• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 23:29
CEST 05:29
KST 12:29
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
BGE Stara Zagora 2025: Info & Preview27Code S RO12 Preview: GuMiho, Bunny, SHIN, ByuN3The Memories We Share - Facing the Final(?) GSL47Code S RO12 Preview: Cure, Zoun, Solar, Creator4[ASL19] Finals Preview: Daunting Task30
Community News
Weekly Cups (June 2-8): herO doubles down1[BSL20] ProLeague: Bracket Stage & Dates9GSL Ro4 and Finals moved to Sunday June 15th13Weekly Cups (May 27-June 1): ByuN goes back-to-back0EWC 2025 Regional Qualifier Results26
StarCraft 2
General
The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation Jim claims he and Firefly were involved in match-fixing CN community: Firefly accused of suspicious activities How does the number of casters affect your enjoyment of esports? Serious Question: Mech
Tourneys
Bellum Gens Elite: Stara Zagora 2025 $3,500 WardiTV European League 2025 Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament SOOPer7s Showmatches 2025 Master Swan Open (Global Bronze-Master 2)
Strategy
[G] Darkgrid Layout Simple Questions Simple Answers [G] PvT Cheese: 13 Gate Proxy Robo
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 477 Slow and Steady Mutation # 476 Charnel House Mutation # 475 Hard Target Mutation # 474 Futile Resistance
Brood War
General
BW General Discussion StarCraft & BroodWar Campaign Speedrun Quest BGH auto balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Will foreigners ever be able to challenge Koreans? Mihu vs Korea Players Statistics
Tourneys
[ASL19] Grand Finals NA Team League 6/8/2025 [Megathread] Daily Proleagues [BSL20] ProLeague Bracket Stage - Day 2
Strategy
I am doing this better than progamers do. [G] How to get started on ladder as a new Z player
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread What do you want from future RTS games? Armies of Exigo - YesYes? Nintendo Switch Thread Path of Exile
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
LiquidLegends to reintegrate into TL.net
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Vape Nation Thread European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread
Fan Clubs
Maru Fan Club Serral Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Korean Music Discussion [Manga] One Piece
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Cognitive styles x game perf…
TrAiDoS
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Heero Yuy & the Tax…
KrillinFromwales
I was completely wrong ab…
jameswatts
Need Your Help/Advice
Glider
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Poker
Nebuchad
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 22178 users

"APM Spam" spectrum

Blogs > etofok
Post a Reply
etofok
Profile Blog Joined March 2012
138 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-11-21 14:25:58
August 21 2015 22:31 GMT
#1
“APM Spam” spectrum by etofok

An article about difficulty in games, human attention and design.

I kept it unfinished for a long time, but there is no better moment to complete and publish it. I hope you’ll enjoy reading it as much as I enjoyed composing this.



I don’t know how many of you are familiar with this completely dedgeam "Grey Goo". This was one of the highly anticipated RTS games a year ago, and I was one of the people riding the hype train at full speed.


The developers were advertising this game as more of a “casual” RTS with interesting approaches and mechanics and whatnot. And they were not lying. The game has a rather slower pace, quite cool the Goo race design, simcity has its pluses, the macro is done for you for the most part - meaning no more hassle with worker building, and you can build battle units automatically - just lock this “Build continuously this unit” switch and you are good to go. Unit balance had this familiar and understandable “rock-paper-scissors” dynamic, and it was easy to get into. Also units have no active abilities, so you can have easier time battling your opponent.

What a surprise, the game ended up as completely pointless. It has some “wow that’s interesting” moments, but this is not what keeps people playing. There was literally nothing that was worth playing for, since the game was unbelievable bland and shallow and I honestly felt sorry for the developers who managed to assemble such a cool project but failed to hire a game designer.




So, I was lurking at /r/greygoo at the time to read all the stuff about the game.

