|
Sigh. 
I have two major weaknesses which prevent me from ever becoming good at RTS (any RTS, including SC): I'm slow, and I often fuck up my timing (actually I have quite good timing, but I always try to gain an advantage and think stuff like "I can hold this, just a few more drones..." and then get rolled over).
So this really is NOT about me. I DO NOT care about playing good or becoming good or any of this. I'm too old for this stuff anyway, and I don't have enough time for it anymore. This is only about me wanting better games to watch. Really.
I'll give you a *very simple*, very basic, somewhat contrived example about that "mechanical vs mental" thing which TL (at large) doesn't seem to "get", and why I think that MBS will help with that (while SBS does not). This might not be a great example, but it shows you exactly why the faster a game is, the less every player is able to take care of (maybe important) details.
I've watched the games on GOM today. In one of Kal's games against that Terran (on Destination) he did some typical reaver/shuttle harassment. At one point, he unloaded the reaver within range of the tank, trying to get a shot off at that tank (which was sieged). However, the reaver was already quite a bit damaged, and once he unloaded the reaver it couldn't survive the tank shot. So the reaver unload was a mistake, he lost it without getting a shot off.
Now just imagine SC would be 2 or 3 times slower (doesn't really matter, just that it would be slower. And no I'm *NOT* implying that I would like it to be 2 or 3 time slower, just to get that out of the way because I'm sure some retard would pick on me for writing that). If that were the case, Kal could have LOOKED at the reaver's health before loading it into the shuttle, then he would have KNOWN how much health it had, so then he could have "CALCULATED" if it could survive 1 more tank shot or not.
But since SC is such an INCREDIBLY FAST game, the best you do is look at if the unit is green, yellow or red. You do not have TIME for details, you do not have TIME for calculating if your units could take another hit or not. You simply DO NOT! Neither you, nor progamers like Kal.
And this is *just one* example of why frantic speed decreases the mental aspect of a game, why details become irrelevant, why even progamers make mistakes like this, why the game does not require intelligence, why it's not chess or Go where you have time to really think your actions through.
It's not a great example, I'm not saying SC should be so much slower so that you should actually do that in every game for every unit. It's really just an example for that "speed vs. mental work" thing, and why the balance in SC is heavily leaned towards speed, making the other thing largely irrelevant (not completely). OK? I would like that balance to be somewhat in the center. I know that speed is essential for the players to have fun, but I also know that the game could be more intricate, complex, and reward "advanced thinking" like what I mentioned. For this to happen, you have to give the players *a little bit* more time, and MBS will do that.
Other things, like advanced micro, could also be used with more time. But as I said, I just wanted to give ONE example and hopefully explain it well enough for TL.
I really hope you somehow understood that now. It'll be my last post about that, I've posted enough here today. Don't pick at details on this post (I won't reply anyway), just try to understand the problem I've described on the whole.
|
I'm not a pro-gamer, but isn't what you just described what balances your mental conflict in the game, the balance of when and where you make decisions. Even assuming your premise, wouldn't the answer just be more practice instead of simplifying the game?
|
|
|
Sweden33719 Posts
I want a game that challenges me as SC:BW did ten years ago. I want a game that I can be proud of being good at but at the same time enjoy playing casually with friends. I want a game that can have a Bonjwa. I want a game that will make e-sports grow internationally. I want a game that will force me to stay up until 5:00 AM to watch it. I want a game without MBS.
Honestly, I'm pretty sure you WILL have this regardless of wether MBS is in the game or not (from what I hear, MBS on its own is actually fine, the problem is when you combine it with unlimited unit selection, automining, building queues - ie you can queue up 10 supply depots - and the improved AI of units)..
WC3 didn't fail to achieve this because of MBS, it's because it's a very different type of game. And even though WC3 "failed" (failed to make us quit BW is perhaps a better term, since it didn't really fail), it still did pretty well for a failure...
*Tried to find a vod of Moon playing WC3 where you see his hands but I failed*
So here's one of him playing SC2 (jump ahead a little bit)
+ Show Spoiler +
I do hope it costs money to queue supply depots tho (ie if you queue 10 you better get charged 1k minerals instantly).
WC3 is a pretty cool game too:
+ Show Spoiler +http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iSgwjUV750 the really cool micro comes a bit further into the video tho
I don't *want* MBS or automining because I enjoy those tasks and I actually do agree that they make the game better, but I don't think SC2 will crash and burn with them..
|
[QUOTE]On November 02 2008 16:12 IntoTheWow wrote:
- MBS on ZvP
The 2a isn't even necessary, thanks to attack-move rally points. Instead, it's 1s then z till you run out of larvae. The lings attack and surround for you. It's like having "win game" hotkeyed.
|
I agree, although showing Moon's hands while playing SC2 proves absolutely nothing. After all, WC3 progamers are notorious for inflating their APM by spamming a lot.
