That's why, in my opinion, if we would like BW to regain more casual/crowded/mainstream interest with a modern update, I feel like it would be better if the existing BW community is ok with some simple changes in the interface or control. Automine and MBS in particular, imo that would just be good to implement in an update/rerelease. Seriously, as a B~ level player I don't mind very much not having automine or MBS, it doesn't hinder me a lot, though I think it happens to anyone to forget and have some 4-5 probes waiting at nexus or something, and of course it affects everyone to have a harder mechanic to produce units / save buildings in control groups. But I'm pretty sure I would actually feel pretty good with such changes and feel like they improve quality of life for me as a player, and especially, for more casual or slower players or people who used to play long time ago, that's kinda hellish not having automine or MBS, especially when they want to start competing a bit with the better players, and if they compare with other games that have been released in the past 15 years. It doesn't feel particularly fair or rather, particularly smart. It's kinda outdated. 12 unit selection in my view must be super controversial cause it would be a huge change... but in my opinion it's also something that would be good to discuss/modify. Allow people to box as many units, or maybe just a higher limit. Because it slows you down a lot, it requires a lot more speed for not a lot of good reason. You want any decision that you make to be reduced to just as many actions as it needs, the control tools more efficient, without simplifying the mechanics of the game itself, the depth of unit movement and combat, the management of details in countless different possibilities. I've said it before, I think the only true/main advantage to 12 unit selection is the wireframe interface @the bottom which is great and I don't think it's good to lose that. But something could be done to keep the wireframes while still allowing to select more units. In my opinion, these few things are the most important to appeal to new players or more casual players or returning players again in higher numbers and not get them tired of the game, dismissing it as a click fest out of exhaustion and being too punished by it. Along with the extra accessibility and quality of life things, like support for different screen ratio, great Bnet easy to access with no need to forward ports, lan latency.
I think that, no automine / no MBS / 12 unit selection limit are not the reasons why BW is great. BW is great for a lot of reasons, one of them because it actually does have great controls, but they could be even better and use some smart updating
keeping in mind, when BW came out, the context was nobody was very good at RTS, nobody expected that playing BW very well would require such speed, and the other games were not at all comparable in quality of control as well
infinity selection of mutas! What a lovely feature, especially in ZvT!
MBS and >12 unit selection would just make the game completely different. It would not longer be a BW.
^^ originaly, mutas were not supposed to be able to clump in one spot and remain like this while attacking.. and nobody was doing that for a good bunch of years and the game was great personally, I never really liked what the discovery of this "bug" did to the game I would vote for putting it out in all honesty
Modern Zerg vs Terran would be imbalanced without air unit stacking. And it's not a bug. It is the rules of the game functioning as intended. The only thing not intended was how people would use the rules, just like they didn't know which build orders people would use.
Why is it not a bug? Because Blizzard made it so that units attempt to stay in formation. They maintain their relative position to each other as they move around, if they are in the same control group. Test this out for yourself by positioning a few units in an X, and moving them around.
However, Blizzard realized that if units were too far away from each other, this behavior would be problematic, since units on the opposite sides of the map would remain there, even when told to move to the middle. To solve it, they made it so that units who are at a certain distance from each other, rather than maintaining formation, attempt to move to the exact spot that they were ordered to move to.
This can be used by selecting a unit that is far away from the rest of the control group, to cause air unit stacking.
It's not an error in the game. It's the programmed rules acting exactly as they were intended, just like mineral walking on to enemies is a clever way to use the behavior of workers on their way to mine.
There is difference in why AOE2 maintains it's status, AOE3 had horrid balance issues and AOE2HD has technical problems. These games don't have the same support and dedicated development teams like SC2 does. The former has a community of which has surpassed the abilities of the original developers to put out content and updates, thus remains why AOE2 will forever be the best of the series.
I have no idea of the current status of SC2 as I had never developed interest it in, although I did follow the AOE2 scene quite heavily till last year.
And also the AOE2 scene does not have the same dedicated pro-scene like SC2 or other e-sports games. Majority or if not all of the veteran players just play part-time, there are no true AOE2 teams that dedicate their full time in playing the game. Example many of the high-tier Chinese players have families or attend school.
