with good balance that SC has provided us (except mutas RAWR)

You can also argue that in island maps, turrets are advantageous by a bit and how people will build those defenses around the edges and in their base more whereas in "normal" games, one can risk not having those and constantly apply pressure with ground forces to prevent them from thinking about attacking...

also, about lift off...

seriously.. you can't take out terran that had to use lift off to stalemate the game?... if you base switched and you can't build air units to go kill their lifted off buildings, you deserve to lose.

and why is lift off such a problem anyway? don't base switch!

I can see where if you deplete all the resources in the game and both of you have too much base defense (cannons, spine, bunkers) to end the game where you can ask for stalemate button.. but lift off isn't and never was a big problem

[Johan]

This thread is pretty terrible :|

Also I've noticed a trend on the internet. Whenever someone has a piss poor opinion, they always cry out "fallacies!" at the players who point out that they're wrong.

Edit: Also in b4 "THAT'S A FALLACY!"

[Thebaron]

I can see where if you deplete all the resources in the game and both of you have too much base defense (cannons, spine, bunkers) to end the game where you can ask for stalemate button.. but lift off isn't and never was a big problem

This. You people whining about liftoff deserved to lose for trying to trade bases with Terran.

[Joneleth]

meh

I'd still be sad not to see some new map designs for Ladder matches, beyond Blizzard's adaptation of ICCup maps, and so far one of the major arguments against island maps is that they tend to be in the favor of Terrans (mostly due to Lift-Off, and this complaint goes as far back as the year 2000) and maybe because there are no good units for assaulting fortified islands which can't be abused otherwise, on ground-only maps.

In any case I'm not asking for a permanent overhaul to the status quo, just a temporary change to see how things work differently, since this IS the time to check stuff like that. You can't claim to know how all the 5000 or so players in the Beta will be playing the game if Lift-Off was made optional and we had island maps, especially with units like the Colossus which's supposed to walk over water.

also, about lift off...

seriously.. you can't take out terran that had to use lift off to stalemate the game?... if you base switched and you can't build air units to go kill their lifted off buildings, you deserve to lose.Not that this thread is about that, but what if the Terran explicitly goes for more-or-less a suicide attack, counting on the ability to lift-off to throw the game into a stalemate on purpose?

The very fact that these kinds of deadlocks are occurring at all suggests a flaw that needs to be looked at.

but whatever, it's up to Blizzard.

[Divine]

meh

I'd still be sad not to see some new map designs for Ladder matches, beyond Blizzard's adaptation of ICCup maps, and so far one of the major arguments against island maps is that they tend to be in the favor of Terrans (mostly due to Lift-Off, and this complaint goes as far back as the year 2000) and maybe because there are no good units for assaulting fortified islands which can't be abused otherwise, on ground-only maps.

In any case I'm not asking for a permanent overhaul to the status quo, just a temporary change to see how things work differently, since this IS the time to check stuff like that. You can't claim to know how all the 5000 or so players in the Beta will be playing the game if Lift-Off was made optional and we had island maps, especially with units like the Colossus which's supposed to walk over water.

Not that this thread is about that, but what if the Terran explicitly goes for more-or-less a suicide attack, counting on the ability to lift-off to throw the game into a stalemate on purpose?

The very fact that these kinds of deadlocks are occurring at all suggests a flaw that needs to be looked at.

but whatever, it's up to Blizzard.

understandable but I see this lift off testing as completely unnecessary.

and note about terran going for suicide atk, it's fixed by more active scouting and reactive response to the so called "suicide attack"... base switch is what I called it... has existed ever since staracraft 1.. and sometimes (rarely) even happens in pro games but because pros are able to macro and micro more efficienty (not to mention constant scouting), those do not go into stalemate...

oh and I do have to agree with, "i would like to see more innovative design" .. and emphasis on "innovative" and not.. island maps that have existed forever

[Dreuel]

I don't know, I had a fun TvT match where my opponent decided to relocate to an island immediately at the start of the game and turtling with dozens of missile turrets.