There was this post that I saved:

“Been lurking this game a little bit, showing moderate interest. Two RTS games that I've played and gotten into for a decent amount of time are StarCraft 2 and Planetary Annihilation. It looks more similar to SC2, but how similar is it really? Is it a click-fest competition? I get the impression that, in SC2, having good wits is meaningless if you actions/minute is a bit slower than your opponent. Is that anything like Grey Goo?”

and another one

“I never understood the point of the needless button hitting to keep your apm high. It's meaningless actions and I only perform actions necessary”



This sort of opinions are reasonably popular. However, let’s think about it for a bit.


What is an RTS game? A game that is being played in Real Time, obviously is not a Turn-Based game.
That means you perform actions simultaneously with your opponent. There are no specific game rules regarding how many things you can perform within “a turn”, because there is no such thing as a turn: every second is a turn that last for one second.

Game understanding is important for both types of games - be it a Turn-based or a Real-time game: the word “Strategy” in “RTS” flat-out implies that. However, Turn-based gameplay doesn't have this stressful component of continuous and non-stop action. This is simply nature of a turn - you have the time. You have the time to act precisely as you want: there is no mechanical / dexterity / attention split restrictions that you have to overcome.


I have a lot of friends who dislike playing Starcraft multiplayer: it is frustrating, difficult, demanding and they “can’t keep up with the speed”. If you constantly can’t keep up, you just feel like you're playing sub-optimally.

The game has a lot of different things that you have to perform, while you just physically can’t handle everything at once. It’s impossible to be 100% efficient: it is a constant struggle, be you are from bronze or a top grandmaster player. Why doesn’t it keep getting easier instead?


It’s not about the game. It’s about you and your opponent. The game gives you options and tools to do stuff with, and you, as a player, act and respond accordingly to the stuff your opponent does to you, be it a Real-Time or a Turn Based game. Think about it: is chess a hard game to play?


Anyhow, the reason you cannot avoid “APM spam” in a REAL-TIME Strategy game is because even if you physically can't play the game as fast as the other guy, or if you don't have ridiculously attuned attention like a top-notch World of Warcraft raider has, there is no other way, but you will inevitable end up in disadvantage against a better player because of that. You don't compete with the game, you compete with other people.

The game always feels difficult, because you play against real people who make you struggle. For a Platinum league player a Bronze opponent is just a walk in the park, whilst a Platinum is not even a challenge for a Masters. Both you and your opponent COMPETE with each other trying to outperform both the enemy and their previous self.

Therefore the terms - “competitiveness” and “competitive game”.


After I collected some responses on this, I've seen a decent argument: why would you need "mechanical burden" for a game?
Think about regular sports. Aside from their strategic depth, they also require stamina, strength, finesse and overall years of physical training just to be on par with other players. Just to play the game.

Let's "improve" basketball, by getting rid of some of these useless complication that don't contribute to its tactical depth. Remove Dribbling, ain't got time for this burden. The basket size x2, for easier scoring - people love scoring. Forbid running as well, because after a hard day I just want to relax and play the damn game.
Is the game now easier to play? Definitely. But it is also less interesting to play, since there is less room for human error as well as for player improvement. Perfect is boring.



Coming back to video games.

By having a lot of different tasks that you have to control as a player, the game forces you to split your attention. Under these circumstances, attention becomes a finite, player-based resource that everyone has to manage on their own in order to improve as a player and to ultimately face better opponents.


The best advice for a bronze player? “Probes and Pylons”. It is a starting point - like a vector from zero to something, it gives a clear direction towards improvement.

By not forgetting these basic and simple tasks a player is able to progress significantly. After consciously doing this over and over again, it gets progressively less attention demanding and therefore frees up the brain capacity to focus on other tasks, such as not forgetting adding production facilities on time for example. To keep spreading creep. To check and maintain proper rally-points. To pay attention to the minimap. To micro a scouting probe and be distracting. To attack 3 places at once, fortify your 4th base with different structures and transfer SCVs while doing so.



I cannot emphasize this enough:

The continuous process of converting thoughts into memory gradually frees the brain capacity to think about something else, until your play turns into a pure performance. Similar to driving or playing an instrument you have to map out your decision making process for it to become mindless execution before you can properly operate it and do something else at the same time.