That's why, in my opinion, if we would like BW to regain more casual/crowded/mainstream interest with a modern update, I feel like it would be better if the existing BW community is ok with some simple changes in the interface or control. Automine and MBS in particular, imo that would just be good to implement in an update/rerelease. Seriously, as a B~ level player I don't mind very much not having automine or MBS, it doesn't hinder me a lot, though I think it happens to anyone to forget and have some 4-5 probes waiting at nexus or something, and of course it affects everyone to have a harder mechanic to produce units / save buildings in control groups. But I'm pretty sure I would actually feel pretty good with such changes and feel like they improve quality of life for me as a player, and especially, for more casual or slower players or people who used to play long time ago, that's kinda hellish not having automine or MBS, especially when they want to start competing a bit with the better players, and if they compare with other games that have been released in the past 15 years. It doesn't feel particularly fair or rather, particularly smart. It's kinda outdated. 12 unit selection in my view must be super controversial cause it would be a huge change... but in my opinion it's also something that would be good to discuss/modify. Allow people to box as many units, or maybe just a higher limit. Because it slows you down a lot, it requires a lot more speed for not a lot of good reason. You want any decision that you make to be reduced to just as many actions as it needs, the control tools more efficient, without simplifying the mechanics of the game itself, the depth of unit movement and combat, the management of details in countless different possibilities. I've said it before, I think the only true/main advantage to 12 unit selection is the wireframe interface @the bottom which is great and I don't think it's good to lose that. But something could be done to keep the wireframes while still allowing to select more units. In my opinion, these few things are the most important to appeal to new players or more casual players or returning players again in higher numbers and not get them tired of the game, dismissing it as a click fest out of exhaustion and being too punished by it. Along with the extra accessibility and quality of life things, like support for different screen ratio, great Bnet easy to access with no need to forward ports, lan latency.
I think that, no automine / no MBS / 12 unit selection limit are not the reasons why BW is great. BW is great for a lot of reasons, one of them because it actually does have great controls, but they could be even better and use some smart updating
keeping in mind, when BW came out, the context was nobody was very good at RTS, nobody expected that playing BW very well would require such speed, and the other games were not at all comparable in quality of control as well
infinity selection of mutas! What a lovely feature, especially in ZvT!
MBS and >12 unit selection would just make the game completely different. It would not longer be a BW.
^^ originaly, mutas were not supposed to be able to clump in one spot and remain like this while attacking.. and nobody was doing that for a good bunch of years and the game was great personally, I never really liked what the discovery of this "bug" did to the game I would vote for putting it out in all honesty
Modern Zerg vs Terran would be imbalanced without air unit stacking. And it's not a bug. It is the rules of the game functioning as intended. The only thing not intended was how people would use the rules, just like they didn't know which build orders people would use.
Why is it not a bug? Because Blizzard made it so that units attempt to stay in formation. They maintain their relative position to each other as they move around, if they are in the same control group. Test this out for yourself by positioning a few units in an X, and moving them around.
However, Blizzard realized that if units were too far away from each other, this behavior would be problematic, since units on the opposite sides of the map would remain there, even when told to move to the middle. To solve it, they made it so that units who are at a certain distance from each other, rather than maintaining formation, attempt to move to the exact spot that they were ordered to move to.
This can be used by selecting a unit that is far away from the rest of the control group, to cause air unit stacking.
It's not an error in the game. It's the programmed rules acting exactly as they were intended, just like mineral walking on to enemies is a clever way to use the behavior of workers on their way to mine.
Oh god. Yes you can argue it's a clever use of game mechanics, but its not like the game was designed around such mechanics being used. It was something that looks funky and was unintended, but they kept it in the game because of your first point, it became important for game balance.
That's why, in my opinion, if we would like BW to regain more casual/crowded/mainstream interest with a modern update, I feel like it would be better if the existing BW community is ok with some simple changes in the interface or control. Automine and MBS in particular, imo that would just be good to implement in an update/rerelease. Seriously, as a B~ level player I don't mind very much not having automine or MBS, it doesn't hinder me a lot, though I think it happens to anyone to forget and have some 4-5 probes waiting at nexus or something, and of course it affects everyone to have a harder mechanic to produce units / save buildings in control groups. But I'm pretty sure I would actually feel pretty good with such changes and feel like they improve quality of life for me as a player, and especially, for more casual or slower players or people who used to play long time ago, that's kinda hellish not having automine or MBS, especially when they want to start competing a bit with the better players, and if they compare with other games that have been released in the past 15 years. It doesn't feel particularly fair or rather, particularly smart. It's kinda outdated. 12 unit selection in my view must be super controversial cause it would be a huge change... but in my opinion it's also something that would be good to discuss/modify. Allow people to box as many units, or maybe just a higher limit. Because it slows you down a lot, it requires a lot more speed for not a lot of good reason. You want any decision that you make to be reduced to just as many actions as it needs, the control tools more efficient, without simplifying the mechanics of the game itself, the depth of unit movement and combat, the management of details in countless different possibilities. I've said it before, I think the only true/main advantage to 12 unit selection is the wireframe interface @the bottom which is great and I don't think it's good to lose that. But something could be done to keep the wireframes while still allowing to select more units. In my opinion, these few things are the most important to appeal to new players or more casual players or returning players again in higher numbers and not get them tired of the game, dismissing it as a click fest out of exhaustion and being too punished by it. Along with the extra accessibility and quality of life things, like support for different screen ratio, great Bnet easy to access with no need to forward ports, lan latency.
I think that, no automine / no MBS / 12 unit selection limit are not the reasons why BW is great. BW is great for a lot of reasons, one of them because it actually does have great controls, but they could be even better and use some smart updating
keeping in mind, when BW came out, the context was nobody was very good at RTS, nobody expected that playing BW very well would require such speed, and the other games were not at all comparable in quality of control as well
infinity selection of mutas! What a lovely feature, especially in ZvT!