Using a medivac to drop ghosts on the corner of the island and nuking the crap out of it resolved that issue.

[Thebaron]

especially with units like the Colossus which's supposed to walk over water.

They don't. Water is considered "impassable" terrain by all ground units, like lava, long drops, and space.

Not that this thread is about that, but what if the Terran explicitly goes for more-or-less a suicide attack, counting on the ability to lift-off to throw the game into a stalemate on purpose?

The very fact that these kinds of deadlocks are occurring at all suggests a flaw that needs to be looked at.

but whatever, it's up to Blizzard.

I agree that the game should check for stalemates and declare draws in such cases, but removing or limiting lift-off is not the way to avoid this sort of situation.

[Joneleth]

This thread is pretty terrible :|

Also I've noticed a trend on the internet. Whenever someone has a piss poor opinion, they always cry out "fallacies!" at the players who point out that they're wrong.

Edit: Also in b4 "THAT'S A FALLACY!" Well, now that you've got yourself covered with that little disclaimer, let me just say, NO U.

[Tehschoolbus]

A real game is one where the "balance" does not rely on map design. You're modifying the play-field to cover up the deficiencies of the participants.

I assume you consider every single ladder map having bases on high ground with one or two ramps leading up to them, other such chokepoints, and "natural" expansions, as "good" map design?



A perfectly-balanced system would allow all kinds of interesting terrain to be put into play. Not one where the majority of map designs are cut off by bad balance design, leaving little difference between ladder maps beyond the starting positions and tileset:

http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=23425466465&sid=5000

I agree wholeheartedly. Unfortunately such talk will get you QQ'd on by the "non-noobs" around here. As far as I'm concerned, there should be a mix of maps with islands, maps with chokes near their starting location, maps without said chokes, maps with rocks at their choke (that aren't considered "rookie" maps or whatever they're called now) etc. There should be a variety of game strategies, not just the ones that result from this one map style we have now.

I seriously hope they are still considering at least bringing in the lava with the sirens that we saw in the campaign demo.

[Eloderung]

Part of what makes SC1+2 great is how varied the races are.

On another note, how in the world is lift-off causing you to lose? If you can't kill a useless floating building, you probably aren't going to succeed much in games anyways.

[Tehschoolbus]

Part of what makes SC1+2 great is how varied the races are.

On another note, how in the world is lift-off causing you to lose? If you can't kill a useless floating building, you probably aren't going to succeed much in games anyways.

Well he's trying to say that just because he destroyed most of his opponents structures he should win the game. As if to say it wasn't good enough for his opponent to destroy his own.

[Joneleth]

On another note, how in the world is lift-off causing you to lose? If you can't kill a useless floating building, you probably aren't going to succeed much in games anyways.
/facepalm

l2read OPs.

[Tehschoolbus]

/facepalm

l2read OPs.

Can't it be assumed that his post was mostly sarcasm?

[Joneleth]

Can't it be assumed that his post was mostly sarcasm?or he confused this as yet another one of those stalemate threads floating around recently :P

[Divine]

I agree wholeheartedly. Unfortunately such talk will get you QQ'd on by the "non-noobs" around here. As far as I'm concerned, there should be a mix of maps with islands, maps with chokes near their starting location, maps without said chokes, maps with rocks at their choke (that aren't considered "rookie" maps or whatever they're called now) etc. There should be a variety of game strategies, not just the ones that result from this one map style we have now.

I seriously hope they are still considering at least bringing in the lava with the sirens that we saw in the campaign demo.

I agree with mixing in islands in the map which they already have... but all these things.. like islands and rocks are just... restrictors... that slows down or eliminate initial attack. It doesn't add another dimension to the game it just restricts one aspect of it. I do have to agree with the point where all the maps right now have a small ramp/choke and they need to diversify with... more open points perhaps? but that could raise the balance issue where every game ends up "who rushes faster/better"

[Rilgon]

seriously.. you can't take out terran that had to use lift off to stalemate the game?... if you base switched and you can't build air units to go kill their lifted off buildings, you deserve to lose.So Terran deserve to win any matchup that's T v Anything-But-T if base-trading occurs because they can fly an emergency building away?