There are a lot of games that utilize this, for example, another Blizzard’s game World of Warcraft. I played PvE and let me tell you if you can’t keep a decent attention split of your own, you will die in some random fire while not being able to maintain a decent DPS rotation whatsoever. This is what the lack of attention split skills does to you. It is the attention split ability that differentiates not only good players from the bad ones, but every player from any other random player.

Don't get me wrong, it is not like stepping out of fire or queuing probes is THAT difficult, in fact, it is a compete no-brainer. But the problems arise when you're supposed to do that while trying to keep your focus on other 5 different things as well. Once the field gets more dynamic and strategic, players crumble under these circumstances.

In other words: a bunch of simple, but simultaneous tasks construct this type of gameplay where managing them with your attention becomes a skill on its own. Playing a game now requires careful planning and dynamic prioritization to maximize your efficiency.


You can’t have an outstandingly deep and sophisticated gameplay if it takes no time nor effort to learn. Including the attention split. Once you map out the entire decision making process that you also can flawlessly perform, the game loses its previous appealing.

Brood War had terrible UI and AI, meaning you had to dedicate a lot of your attention towards it. SC2 fixed these problems with a drastically better game engine: to play more efficiently and strategically got much easier. Then they added additional mechanics, including the macro ones.

HOWEVER,
Player vs Player games do not require any additional gameplay facilitations. At least, this is not necessary, because you compete against real people within the exact same system. If you think I want to add "APM Spam", attention sinks and severe execution taxes let me tell you that Player vs Player games do not require any additional gameplay complications, because you compete against real people as well.


What I’m trying to say is that there should be a fine balance between “Mechanical insanity” and “Point-and-click supremacy” to keep players in the flow: to give them a clear and huge room for improvements, whilst hooking them with this fascinating challenge. Before reaching this threshold the game might end up as insipid, however overshooting might repulse players early on.


The pros look forward towards improvement and competition - being the best. Regular players look forward to see the pros performing, admiring their mechanical prowess and superior game knowledge. If there is nothing to strive for, there is nothing to admire. This is especially important for a competitive 1v1 RTS eSports game.

If you’ve ever played Nexus Wars you should understand what I’m talking about.

But how about Dark Souls's Ornstein & Smough or Throne Watcher & Defender fights? Simply because there are 2 enemies you have to keep track of, the encounter feels much more difficult even though separately on their own, the bosses are dumber, slower and easier all around than a regular non-boss creature. I have this old videoclip of me killing TW&TD SL1, but I want you as a viewer to pay attention exclusively to the Defender guy and what he actually does in the fight.

Your attention is divided between:
- stamina management,
- 1st boss positioning,
- 2nd boss positioning,
- evading in time and towards proper directions,
- recognizing attack patterns to define the timings,
- avoiding the cliff behind you which you can totally fall off from,
- tracking their health bars, since they resurrect each other (meaning you have to distribute your damage somewhat evenly refocusing your attention on whom to attack),
- you can actually miss your attack because of the insufficient weapon reach and poor positioning,
- you can connect your attack, but hit the shield (which staggers and exposes you to a counter-attack)
- and on top of that your field of view is limited.

The mixture of these is what makes it difficult.



In Legacy of the Void Beta Blizzard did remove a small portion of macro: Mules, Injects and Chronoboosts. This decision of theirs sprung an enormous amount of discussions throughout all the possible boards, which has been a lot of fun to investigate people's opinions. Blizzard ended up putting them back, but in their tweaked autocast form.
Doing that in Heart of the Swarm would've been a mistake, however for Legacy it is an entire different story.

In LotV there are also a bunch of new gameplay amplifications such as
“Place more bases and then get faster production because of it”
or
“These new units have additional buttons and require more of your control and attention in order to make them efficient. And by the way counterplaying these units is also a huge deal.”

This results in a much faster pace of the game compared with Heart of the Swarm. They (Blizzard) are removing one “attention split drain APM sinks” mechanics and add different ones instead, just sideways: they redirect a player's attention towards unit control and micromanagement.