MBS and >12 unit selection would just make the game completely different. It would not longer be a BW.
^^ originaly, mutas were not supposed to be able to clump in one spot and remain like this while attacking.. and nobody was doing that for a good bunch of years and the game was great personally, I never really liked what the discovery of this "bug" did to the game I would vote for putting it out in all honesty
Modern Zerg vs Terran would be imbalanced without air unit stacking. And it's not a bug. It is the rules of the game functioning as intended. The only thing not intended was how people would use the rules, just like they didn't know which build orders people would use.
Why is it not a bug? Because Blizzard made it so that units attempt to stay in formation. They maintain their relative position to each other as they move around, if they are in the same control group. Test this out for yourself by positioning a few units in an X, and moving them around.
However, Blizzard realized that if units were too far away from each other, this behavior would be problematic, since units on the opposite sides of the map would remain there, even when told to move to the middle. To solve it, they made it so that units who are at a certain distance from each other, rather than maintaining formation, attempt to move to the exact spot that they were ordered to move to.
This can be used by selecting a unit that is far away from the rest of the control group, to cause air unit stacking.
It's not an error in the game. It's the programmed rules acting exactly as they were intended, just like mineral walking on to enemies is a clever way to use the behavior of workers on their way to mine.
Oh god. Yes you can argue it's a clever use of game mechanics, but its not like the game was designed around such mechanics being used. It was something that looks funky and was unintended, but they kept it in the game because of your first point, it became important for game balance.
Irrelevant. My argument is that it's not a bug. A bug is unintended behavior. A unit moving through walls is a bug. A unit being way too strong and therefore being abused is not a bug. The things I mention, and the things that people bring up as "bugs"; are behaviors that function exactly as intended.
i mean, the dev team is pretty much dead and buried, arguing about what is a bug and what is intended is kinda pointless imo.. i dont believe they knew what they were creating when they made the game, it's too good for that.. it was an accident, that's what makes changing it so difficult. it's also what makes creating a sequel so difficult, because the sc2 dev team had a very different opinion about what made broodwar a good competitive game than korea did, as evident from the shift from WoL, which was most like scbw, to hots and then to LOTV which is barely recognizable..
to make a proper sequel, the dev has to understand all of the systems at play, including the "artificial" restrictions to players causing them to have to manage attention to differentiate gosus from noobs.. imo, if we were to make a broodwar 2, the glitches and patch finding discussions wouldn't be super important, what would be most important is staying true to the core mechanics of bw to retain the audience.. the hd rerelease won't have the proper staffing to rebalance broodwar if they remove glitches, so i doubt they will even try it.. the best thing they can do is reskin bnet1.0 and add some features like tournaments, add hd sprites, and try to keep everything else the same imo.
That's why, in my opinion, if we would like BW to regain more casual/crowded/mainstream interest with a modern update, I feel like it would be better if the existing BW community is ok with some simple changes in the interface or control. Automine and MBS in particular, imo that would just be good to implement in an update/rerelease. Seriously, as a B~ level player I don't mind very much not having automine or MBS, it doesn't hinder me a lot, though I think it happens to anyone to forget and have some 4-5 probes waiting at nexus or something, and of course it affects everyone to have a harder mechanic to produce units / save buildings in control groups. But I'm pretty sure I would actually feel pretty good with such changes and feel like they improve quality of life for me as a player, and especially, for more casual or slower players or people who used to play long time ago, that's kinda hellish not having automine or MBS, especially when they want to start competing a bit with the better players, and if they compare with other games that have been released in the past 15 years. It doesn't feel particularly fair or rather, particularly smart. It's kinda outdated. 12 unit selection in my view must be super controversial cause it would be a huge change... but in my opinion it's also something that would be good to discuss/modify. Allow people to box as many units, or maybe just a higher limit. Because it slows you down a lot, it requires a lot more speed for not a lot of good reason. You want any decision that you make to be reduced to just as many actions as it needs, the control tools more efficient, without simplifying the mechanics of the game itself, the depth of unit movement and combat, the management of details in countless different possibilities. I've said it before, I think the only true/main advantage to 12 unit selection is the wireframe interface @the bottom which is great and I don't think it's good to lose that. But something could be done to keep the wireframes while still allowing to select more units. In my opinion, these few things are the most important to appeal to new players or more casual players or returning players again in higher numbers and not get them tired of the game, dismissing it as a click fest out of exhaustion and being too punished by it. Along with the extra accessibility and quality of life things, like support for different screen ratio, great Bnet easy to access with no need to forward ports, lan latency.
I think that, no automine / no MBS / 12 unit selection limit are not the reasons why BW is great. BW is great for a lot of reasons, one of them because it actually does have great controls, but they could be even better and use some smart updating
keeping in mind, when BW came out, the context was nobody was very good at RTS, nobody expected that playing BW very well would require such speed, and the other games were not at all comparable in quality of control as well
infinity selection of mutas! What a lovely feature, especially in ZvT!