[Joneleth]

I agree with mixing in islands in the map which they already have... but all these things.. like islands and rocks are just... restrictors... that slows down or eliminate initial attack. It doesn't add another dimension to the game it just restricts one aspect of it. I do have to agree with the point where all the maps right now have a small ramp/choke and they need to diversify with... more open points perhaps? but that could raise the balance issue where every game ends up "who rushes faster/better"
Now that we're finally back on-topic, let me say that island maps involve very different strategies than the usual ground-only maps, no matter what kind of checkpoints those have.

On islands, since your primary units can't navigate freely around the map, turtling indefinitely does not pay off very well, in fact, it's worse than on landlocked maps because your workers can't just walk to an expansion.

An interesting hold-&-control aspect comes into play where you have to strike a balance between taking over multiple expansion-islands (which you can't even reach until you get flying transports, unless you're Terran, hence this thread) and keeping a decent force on each without spending too much on over-fortifying any single island.

On landlocked maps, it's rare to see more than one or two major battles outside of bases or expansions, but with islands you'll obviously get in a lot of battles with flying units between the islands, and there's the drop-destroy-hop element of course, where you have to keep moving your ground forces between the islands, emphasizing the need for transports and the value of escorts for those transports.

Ultimately, IMO, islands generally take more skill to succeed at than ground-only maps, unless played by utter newbs, and if Blizzard would just fine-tune the current setup that little bit to work nicely on island-maps without affecting "normal" gameplay, it could open up a lot of new map designs for the Ladder.

[Ahnteis]

So Terran deserve to win any matchup that's T v Anything-But-T if base-trading occurs because they can fly an emergency building away?

This problem is related the the fact that there is no way to get ANY more resources after a certain point. It's a starcraft resource problem, not a unit ability problem. There's other threads discussing it -- check them out. :)

[Thebaron]

So Terran deserve to win any matchup that's T v Anything-But-T if base-trading occurs because they can fly an emergency building away?

If their opponent was stupid enough to base-trade with Terran, then yes.

[Divine]

Now that we're finally back on-topic, let me say that island maps involve very different strategies than the usual ground-only maps, no matter what kind of checkpoints those have.

On islands, since your primary units can't navigate freely around the map, turtling indefinitely does not pay off very well, in fact, it's worse than on landlocked maps because your workers can't just walk to an expansion.

This baffles me to no end. Turtling indefinitely works even worse on land maps since your opponent is free to fast expand if he wishes and gets a DOMINATING resource advantage faster than island maps. I don't know if you understand what turtling is but with "landlocked" map, as you put it, your opponent has a huge resource dominance if you turtle and I don't see how it pays off at all? I don't know how it is worse on landlocked map when "you walk up to your expo" you're not exactly turtling anymore.. because now you got two bases to defend and now your oppoenent can harrass you on two different points.


An interesting hold-&-control aspect comes into play where you have to strike a balance between taking over multiple expansion-islands (which you can't even reach until you get flying transports, unless you're Terran, hence this thread) and keeping a decent force on each without spending too much on over-fortifying any single island.
You talk about hold-and-control.. what's the difference here compared to ground here? Only difference is that your opponents now have to utilize air to attack your holding areas.. whereas in ground they can walk up to any of your expansions in land. Again, just another restricting aspect of island only map. You talk about how landlocked map has turtling but "keeping a decent force on each" sounds more like turtling than exciting exchanges of forces in land map

On landlocked maps, it's rare to see more than one or two major battles outside of bases or expansions, but with islands you'll obviously get in a lot of battles with flying units between the islands, and there's the drop-destroy-hop element of course, where you have to keep moving your ground forces between the islands, emphasizing the need for transports and the value of escorts for those transports.
This kinda describes a very low end game where people are struggling to even learn about units so they just mass it before going in... First off, I see many battles in land locked maps and since we're talking mainly about 1v1, there are early harrasses that you have to fight through, then timing rushes, you have to worry about air units starting around mid phase and there are more harrasses going on whereas island maps.. there are no "choke points" so you just turret around your base or put base defense with your army sitting in your base while your air units and harrass group goes in.