Does it improve the gameplay though? This is what the beta test is for.


My personal opinion on this: for Terran and Protoss it is a mild improvement, however Zerg gameplay is desolated.

Zerg units are too "swarmy" by design to control them individually. Drops, Warp-prism, blink control, force fields, disruptors, siege tanks, widow mines, marine splitting, liberators etc etc require conscious control and dedicated attention.

Zerg has much less individual unit control and their gameplay comes down to setting up a perfect engagement with the perfect army composition (due to larva mechanic, unlike linear Terran production), superior map control (Overlords, lings, creep, mutas) and continuous proper economy management. Their attention is divided more thinly and equally in between these tasks throughout the game.

The fights themselves are not micro intensive because they can't be. This is the root of "A-Move" complaints. By removing Zerg's main economy management sink, that also serves the purpose of their entire unit production, players might find themselves staring at their swarmy units and creep tumors, which is just not engaging on its own. It is only fun when you don't have enough time for it.


Recommended material to watch: "Baseballs vs Frisbees" by Day[9].


Summary #1: for a game to be competitively challenging, designers have to play on the insufficient human brain capabilities such as attention and capacity. This can be achieved by forcing players to solve or keep track of problems regardless of their variety and complexity. By tuning these factors you can set up engaging gameplay where players always have a clear room for improvement in both short-term and long-term perspectives.

Summary #2: since players compete against real people, developers can make their game as complex or as simple as their hearts desire. "WCS Champion" and "Silver League player" are positions that are relative to other competitors - relativistic thresholds. Players come and go, but top 0.1% has always been and will always be 0.1%. You don't compete against the game, you compete against other people - the game is just a medium. The players make you feel overwhelmed, not the game.

cheers
/etofok

edits: clarity, better wording and formatting. Rewrited the article completely (03.09.15). Several additions (06.09.15).

*****
The king, the priest, the rich man—who lives and who dies? Who will the swordsman obey?
billynasty
Profile Joined October 2014
United States260 Posts
August 22 2015 19:08 GMT
#2
hey etofok, thanks for your writeup here. I too when thinking about the changes to macro mechanics, 1st thought about Grey Goo, & how that game doesnt really make u feel like playing it. The main reason why myself & so many play SC2 over & over again, is that challenge it provides. We want to get better & better at it. If the challenge wasnt there, we'd simply get bored with it & move on. I too would like the macro mechanics to stay, anything that moves down a path of automation is a slippery slope, one in which history dictates leads to a daed geam
i dont miss God but i sure miss Santa Claus
imBLIND
Profile Blog Joined December 2006
United States2626 Posts
August 24 2015 00:15 GMT
#3
I quit playing SC2 about 4 months into WoL because at the time, the game favored good macro over good micro. I don't watch any more SC2, and I haven't played the game in a long time, but there's a difference between the pace of the game and the speed of the game. The speed at which a game is played at is a result of the players becoming better at the game. The pace of the game is the minimum amount of time it takes to get to a certain point in the game, and is dependent on costs and build times. The two are similar, but aren't directly related to each other. An example of this would be the difference between BW and SC2; both games are played at similar speeds, but the pace of the games are different. I feel that if a game naturally develops at such a fast pace, such as SC2, the little details of the game gets lost in the bigger picture. A painting isn't beautiful because it looks nice; it's beautiful because of the time and attention to detail that went into the painting.

I don't know if many people here played BW anymore, but I loved playing micro maps and "impossible scenario" maps all the time. Seeing people do this stuff at a high level was funner to watch than 200/200 armies dying and being rebuilt
im deaf
etofok
Profile Blog Joined March 2012
138 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-09-03 12:14:47
August 24 2015 01:04 GMT
#4
On August 23 2015 04:08 billynasty wrote:
we'd simply get bored with it & move on


Precisely, this is why it is so difficult for the developers to balance it right: the line between too hard ("I ain't got time for this") and too easy ("why am I not entertained") is often overly ambiguous and indistinguishable without rigorous play testing. Even if a game is successful at the start, as players get better at it you will hit the point where it is becoming too easy and figured out, meaning you have to patch it again and again increasing the skill ceiling for players to hit and rebalancing in game pieces to make it fresh (see: dota)

On August 24 2015 09:15 imBLIND wrote:
both games are played at similar speeds


Because they are being played in Real-Time. I'd say, however, the pace of it depends on both the players and the game by itself.