MBS and >12 unit selection would just make the game completely different. It would not longer be a BW.
^^ originaly, mutas were not supposed to be able to clump in one spot and remain like this while attacking.. and nobody was doing that for a good bunch of years and the game was great personally, I never really liked what the discovery of this "bug" did to the game I would vote for putting it out in all honesty
Modern Zerg vs Terran would be imbalanced without air unit stacking. And it's not a bug. It is the rules of the game functioning as intended. The only thing not intended was how people would use the rules, just like they didn't know which build orders people would use.
Why is it not a bug? Because Blizzard made it so that units attempt to stay in formation. They maintain their relative position to each other as they move around, if they are in the same control group. Test this out for yourself by positioning a few units in an X, and moving them around.
However, Blizzard realized that if units were too far away from each other, this behavior would be problematic, since units on the opposite sides of the map would remain there, even when told to move to the middle. To solve it, they made it so that units who are at a certain distance from each other, rather than maintaining formation, attempt to move to the exact spot that they were ordered to move to.
This can be used by selecting a unit that is far away from the rest of the control group, to cause air unit stacking.
It's not an error in the game. It's the programmed rules acting exactly as they were intended, just like mineral walking on to enemies is a clever way to use the behavior of workers on their way to mine.
Oh god. Yes you can argue it's a clever use of game mechanics, but its not like the game was designed around such mechanics being used. It was something that looks funky and was unintended, but they kept it in the game because of your first point, it became important for game balance.
Irrelevant. My argument is that it's not a bug. A bug is unintended behavior. A unit moving through walls is a bug. A unit being way too strong and therefore being abused is not a bug. The things I mention, and the things that people bring up as "bugs"; are behaviors that function exactly as intended.
Units clumping up like that is completely unintentional and not designed to be used that way. Just because it follows the programmed rules, doesn't mean it's not a bug. Programming oversights to how something is "supposed" to be designed on how a variety of gameplay mechanics interact with eachother are bugs.
Imo, programming oversights are just that - programming oversights. Bugs are Bugs.
Anyway, no point in discussing vocabulary...
In regards to BW making a comeback, I feel like it's already started - just look at the number of views on BW players' streams, they outnumber SC2 by like 10:1. Now it's just up to the audiences and average players like us to restore life to the game via for example the ICCup ladder. The interest is definitely there I think, and it doesn't have to mean choosing BW over SC2...
I don't think that'd help. Brood War is notoriously spaghetti code.
Interesting, I didn't know that. And that's why there are so many nice glitches in the game I guess. I wonder how it would all work out if not for all those random reaver shots...
if rvrs always connected on the best target, it would be imba. You'd see them dumb down PvP to a reaver fest :D
Well if its about to dud or not to dud, it a bit questionable, Note: not talking about reaver autotargeting. It would certainly make reavers less risky investment and it can become really imba in the hands of the good player. However if there is something that need to be changed that would be definitelly reavers and guardians not to suicide into the range of static defences they are attacking.
That's why, in my opinion, if we would like BW to regain more casual/crowded/mainstream interest with a modern update, I feel like it would be better if the existing BW community is ok with some simple changes in the interface or control. Automine and MBS in particular, imo that would just be good to implement in an update/rerelease. Seriously, as a B~ level player I don't mind very much not having automine or MBS, it doesn't hinder me a lot, though I think it happens to anyone to forget and have some 4-5 probes waiting at nexus or something, and of course it affects everyone to have a harder mechanic to produce units / save buildings in control groups. But I'm pretty sure I would actually feel pretty good with such changes and feel like they improve quality of life for me as a player, and especially, for more casual or slower players or people who used to play long time ago, that's kinda hellish not having automine or MBS, especially when they want to start competing a bit with the better players, and if they compare with other games that have been released in the past 15 years. It doesn't feel particularly fair or rather, particularly smart. It's kinda outdated. 12 unit selection in my view must be super controversial cause it would be a huge change... but in my opinion it's also something that would be good to discuss/modify. Allow people to box as many units, or maybe just a higher limit. Because it slows you down a lot, it requires a lot more speed for not a lot of good reason. You want any decision that you make to be reduced to just as many actions as it needs, the control tools more efficient, without simplifying the mechanics of the game itself, the depth of unit movement and combat, the management of details in countless different possibilities. I've said it before, I think the only true/main advantage to 12 unit selection is the wireframe interface @the bottom which is great and I don't think it's good to lose that. But something could be done to keep the wireframes while still allowing to select more units. In my opinion, these few things are the most important to appeal to new players or more casual players or returning players again in higher numbers and not get them tired of the game, dismissing it as a click fest out of exhaustion and being too punished by it. Along with the extra accessibility and quality of life things, like support for different screen ratio, great Bnet easy to access with no need to forward ports, lan latency.