Where do you get the idea that you get into more fights in island maps? Again, it RESTRICTS land movement so you HAVE to use air units to move around or just mass air attack units like mutalisks/corruptor/carrier/void rays/battlecruiser/banshees

Ultimately, IMO, islands generally take more skill to succeed at than ground-only maps, unless played by utter newbs, and if Blizzard would just fine-tune the current setup that little bit to work nicely on island-maps without affecting "normal" gameplay, it could open up a lot of new map designs for the Ladder.

I don't know where you get these assumptions... really. All it adds is, more base defense and harder to expand.. with 1 dimensional mass air and win type of situation and "no" to.. it requires more skills >_>

[Joneleth]

This baffles me to no end. Turtling indefinitely works even worse on land maps since your opponent is free to fast expand if he wishes and gets a DOMINATING resource advantage faster than island maps.This clearly does baffle you. That's exactly why it's harder on island maps because you can't just move your workers to any Mineral patch, no matter how far it is, once you've exhausted all your initial clusters, without having transports and some support for those transports.

I don't know if you understand what turtling is but with "landlocked" map, as you put it, your opponent has a huge resource dominance if you turtle and I don't see how it pays off at all? I don't know how it is worse on landlocked map when "you walk up to your expo" you're not exactly turtling anymore.. because now you got two bases to defend and now your oppoenent can harrass you on two different points.Not really, since SC2 seems to make "natural" expansions pretty much a given and those are almost always ridiculously close to your main base, in every single map. Another sign of stagnancy in map design having to fit some narrow criteria? or is it just oooh perfected "balance!" ★

You talk about hold-and-control.. what's the difference here compared to ground here? Only difference is that your opponents now have to utilize air to attack your holding areas.. whereas in ground they can walk up to any of your expansions in land. Again, just another restricting aspect of island only map. You talk about how landlocked map has turtling but "keeping a decent force on each" sounds more like turtling than exciting exchanges of forces in land mapUnlike land maps you can't freely move your main army between different bases, and you can't always have enough transports or risk getting them shot down enroute, so if you're smart you have to leave some units in each base, and those are often on their own, because the escorts accompanying the enemy's transports will hinder your own reinforcements.

First off, I see many battles in land locked maps and since we're talking mainly about 1v1, there are early harrasses that you have to fight through, ...

Where do you get the idea that you get into more fights in island maps? Again, it RESTRICTS land movement so you HAVE to use air units to move around or just mass air attack units like mutalisks/corruptor/carrier/void rays/battlecruiser/bansheeslol seriously, take l2read the next time you level, will you （の＿の）

I said, on island maps you see more battles away from bases and expansions, whereas on landlocked maps most battles occur in or just outside the bases, mostly because of the limited mobility of ground units.

On islands you have to have a sizeable force of escorts accompanying your transports whenever you want to move somewhere, and you often have to drop your units halfway from the intended destination if you get caught by the enemy's fleet.



You know what, just tell me this; Why're you so QQ against island maps, anyway? When and which was the last island map you played and how did it go?

[Divine]

because you try to sell it as a ladder compatible map with decent competitive balance and it's not and I have a problem with that.. I have no problem being in used map setting or custom games

last island map I played in SC where I had to utlize air + goliaths and dropships... it was kinda fun but I thought it took away too much out of first part of the game

oh and what's the advantage of fighting away from base?

[Joneleth]

because you try to sell it as a ladder compatible map with decent competitive balance and it's not and I have a problem with that..What're the problems you currently see with them? This Beta would be the best chance as any ever to try and fix those.

and that's all I offered to try with the suggestion about nerfing Lift-Off and having only island maps for a while during the Beta.

or are you saying that you don't want to see anything new for the Ladder map pool at all?