On August 24 2015 09:15 imBLIND wrote:
A painting isn't beautiful because it looks nice; it's beautiful because of the time and attention to detail that went into the painting


Depends on the painting and most likely on the viewer as well. I only like the ones that convey a feeling or an idea, the ones that mesmerizing to look at. Like this one. I don't really care how detailed and beautiful it might be.
The king, the priest, the rich man—who lives and who dies? Who will the swordsman obey?
FrozenProbe
Profile Joined March 2012
Italy276 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-09-03 14:02:01
September 03 2015 14:01 GMT
#5
I'm playing the beta quite frequently, and what I found is that the game pace is way better than an HotS game. Today I watched a game between TY and a zerg and I was absolutely bored, turtle mech vs mass queens and ultralisks. They just waited until a 7000K bank and then amove vs amove.

If removing macro mechanics lead towards a more action packed gameplay count me in, it is since the late WoL that I watch games of starcraft that are boring as hell ( there are a few great games, I know ). If I'm enjoying more a completely broken game ( as it is LotV right now ) than a "well balanced game" there's something wrong in the "balance" towards Blizzard moved. I don't get all this hate on the lack of stupid actions like boosting or calling down a mule, macro is still there and is still more difficult than the HotS macro because you've to expand really fast while putting up some pressure. The only race that has problems with the macro mechanics removal is zerg because they don't have interesting units to control, they don't have to babysit their units as terran or protoss does. What remain to them is spam creep tumors and rally units on the minimap, there are people in the beta that are winning with just pure zergling production.

I saw the last community update, and I'm not against the "nerfed" mechanics because Terran need the mule or some sort of mineral boost ( or Blizzard has to reduce the cost of bio, and that would be really tricky to balance out ). But I don't get how zerg will be at the same level of the other races with autoinject and pretty much the same larvae generation as HotS. We'll see how it goes, but even if zerg will be utterly broken I think that I will still prefer LotV over HotS.
virpi
Profile Blog Joined August 2009
Germany3598 Posts
September 03 2015 15:57 GMT
#6
Long post incoming:

Currently, I'm playing quite a lot of HotS (not the Heroes thingy). Coming from BW, my mechanics have always been decent and as I'm practicing hard, they are still improving - even though I've been playing SC2 for 4 years now. I've noticed that the higher I climb on the ladder the more unforgiving the game gets, which is logical due to the opponents making less mistakes.

The consequences of this process are quite dramatic, though: While the player who makes less mistakes generally wins the game, the probability for comebacks is way higher in the lower leagues. Simply put, the fundamental parts of the gameplay are more important in the lower leagues, while in the higher leagues (I'd say diamond and above) build order decisions, micro / scouting errors and meta game aspects outweigh basic stuff like macro by far.

The main reason for this effect is well known: Executing a build order is not terribly hard once you've got decent mechanics. In theory, there's still lots of headroom left (just think of macro monsters like soO or Innovation), but most of the time, games are decided by a small number of errors. And that's why playing SC2 feels so harsh. Let's say I scout a +2 blink allin in ZvP. I know how to counter it and I'm hitting my injects. It all comes down to pylon sniping, creep spread and the correct setup for the engagement. Once the battle has started, there's no turning back. Micro, macro, everything has to be as perfect as can be, otherwise I'm dead.

ONE supply block or ONE missed inject can cost me the game. (Of course, protoss has to have clean macro, too.) In my opinion, this is where the fundamental problem of the whole "noob friendly game" discussion is rooted. New players are overwhelmed by the speed, the abundance of options and the complexity of the decision making process. If you lower the skill floor, the skill ceiling remains untouched. It might be easier to get into the game, but it also might become even more unforgiving, because the mechanical part of the game is too easy to really differentiate players from each other in other ways than control, game knowledge and multitasking.