I think that, no automine / no MBS / 12 unit selection limit are not the reasons why BW is great. BW is great for a lot of reasons, one of them because it actually does have great controls, but they could be even better and use some smart updating
keeping in mind, when BW came out, the context was nobody was very good at RTS, nobody expected that playing BW very well would require such speed, and the other games were not at all comparable in quality of control as well
infinity selection of mutas! What a lovely feature, especially in ZvT!
MBS and >12 unit selection would just make the game completely different. It would not longer be a BW.
^^ originaly, mutas were not supposed to be able to clump in one spot and remain like this while attacking.. and nobody was doing that for a good bunch of years and the game was great personally, I never really liked what the discovery of this "bug" did to the game I would vote for putting it out in all honesty
Modern Zerg vs Terran would be imbalanced without air unit stacking. And it's not a bug. It is the rules of the game functioning as intended. The only thing not intended was how people would use the rules, just like they didn't know which build orders people would use.
Why is it not a bug? Because Blizzard made it so that units attempt to stay in formation. They maintain their relative position to each other as they move around, if they are in the same control group. Test this out for yourself by positioning a few units in an X, and moving them around.
However, Blizzard realized that if units were too far away from each other, this behavior would be problematic, since units on the opposite sides of the map would remain there, even when told to move to the middle. To solve it, they made it so that units who are at a certain distance from each other, rather than maintaining formation, attempt to move to the exact spot that they were ordered to move to.
This can be used by selecting a unit that is far away from the rest of the control group, to cause air unit stacking.
It's not an error in the game. It's the programmed rules acting exactly as they were intended, just like mineral walking on to enemies is a clever way to use the behavior of workers on their way to mine.
Oh god. Yes you can argue it's a clever use of game mechanics, but its not like the game was designed around such mechanics being used. It was something that looks funky and was unintended, but they kept it in the game because of your first point, it became important for game balance.
See so many things in BW were beautiful accidents, more acts of god than design (yes god does exist, BW is the proof of that!) and they had no clue how competitive BW would evolve either
Developer intention is irrelevant to a game's depth. A game's depth may be enhanced by bugs and exploits. If a given bug or exploit increases a game's depth, it ought be kept. Unless the gain is marginal and the amount of complexity it introduces is significant. Then, it is an argument from degrees--which is where the truth becomes harder to discern, and also where subjectivity becomes more attractive as a fallback when conclusions are indiscernible.
On February 26 2016 04:46 Jaedrik wrote: Developer intention is irrelevant to a game's depth. A game's depth may be enhanced by bugs and exploits. If a given bug or exploit increases a game's depth, it ought be kept. Unless the gain is marginal and the amount of complexity it introduces is significant. Then, it is an argument from degrees--which is where the truth becomes harder to discern, and also where subjectivity becomes more attractive as a fallback when conclusions are indiscernible.
It's extremely relevant because during the 2nd time around (which is what we're talking about), by "fixing" bugs and "improving" interactions, going back to the "intent", you run the risk of taking away, or refocusing the depth of the game.
true that, and there is the danger of community split where "half" people would play one version, the others the second version, (like CS 1.6 > Source > Go) and also incompatibilities like replay incompatibility^^
On February 25 2016 14:23 Disregard wrote: There is difference in why AOE2 maintains it's status, AOE3 had horrid balance issues and AOE2HD has technical problems. These games don't have the same support and dedicated development teams like SC2 does. The former has a community of which has surpassed the abilities of the original developers to put out content and updates, thus remains why AOE2 will forever be the best of the series.
I have no idea of the current status of SC2 as I had never developed interest it in, although I did follow the AOE2 scene quite heavily till last year.
And also the AOE2 scene does not have the same dedicated pro-scene like SC2 or other e-sports games. Majority or if not all of the veteran players just play part-time, there are no true AOE2 teams that dedicate their full time in playing the game. Example many of the high-tier Chinese players have families or attend school.
On February 25 2016 14:23 Disregard wrote: There is difference in why AOE2 maintains it's status, AOE3 had horrid balance issues and AOE2HD has technical problems. These games don't have the same support and dedicated development teams like SC2 does. The former has a community of which has surpassed the abilities of the original developers to put out content and updates, thus remains why AOE2 will forever be the best of the series.
I have no idea of the current status of SC2 as I had never developed interest it in, although I did follow the AOE2 scene quite heavily till last year.
And also the AOE2 scene does not have the same dedicated pro-scene like SC2 or other e-sports games. Majority or if not all of the veteran players just play part-time, there are no true AOE2 teams that dedicate their full time in playing the game. Example many of the high-tier Chinese players have families or attend school.
which balance issues did AOE3 have?
I don't know if this ever got patched, but Japan with the Agri spam was OP. Some civs just were straight up at a disadvantage.
I don't know if this was ever patched (it's been so long since aoe3), I remember when Uhlan's were broken, I think gendarmes are still broken (French late game cavalry if you can get to that point).
There were lots of balance issues throughout aoe3's life that I can remember.