[Divine]

What're the problems you currently see with them? This Beta would be the best chance as any ever to try and fix those.

and that's all I offered to try with the suggestion about nerfing Lift-Off and having only island maps for a while during the Beta.

or are you saying that you don't want to see anything new for the Ladder map pool at all?

yeah that's what I said.. I DON'T WANT ANYTHING NEW...

lol "l2read" right back at you

I want innovative map designs and new map mechanics

where you see fun in islands and REQUIRED utilization of 30~40% of units (air), I see it as being less dimensional and restricting

[Joneleth]

I don't know where you get these assumptions... really. All it adds is, more base defense and harder to expand.. with 1 dimensional mass air and win type of situation and "no" to.. it requires more skills >_>and actually, dude, it does take more skill to win on island maps, because there you rely on 1 unit to move lots of units around (transports) so you need extra care (and "micro") to avoid losing them all if one of those transports gets shot down, because your enemy's fleet is doing the same all over the map, unlike land maps where land units can just independently waltz around to anywhere they want.

where you see fun in islands and REQUIRED utilization of 30~40% of units (air), I see it as being less dimensional and restrictingevery map has required utilization of SOME units, but in land maps you can usually do without air units AT ALL.

On island maps, at an above-average level of play, you pretty much need to use ALL of the units a race has available, really. What's better and tougher? Having to use everything the game has to offer or just a subset?

[Divine]

and actually, dude, it does take more skill to win on island maps, because there you rely on 1 unit to move lots of units around (transports) so you need extra care (and "micro") to avoid losing them all if one of those transports gets shot down, because your enemy's fleet is doing the same all over the map, unlike land maps where land units can just independently waltz around to anywhere they want.
that's why people go mass air when they play island maps..


every map has required utilization of SOME units, but in land maps you can usually do without air units AT ALL.

On island maps, at an above-average level of play, you pretty much need to use ALL of the units a race has available, really. What's better and tougher? Having to use everything the game has to offer or just a subset?
yes but you can utilize ALL units in land without a requirement saying.. "you must build transport and guard it if you want to use any ground unit"... you're free to mass air if you want.. free to mass ultralisks only.. if you know your opponents don't have air...

I see islands forcing/encouraging massing air only ... especially the last tier ones like carriers... I know it's possible to utilize transports..

I'm gonna back down here and say yes... it is fun to play island map but as a fan of e-sport who's been watching all those broadcasts of professional leagues for years and years.. I see this as taking too much away from beginning part of already slow/boring early stage of the game (most of the time) ... lot of games start with early expand and possible harrass if there's an opening..

[Thebaron]

On island maps, at an above-average level of play, you pretty much need to use ALL of the units a race has available, really. What's better and tougher? Having to use everything the game has to offer or just a subset?

This is a bold-faced lie and you know it. You do NOT need "every" unit type on an island map, you need one: air-to-air. You rush air-to-air and you prevent the opponent from moving to any other island and starve them to death. Even if that fails, there is absolutely no use for any sort of ground unit but workers on an island map. Transports are pointless with every base surrounded by turrets and anti-air lurking everywhere. And even if they built ground forces that can shoot back at air units that get close to their base, you simply don't go near their base and prevent them from expanding, as said earlier.

All island maps devolve into who can get air-to-air first, and then mass from there. Without air superiority, air-to-ground and transport units can't do anything. That's why the GROUND exists on any BALANCED map, so ground armies can WALK to each others' bases and continue the fight.

[Joneleth]

This is a bold-faced lie and you know it. You do NOT need "every" unit type on an island map, you need one: air-to-air. You rush air-to-air and you prevent the opponent from moving to any other island and starve them to death.Well, lots of air is expensive, especially if you go for air units that can really damage structures, and even more so with the decreased Vespene output of SC2 per-base.

Assuming a 1v1, when both players recognize that, they'll both be attempting to prevent the other from massing enough air to dominate the whole damn world, and the quickest way to do that, and the quickest way to defend versus that, is ground units.