It seems like Blizzard has decided to go down the WC3 route, which means: Easier macro, more focus on battles and micro. While this leads to more skirmishes and more action, it also dumbs down the game in a way that (imho) takes away the defining characteristic of StarCraft. StarCraft has always been a macro RTS. Whoever makes more of the correct stuff and is able to control it appropriately, wins the game.

Please don't get me wrong, I still think that the macro part in LotV is very demanding. You have to expand constantly and you still have to produce workers and avoid supply blocks. But with easier macro the whole decision making process is being shifted towards a different area of the game. The amount of clicks per minute is limited. The less clicks you have to spend on macroing, the more clicks you have for unit control. I don't think that LotV will be more forgiving than HotS and WoL, with all the abilities the units have, it might be even more brutal.

It has to be said that there's no such thing as an easy RTS game. The level of gameplay is only limited by the game engine and the human brain. As long as RTS games are being played competitively, they will be incredibly hard to get into. Maybe there should be stickers on the packages: "ATTENTION! This game is too hard for you. But once you've tasted victory, you're lost. Because you'll want MORE. And that's when the fun starts."

So what's my point? I think that SC2 should not become "easier" (whatever that means). I also think that SC2 should remain a macro-focused RTS game. To succeed in the long run, the game has to be more accessible and more transparent. The whole process of improvement feels shallow due to the half-assed ladder system and the lack of good in-game tutorials and analysis tools. Most of the players who have quit the game have done so, because they felt that they couldn't improve anymore. Once you've plateaued, it's very simple to blame the game for your losses. And that's what lots of people I know did.

People need to UNDERSTAND the game to enjoy the competitive part, otherwise over-simplification and whining will always rule supreme.

TL;DR:
1. The higher the skill level, the more unforgiving the game gets.
2. SC2 is too stressful to play for many people, because games can be decided in the blink of an eye.
3. Making the basic parts of the game easier doesn't mean that the whole game becomes easier.
4. The lack of transparency and analysis tools leads to false assumptions and biased mindsets.
5. RTS games are not for everyone and they never will be. But they don't have to be shark tanks.
first we make expand, then we defense it.
LaLuSh
Profile Blog Joined April 2003
Sweden2358 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-09-03 18:18:47
September 03 2015 18:18 GMT
#7
I say bravo to etofok.

Rare to see a sensible thread on this topic and on LotV. So much shit is written on this topic.

Virpi's post is good too. Read and enjoyed them both.
etofok
Profile Blog Joined March 2012
138 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-09-03 20:25:18
September 03 2015 19:52 GMT
#8
When you watch a grandmaster level chess match it looks like nothing, but players feel the tension.

Warcraft 3 has practically no macro and the speed of the game is rather slow. In this environment it is totally justified to have heavy micro battles with multiple heroes, different items and unit abilities. When you watch WC3 games they look dull, clunky and slow, but players feel the tension.

Even these days a lot of people play, watch and follow Brood War which is insanely mechanically demanding game. Unsurprisingly, players definitely feel the tension playing it.

Which only reinforces the point that Player vs Player games are always difficult, given enough complexity and a decent opponent. But the game can be difficult and not engaging whatsoever at the same time. Be it stale, figured out, tiresome, dull, tedious or any other shade of "boring", it totally can.

Designers have to make and keep a game engaging if they want a healthy player base. One of the "tricks" is to play on insufficient attention of a player. What actually causes it to split doesn't really matter if you've already achieved interesting gameplay (HotS).

Why would you shatter the eco system that works? Just add on top of that, since the limit line "Unplayable even by pros" is still far away. See: Brood War.