Chinese Cannon spam, Russia late game (instant fortresses could be built that could pump out units instantly, you could literally have 1 Fortress and go from 50 supply to 200/200 in roughly 20 seconds, faster then that maybe). German instant gendarme spam (was a cavalry unit that did splash, ton of HP and just destroyed everything, I do remember this getting nerfed although it's still very strong).
India Elephant spam back in the day made me cry in my dreams.
I could go on with all the balance issues that popped up over the years, don't remember the game ever truly being balanced as every major tournament would always have 1 civ that dominated it and would be a mirror finals (will all the ones I remember, I remember dutch vs dutch final, Japan vs Japan).
That's why, in my opinion, if we would like BW to regain more casual/crowded/mainstream interest with a modern update, I feel like it would be better if the existing BW community is ok with some simple changes in the interface or control. Automine and MBS in particular, imo that would just be good to implement in an update/rerelease. Seriously, as a B~ level player I don't mind very much not having automine or MBS, it doesn't hinder me a lot, though I think it happens to anyone to forget and have some 4-5 probes waiting at nexus or something, and of course it affects everyone to have a harder mechanic to produce units / save buildings in control groups. But I'm pretty sure I would actually feel pretty good with such changes and feel like they improve quality of life for me as a player, and especially, for more casual or slower players or people who used to play long time ago, that's kinda hellish not having automine or MBS, especially when they want to start competing a bit with the better players, and if they compare with other games that have been released in the past 15 years. It doesn't feel particularly fair or rather, particularly smart. It's kinda outdated. 12 unit selection in my view must be super controversial cause it would be a huge change... but in my opinion it's also something that would be good to discuss/modify. Allow people to box as many units, or maybe just a higher limit. Because it slows you down a lot, it requires a lot more speed for not a lot of good reason. You want any decision that you make to be reduced to just as many actions as it needs, the control tools more efficient, without simplifying the mechanics of the game itself, the depth of unit movement and combat, the management of details in countless different possibilities. I've said it before, I think the only true/main advantage to 12 unit selection is the wireframe interface @the bottom which is great and I don't think it's good to lose that. But something could be done to keep the wireframes while still allowing to select more units. In my opinion, these few things are the most important to appeal to new players or more casual players or returning players again in higher numbers and not get them tired of the game, dismissing it as a click fest out of exhaustion and being too punished by it. Along with the extra accessibility and quality of life things, like support for different screen ratio, great Bnet easy to access with no need to forward ports, lan latency.
I think that, no automine / no MBS / 12 unit selection limit are not the reasons why BW is great. BW is great for a lot of reasons, one of them because it actually does have great controls, but they could be even better and use some smart updating
keeping in mind, when BW came out, the context was nobody was very good at RTS, nobody expected that playing BW very well would require such speed, and the other games were not at all comparable in quality of control as well
infinity selection of mutas! What a lovely feature, especially in ZvT!
MBS and >12 unit selection would just make the game completely different. It would not longer be a BW.
^^ originaly, mutas were not supposed to be able to clump in one spot and remain like this while attacking.. and nobody was doing that for a good bunch of years and the game was great personally, I never really liked what the discovery of this "bug" did to the game I would vote for putting it out in all honesty
Wasn't JulyZerg stacking mutas by spam clicking them on minerals before the stack bug was discovered though?
That's why, in my opinion, if we would like BW to regain more casual/crowded/mainstream interest with a modern update, I feel like it would be better if the existing BW community is ok with some simple changes in the interface or control. Automine and MBS in particular, imo that would just be good to implement in an update/rerelease. Seriously, as a B~ level player I don't mind very much not having automine or MBS, it doesn't hinder me a lot, though I think it happens to anyone to forget and have some 4-5 probes waiting at nexus or something, and of course it affects everyone to have a harder mechanic to produce units / save buildings in control groups. But I'm pretty sure I would actually feel pretty good with such changes and feel like they improve quality of life for me as a player, and especially, for more casual or slower players or people who used to play long time ago, that's kinda hellish not having automine or MBS, especially when they want to start competing a bit with the better players, and if they compare with other games that have been released in the past 15 years. It doesn't feel particularly fair or rather, particularly smart. It's kinda outdated. 12 unit selection in my view must be super controversial cause it would be a huge change... but in my opinion it's also something that would be good to discuss/modify. Allow people to box as many units, or maybe just a higher limit. Because it slows you down a lot, it requires a lot more speed for not a lot of good reason. You want any decision that you make to be reduced to just as many actions as it needs, the control tools more efficient, without simplifying the mechanics of the game itself, the depth of unit movement and combat, the management of details in countless different possibilities. I've said it before, I think the only true/main advantage to 12 unit selection is the wireframe interface @the bottom which is great and I don't think it's good to lose that. But something could be done to keep the wireframes while still allowing to select more units. In my opinion, these few things are the most important to appeal to new players or more casual players or returning players again in higher numbers and not get them tired of the game, dismissing it as a click fest out of exhaustion and being too punished by it. Along with the extra accessibility and quality of life things, like support for different screen ratio, great Bnet easy to access with no need to forward ports, lan latency.