Transports loaded with a mix of different and complementing ground units will still be more effective per-resource than an air-only assault, especially since anti-air defenses will be mandatory in island maps.

Your assumption of an air-only army relies on one of the players letting the other build without pause, which basically amounts to suicide on island maps.


Anyway, can't really say a lot about how it'll all work in SC2 until we see some island maps in the Beta.

[Shinosai]

I think island maps would be cool, but I'd like it if map preferences were fixed before then. Shouldn't have to play on an island map if you don't want to. :)

[Thebaron]

Well, lots of air is expensive, especially if you go for air units that can really damage structures, and even more so with the decreased Vespene output of SC2 per-base.

Assuming a 1v1, when both players recognize that, they'll both be attempting to prevent the other from massing enough air to dominate the whole damn world, and the quickest way to do that, and the quickest way to defend versus that, is ground units.

Transports loaded with a mix of different and complementing ground units will still be more effective per-resource than an air-only assault, especially since anti-air defenses will be mandatory in island maps.

Your assumption of an air-only army relies on one of the players letting the other build without pause, which basically amounts to suicide on island maps.

Anyway, can't really say a lot about how it'll all work in SC2 until we see some island maps in the Beta.

I can't help but think you haven't actually played SC2 (or 1 for that matter), because transports are the same tier as air for all races. If you have a starport for medivacs(dropships) you can make vikings(wraiths), if you could make a robo fac for prisms(shuttles) you can just get a starport for phoenixes(corsairs) instead, if you have a lair to research overlord carry, you can get spire instead and make corrupters(scourge/mutas). Then all you do is shoot down the transport. And you would NOT attack the other base, that's the point. You don't even TOUCH the other player's base, you just find it and surround it and keep a unit or two constantly scouting for expansions. All you do once you're in the air is build more and more air to maintain superiority and prevent the other person from expanding, expanding yourself when you get the opportunity. Then you just wait for their minerals to run out. Every island map between players who know what they're doing is a race to air-to-air. Any resources wasted on ground units to put into a transport is an instant loss when that transport can't leave its own base.

[Divine]

I can't help but think you haven't actually played SC2 (or 1 for that matter), because transports are the same tier as air for all races. If you have a starport for medivacs(dropships) you can make vikings(wraiths), if you could make a robo fac for prisms(shuttles) you can just get a starport for phoenixes(corsairs) instead, if you have a lair to research overlord carry, you can get spire instead and make corrupters(scourge/mutas). Then all you do is shoot down the transport. And you would NOT attack the other base, that's the point. You don't even TOUCH the other player's base, you just find it and surround it and keep a unit or two constantly scouting for expansions. All you do once you're in the air is build more and more air to maintain superiority and prevent the other person from expanding, expanding yourself when you get the opportunity. Then you just wait for their minerals to run out. Every island map between players who know what they're doing is a race to air-to-air. Any resources wasted on ground units to put into a transport is an instant loss when that transport can't leave its own base.

i'm gonna have to agree with this... completely

[Joneleth]

I can't help but think you haven't actually played SC2 (or 1 for that matter), ... you would NOT attack the other base, that's the point. You don't even TOUCH the other player's base, you just find it and surround it and keep a unit or two constantly scouting for expansions. All you do once you're in the air is build more and more air to maintain superiority and prevent the other person from expanding, expanding yourself when you get the opportunity.I don't know want to know what you've played if you're assuming that the other player is always going to just sit there and let you do all that.

It takes a substantial gap in the skill levels for one of the players to win through air units and only air units alone - which end have you been on?

The fact that you seem to think you can have enough anti-air to shoot down the first of my loaded transports and/or its contents, no matter from where it approaches, when (as you yourself pointed out) both transports and other air units can be build in the same Tier, seems to suggest that it must've been the hurting end.

[Divine]

I don't know want to know what you've played if you're assuming that the other player is always just going to sit there and let you do all that.

It takes a substantial gap in the skill levels for one of the players to win through air units and only air units alone - which end have you been on?