On September 04 2015 03:18 LaLuSh wrote:
I say bravo to etofok.


thanks lalush you are the man
The king, the priest, the rich man—who lives and who dies? Who will the swordsman obey?
Filter
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
Canada620 Posts
September 03 2015 20:32 GMT
#9
I want to add to this post that people need to understand that the vast majority of thinking, planning and strategy takes place outside the actual game. I spend hours thinking about my games between them, how I want to play etc and this is something that is rarely every brought up. The game, the 1v1 portion is just a small part of the Starcraft 2 package as a whole. That part is all execution and reaction, trying to execute what you want to do while relying on experience to react to what your opponent is doing.


The game is extremely intense and difficult, but that's what makes it interesting. You have to take the time figure out your strategy, work on your mechanics individually etc outside of the game. There's a ton of very slow RTS games that automate things for you and give you that time in game, and non of them are very engaging in the long term. What makes starcraft different is that the games themselves are mechanical tests, they are real time tests on how well you can perform what you've been putting into theory.
Live hard, live free.
etofok
Profile Blog Joined March 2012
138 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-09-06 19:43:31
September 06 2015 15:04 GMT
#10
Added a basketball reference, summary and made the reading experience smoother. Most likely I'll come back for further improvements, since the topic is highly complex and interesting to me. I thank everyone participating it the discussion both here and on reddit.


+ Show Spoiler +
After I collected some responses on this, I've seen a decent argument: why would you need "mechanical burden" for a game?
Think about regular sports. Aside from their strategic depth, they also require stamina, strength, finesse and overall years of physical training just to be on par with other players. Just to play the game.

Let's "improve" basketball, by getting rid of some of these useless complication that don't contribute to its tactical depth. Remove Dribbling, ain't got time for this burden. The basket size x2, for easier scoring - people love scoring. Forbid running as well, because after a hard day I just want to relax and play the damn game.
Is the game now easier to play? Definitely. But it is also less interesting to play, since there is less room for human error as well as for player improvement.


+ Show Spoiler +
Summary: for a game to be competitively challenging designers have to play on insufficient human brain capabilities such as attention and capacity. This can be achieved by forcing players to solve or keep track of problems regardless of their variety and complexity. By tuning these factors you can set up engaging gameplay where players always have a clear room for improvement.
The king, the priest, the rich man—who lives and who dies? Who will the swordsman obey?
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Replay Cast
00:00
2025 KFC #10: SC Evolution
CranKy Ducklings132
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
PiGStarcraft447
Nina 134
RuFF_SC2 115
Ketroc 36
StarCraft: Brood War
Horang2 1610
Sea 1039
Sharp 98
Noble 31
Icarus 9
Dota 2
monkeys_forever649
LuMiX1
League of Legends
JimRising 674
Super Smash Bros
hungrybox626
Mew2King60
Other Games
shahzam1181
Maynarde121
Livibee69
NeuroSwarm53
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick985
BasetradeTV69
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 17 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH258
• Mapu7
• Kozan
• sooper7s
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Migwel
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
StarCraft: Brood War
• RayReign 31
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
League of Legends
• Doublelift6285
• Shiphtur474
• Stunt235
Other Games
• Scarra1674
Upcoming Events
Replay Cast
6h 31m
WardiTV Invitational
7h 31m
WardiTV Invitational
7h 31m
PiGosaur Monday
20h 31m
GSL Code S
1d 6h
Rogue vs GuMiho
Maru vs Solar
Online Event
1d 20h
Replay Cast
1d 22h
GSL Code S
2 days
herO vs Zoun
Classic vs Bunny
The PondCast
2 days
Replay Cast
2 days
[ Show More ]
WardiTV Invitational
3 days
OSC
3 days
Korean StarCraft League
3 days
CranKy Ducklings
4 days
WardiTV Invitational
4 days
Cheesadelphia
4 days
GSL Code S
5 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
5 days
Replay Cast
5 days
Replay Cast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Season 17: Qualifier 2
BGE Stara Zagora 2025
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
BSL Season 20
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
NPSL S3
Rose Open S1
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
2025 GSL S2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025
YaLLa Compass Qatar 2025
PGL Bucharest 2025
BLAST Open Spring 2025

Upcoming

Copa Latinoamericana 4
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
SEL Season 2 Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
HSC XXVII
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.