I think that, no automine / no MBS / 12 unit selection limit are not the reasons why BW is great. BW is great for a lot of reasons, one of them because it actually does have great controls, but they could be even better and use some smart updating
keeping in mind, when BW came out, the context was nobody was very good at RTS, nobody expected that playing BW very well would require such speed, and the other games were not at all comparable in quality of control as well
infinity selection of mutas! What a lovely feature, especially in ZvT!
MBS and >12 unit selection would just make the game completely different. It would not longer be a BW.
^^ originaly, mutas were not supposed to be able to clump in one spot and remain like this while attacking.. and nobody was doing that for a good bunch of years and the game was great personally, I never really liked what the discovery of this "bug" did to the game I would vote for putting it out in all honesty
Wasn't JulyZerg stacking mutas by spam clicking them on minerals before the stack bug was discovered though?
I don't know, but I thought, if you do something like that, you can only keep mutas stacked if you keep them moving forward and far away or something, they unstack pretty fast if you don't have a far-unit in select group no? I think before the stack bug, people were attacking with stacked mutas only by flying-by forward and couldn't do back & forth stacked attack, or smtg like that. Not sure, I never do this.
That's why, in my opinion, if we would like BW to regain more casual/crowded/mainstream interest with a modern update, I feel like it would be better if the existing BW community is ok with some simple changes in the interface or control. Automine and MBS in particular, imo that would just be good to implement in an update/rerelease. Seriously, as a B~ level player I don't mind very much not having automine or MBS, it doesn't hinder me a lot, though I think it happens to anyone to forget and have some 4-5 probes waiting at nexus or something, and of course it affects everyone to have a harder mechanic to produce units / save buildings in control groups. But I'm pretty sure I would actually feel pretty good with such changes and feel like they improve quality of life for me as a player, and especially, for more casual or slower players or people who used to play long time ago, that's kinda hellish not having automine or MBS, especially when they want to start competing a bit with the better players, and if they compare with other games that have been released in the past 15 years. It doesn't feel particularly fair or rather, particularly smart. It's kinda outdated. 12 unit selection in my view must be super controversial cause it would be a huge change... but in my opinion it's also something that would be good to discuss/modify. Allow people to box as many units, or maybe just a higher limit. Because it slows you down a lot, it requires a lot more speed for not a lot of good reason. You want any decision that you make to be reduced to just as many actions as it needs, the control tools more efficient, without simplifying the mechanics of the game itself, the depth of unit movement and combat, the management of details in countless different possibilities. I've said it before, I think the only true/main advantage to 12 unit selection is the wireframe interface @the bottom which is great and I don't think it's good to lose that. But something could be done to keep the wireframes while still allowing to select more units. In my opinion, these few things are the most important to appeal to new players or more casual players or returning players again in higher numbers and not get them tired of the game, dismissing it as a click fest out of exhaustion and being too punished by it. Along with the extra accessibility and quality of life things, like support for different screen ratio, great Bnet easy to access with no need to forward ports, lan latency.
I think that, no automine / no MBS / 12 unit selection limit are not the reasons why BW is great. BW is great for a lot of reasons, one of them because it actually does have great controls, but they could be even better and use some smart updating
keeping in mind, when BW came out, the context was nobody was very good at RTS, nobody expected that playing BW very well would require such speed, and the other games were not at all comparable in quality of control as well
infinity selection of mutas! What a lovely feature, especially in ZvT!
MBS and >12 unit selection would just make the game completely different. It would not longer be a BW.
^^ originaly, mutas were not supposed to be able to clump in one spot and remain like this while attacking.. and nobody was doing that for a good bunch of years and the game was great personally, I never really liked what the discovery of this "bug" did to the game I would vote for putting it out in all honesty
Wasn't JulyZerg stacking mutas by spam clicking them on minerals before the stack bug was discovered though?
I don't know, but I thought, if you do something like that, you can only keep mutas stacked if you keep them moving forward and far away or something, they unstack pretty fast if you don't have a far-unit in select group no? I think before the stack bug, people were attacking with stacked mutas only by flying-by forward and couldn't do back & forth stacked attack, or smtg like that. Not sure, I never do this.
I'm not certain as to the veracity of the statement either, but I do know that JulyZerg didn't invent stacking. He just showcased its potential in progaming first, against Hwasin.
Stacking Mutas on minerals is valid if you stack them often, as in you stack, attack an SCV, stack, attack, etc. However, in my personal opinion, I find it unlikely that it was done this way at any point before this game, because this is the game that changed modern Zerg play:
If there is a counter-example, please provide BTW f10eqq, I've been asking if you want to be in the line-up for ASL in Skype chat but you haven't said anything ): We're in the finals now, would be nice to hear from you!