The fact that you seem to think you can have enough anti-air to shoot down the first of my loaded transports and/or its contents, no matter from where it approaches, when (as you yourself pointed out) both transports and other air units can be build in the same Tier, seems to suggest that it must've been the hurting end.

the player get one anti air, you send.. lets say your small army along with 1 transport is already ready at the exact same time.. so you load it up... while the first anti air is looking for your base, your transport is too, the next anti air unit comes out... both of you find each other's base at the same time.... since the guy only made 1 anti air ship so far... he built some ground units or one more starget so he has 2 popping out... he takes down your transport trying to land... or fights it off with forces/base defenses in there since it's only 1 transport.. your base has an anti air floating around it or already killed your 2nd transport.. his 2nd/3rd anti air comes along ane floats around your base... I don't know how hard it'll be for him to miss your transports.. if he keeps peaking in.. assuming you didn't COMPLETELY WALL OF YOUR BASE WITH TURRETS/CANNONS or the zerg one.. forgot.. (was spore colony in SC1) which is stupid to begin with..

the best thing about air in any type of game.. is its mobility and the ability to easily scout your base and keep scouting from different points..

as you said yourself.. you can't block every possible exit point around your base.. same goes for you can't defend against every scouting attempt from your opponent..

It would be pretty unfairto try and take on all-out-air with air escorts and transports:
1. they have the upper hand on mobility
2. air dominance: transport, if found will be shot down since part of your army's ground and in transport
3. only way you'd be able to win is if you slip by his air only ...
4. the last tier air is very effective against most lower tier ground/air

[Joneleth]

See, we've yet to actually try this out in SC2 but unless it's a very tiny flat island, which most main-base islands won't be, I'll have a higher chance of wiggling a Marine-loaded Medivac into somewhere in your base than you'll have of shooting it down with the 1 or 2-at-most Vikings you'd be able to build by that point in time, and definitely not be able to line your whole island with Turrets.

Your chances of successfully intercepting the drop would be even less if I had a Reactor Add-on and got a Viking to escort the Medivac.

Whether or not the Marine-only force will do much damage to you is a separate issue, but it may be able to hold the point for further drops, especially if sent along with an SCV to Bunker it up.

[Roirrawa]

Oh sweet jesus.. I really shouldn't even be touching this thread with a 12 foot pole... but I'll do it anyway. Just because I'm afraid that blizzard MIGHT on the off chance listen to the vocal minority of players who are completely and utterly... whats the nice word for it... noobs. ( Well that didnt come out nice at all, but whatever )

I don't understand how in the world so many of you guys are getting into stalemate games. You guys HAVE to be copper or bronze players. I can't remember the last time I got into a stalemate situation.. or even close to a stalemate situation...

Extensive scouting, and reacting to base trade attempts... You really shouldnt be pushing out with everything and leaving yourself open for a counter anyway... What in the world are you guys thinking?

I have seen ONE pro game in sc1 where base trading occurred and it was because it was PvP and they both rushed DTs without detectors and they ended up trading bases, but one won because he had 2 dts blocking his ramp and he had a pylon behind the dts.
I believe it was a gomtv game. season 3.

Really, you people who are complaining about lift off... take a step back and look deeply at what the root problem is. Is it really the lift off ability, or is it you?

[Tehschoolbus]

Oh sweet jesus.. I really shouldn't even be touching this thread with a 12 foot pole... but I'll do it anyway. Just because I'm afraid that blizzard MIGHT on the off chance listen to the vocal minority of players who are completely and utterly... whats the nice word for it... noobs. ( Well that didnt come out nice at all, but whatever )

I don't understand how in the world so many of you guys are getting into stalemate games. You guys HAVE to be copper or bronze players. I can't remember the last time I got into a stalemate situation.. or even close to a stalemate situation...

Extensive scouting, and reacting to base trade attempts... You really shouldnt be pushing out with everything and leaving yourself open for a counter anyway... What in the world are you guys thinking?

I have seen ONE pro game in sc1 where base trading occurred and it was because it was PvP and they both rushed DTs without detectors and they ended up trading bases, but one won because he had 2 dts blocking his ramp and he had a pylon behind the dts.
I believe it was a gomtv game. season 3.

Really, you people who are complaining about lift off... take a step back and look deeply at what the root problem is. Is it really the lift off ability, or is it you?

Another game of base trading occurred when NonY palyed against Davey (David kim... dunno if its davie or davey i forget). Kim played zerg and fast expand teched to mutas while NonY went for colossus. NonY stated pre-game that he didn't know if it was a good idea or not, and it ended up not being a good idea. NonY destroyed Kim's bases, but at the same time Kim was destroying NonY's base. When NonY had left kim's base after destroying it, he went scouting with his other forces but failed to notice Kim built a spire before he left. So NonY ended up finding this out and GG'ing.

It is rare though. The whole stalemate thing is something that happens more often on lower-rank games more frequently because higher-rank players tend to scout, harass, and defend on a different level. But I do think that there should be a draw mechanic added in anyways. Think of the headache and controversy it would so easily stop if this happened in a pro league match. Surely neither player will want to accept the loss if the game really means so much to them, so there needs to be a steadfast rule set up to deal with this situation.

[Joneleth]

Oh sweet jesus.. I really shouldn't even be touching this thread with a 12 foot pole... but I'll do it anyway. Just because I'm afraid that blizzard MIGHT on the off chance listen to the vocal minority of players who are completely and utterly... whats the nice word for it... noobs. ( Well that didnt come out nice at all, but whatever )

Really, you people who are complaining about lift off... take a step back and look deeply at what the root problem is. Is it really the lift off ability, or is it you? I'd say it's the lack of your ability to read, consider that this thread is not about stalemates at all. Maybe you should put that 12-foot pole away.

[Roirrawa]

Well, I got to this thread after reading two or three other "lift off is op" threads so I just vented all at once in here. Yea, I know its about island maps, but I really won't comment about it because I take advantage of "island" expansions quite frequently in my games to ninja expand early and make it appear like I'm 1 basing marauder spam , but actually going banshees from proxy tech.

So I really like and use lift off CCs quite a lot.

[Thebaron]

Oh sweet jesus.. I really shouldn't even be touching this thread with a 12 foot pole... but I'll do it anyway. Just because I'm afraid that blizzard MIGHT on the off chance listen to the vocal minority of players who are completely and utterly... whats the nice word for it... noobs. ( Well that didnt come out nice at all, but whatever )

I don't understand how in the world so many of you guys are getting into stalemate games. You guys HAVE to be copper or bronze players. I can't remember the last time I got into a stalemate situation.. or even close to a stalemate situation...

Extensive scouting, and reacting to base trade attempts... You really shouldnt be pushing out with everything and leaving yourself open for a counter anyway... What in the world are you guys thinking?

I have seen ONE pro game in sc1 where base trading occurred and it was because it was PvP and they both rushed DTs without detectors and they ended up trading bases, but one won because he had 2 dts blocking his ramp and he had a pylon behind the dts.
I believe it was a gomtv game. season 3.

Really, you people who are complaining about lift off... take a step back and look deeply at what the root problem is. Is it really the lift off ability, or is it you?

Oh man, I remember that game. There was also Pretty vs Savior game 2 in season 2 of the Intel Classic, which was a ZvP that ended with a muta, ling, and drone vs a dragoon and two zealots.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PpbnvbW_Rg8

The difference between these matches and what people here are whining about is that there were no terrans in those matches. The pros KNOW BETTER than to trade bases with terran.

[Joneleth]

So I really like and use lift off CCs quite a lot. I love that too, especially on Scrap Station, hell I actually won because of some flying Barracks cheese rush in recent games ^^

[Divine]

I love that too, especially on Scrap Station, hell I actually won because of some flying Barracks cheese rush in recent games ^^

NO U HATE LIFT OFF RABBLE RABBLE

all that discussion and now I have to catch up on work x_x