That's why, in my opinion, if we would like BW to regain more casual/crowded/mainstream interest with a modern update, I feel like it would be better if the existing BW community is ok with some simple changes in the interface or control. Automine and MBS in particular, imo that would just be good to implement in an update/rerelease. Seriously, as a B~ level player I don't mind very much not having automine or MBS, it doesn't hinder me a lot, though I think it happens to anyone to forget and have some 4-5 probes waiting at nexus or something, and of course it affects everyone to have a harder mechanic to produce units / save buildings in control groups. But I'm pretty sure I would actually feel pretty good with such changes and feel like they improve quality of life for me as a player, and especially, for more casual or slower players or people who used to play long time ago, that's kinda hellish not having automine or MBS, especially when they want to start competing a bit with the better players, and if they compare with other games that have been released in the past 15 years. It doesn't feel particularly fair or rather, particularly smart. It's kinda outdated. 12 unit selection in my view must be super controversial cause it would be a huge change... but in my opinion it's also something that would be good to discuss/modify. Allow people to box as many units, or maybe just a higher limit. Because it slows you down a lot, it requires a lot more speed for not a lot of good reason. You want any decision that you make to be reduced to just as many actions as it needs, the control tools more efficient, without simplifying the mechanics of the game itself, the depth of unit movement and combat, the management of details in countless different possibilities. I've said it before, I think the only true/main advantage to 12 unit selection is the wireframe interface @the bottom which is great and I don't think it's good to lose that. But something could be done to keep the wireframes while still allowing to select more units. In my opinion, these few things are the most important to appeal to new players or more casual players or returning players again in higher numbers and not get them tired of the game, dismissing it as a click fest out of exhaustion and being too punished by it. Along with the extra accessibility and quality of life things, like support for different screen ratio, great Bnet easy to access with no need to forward ports, lan latency.
I think that, no automine / no MBS / 12 unit selection limit are not the reasons why BW is great. BW is great for a lot of reasons, one of them because it actually does have great controls, but they could be even better and use some smart updating
keeping in mind, when BW came out, the context was nobody was very good at RTS, nobody expected that playing BW very well would require such speed, and the other games were not at all comparable in quality of control as well
infinity selection of mutas! What a lovely feature, especially in ZvT!
MBS and >12 unit selection would just make the game completely different. It would not longer be a BW.
^^ originaly, mutas were not supposed to be able to clump in one spot and remain like this while attacking.. and nobody was doing that for a good bunch of years and the game was great personally, I never really liked what the discovery of this "bug" did to the game I would vote for putting it out in all honesty
Modern Zerg vs Terran would be imbalanced without air unit stacking. And it's not a bug. It is the rules of the game functioning as intended. The only thing not intended was how people would use the rules, just like they didn't know which build orders people would use.
Why is it not a bug? Because Blizzard made it so that units attempt to stay in formation. They maintain their relative position to each other as they move around, if they are in the same control group. Test this out for yourself by positioning a few units in an X, and moving them around.
However, Blizzard realized that if units were too far away from each other, this behavior would be problematic, since units on the opposite sides of the map would remain there, even when told to move to the middle. To solve it, they made it so that units who are at a certain distance from each other, rather than maintaining formation, attempt to move to the exact spot that they were ordered to move to.
This can be used by selecting a unit that is far away from the rest of the control group, to cause air unit stacking.
It's not an error in the game. It's the programmed rules acting exactly as they were intended, just like mineral walking on to enemies is a clever way to use the behavior of workers on their way to mine.
Oh god. Yes you can argue it's a clever use of game mechanics, but its not like the game was designed around such mechanics being used. It was something that looks funky and was unintended, but they kept it in the game because of your first point, it became important for game balance.
Irrelevant. My argument is that it's not a bug. A bug is unintended behavior. A unit moving through walls is a bug. A unit being way too strong and therefore being abused is not a bug. The things I mention, and the things that people bring up as "bugs"; are behaviors that function exactly as intended.
Units clumping up like that is completely unintentional and not designed to be used that way. Just because it follows the programmed rules, doesn't mean it's not a bug. Programming oversights to how something is "supposed" to be designed on how a variety of gameplay mechanics interact with eachother are bugs.
The definition of a logical error, for which "bug" is slang, is unintended behavior - not unforeseen tactical application. If you want to call this an error, then you may call it a design error. But that's all it is. It is not a programming error.
Air units (and ground units) attempt to move to the exact same position when they are far away from each other. This was intentional. So obviously, if you keep a unit far away by trapping it, or because it's simply a very slow unit, then this behavior continues, since the units never get close to each other.
It is no more of a bug than mineral walking in battle is. Both unit movement and the ability for mining workers to travel through other units were ad hoc solutions which gave rise to side effects not in behavior, but in tactical application.
A unit walking through a wall is an example of an error. The ability to jump off walls combined with the ability to move in the air would allow a player to jump on walls indefinitely, which may be unforeseen by the programmers, but it's still not a bug, since every part of the program functions as intended.
It is simply players using the tools that they were given (tools which function and behave as intended) in unforeseen ways.
EPT
I would vote for putting it out in all honesty 