You need roughly 150 APM to play WC3 at the very top level (that's from an interview with Grubby conducted by WCReplays some years ago, if anyone wondered; I
'm not making tuff up, it's Grubby if anything ) whereas SC requires about 250.
|
I
100% disagree ..I mean i loved and love starcraft for its strategy part not for mbs, multitasking / mouse skills.. I mean if u really want mbs and find fun to be exhausted after 5 hours in a row of 250 apm then play tetris at speed x 10 or pingpong or something but don t play strategy games ..
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On November 03 2008 00:15 maybenexttime wrote:I agree, although showing Moon's hands while playing SC2 proves absolutely nothing. After all, WC3 progamers are notorious for inflating their APM by spamming a lot. You need roughly 150 APM to play WC3 at the very top level (that's from an interview with Grubby conducted by WCReplays some years ago, if anyone wondered; I 'm not making tuff up, it's Grubby if anything ) whereas SC requires about 250.
Yeah but it's not like Nada's 400 isn't inflated ;p
So let's say you'll need 200 for SC2 - sure, it's a step back, but it's not the end of the world.
|
On November 03 2008 00:24 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2008 00:15 maybenexttime wrote:I agree, although showing Moon's hands while playing SC2 proves absolutely nothing. After all, WC3 progamers are notorious for inflating their APM by spamming a lot. You need roughly 150 APM to play WC3 at the very top level (that's from an interview with Grubby conducted by WCReplays some years ago, if anyone wondered; I 'm not making tuff up, it's Grubby if anything ) whereas SC requires about 250. Yeah but it's not like Nada's 400 isn't inflated ;p So let's say you'll need 200 for SC2 - sure, it's a step back, but it's not the end of the world.
yea but if you take enough steps back you'll eventually fall off a cliff or some stairs
or maybe into one of those fucking spiked cage iron maidens
|
8751 Posts
1. Automining is much worse than MBS. Let's rally to get automining removed first.
2. Haha. I laugh at the people who say mechanical skill in SC makes strategy obsolete. I laugh because it's ironic. Strategy exists at the highest level of SC and it overcomes mechanics in more than half of all professional games. Of course, you all have looked for strategy and have failed to find it. Therefore you suck at strategy. And yet you don't see that conclusion. Instead, you conclude that there is no strategy and so you call for SC2 to rely even more heavily on strategy. Haha.
|
On November 03 2008 00:18 axel wrote:
I
100% disagree ..I mean i loved and love starcraft for its strategy part not for mbs, multitasking / mouse skills.. I mean if u really want mbs and find fun to be exhausted after 5 hours in a row of 250 apm then play tetris at speed x 10 or pingpong or something but don t play strategy games ..
And you, sir, are better off buying DoW2 and watching the game play for you as you put into practice your "grand strategies." 
On November 03 2008 00:24 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2008 00:15 maybenexttime wrote:I agree, although showing Moon's hands while playing SC2 proves absolutely nothing. After all, WC3 progamers are notorious for inflating their APM by spamming a lot. You need roughly 150 APM to play WC3 at the very top level (that's from an interview with Grubby conducted by WCReplays some years ago, if anyone wondered; I 'm not making tuff up, it's Grubby if anything ) whereas SC requires about 250. Yeah but it's not like Nada's 400 isn't inflated ;p So let's say you'll need 200 for SC2 - sure, it's a step back, but it's not the end of the world.
Yeah, but APM isn't really what people are worried about anyways. It the game rhythm, attention splitting, etc. With MBS and auto-mining you can pretty much focus on micro only since you can macro remotely. Also all sorts of ambushes will be harder to pull off as players will hardly ever drive their attention away from their units.
On November 03 2008 00:39 Liquid`NonY wrote:
1. Automining is much worse than MBS. Let's rally to get automining removed first.
2. Haha. I laugh at the people who say mechanical skill in SC makes strategy obsolete. I laugh because it's ironic. Strategy exists at the highest level of SC and it overcomes mechanics in more than half of all professional games. Of course, you all have looked for strategy and have failed to find it. Therefore you suck at strategy. And yet you don't see that conclusion. Instead, you conclude that there is no strategy and so you call for SC2 to rely even more heavily on strategy. Haha.
Couldn't agree more.
It's people like 400 (or whatever his nick was) that want "strategy" to matter more while they completely suck at it. The guy said that if he would've expanded all allover the map had he been not restricted by SBS/lack of auto-mining, being completely oblivious to the fact that it'd be totally moronic strategy-wise. T____T
|
On November 02 2008 23:50 0xDEADBEEF wrote:Sigh. I have two major weaknesses which prevent me from ever becoming good at RTS (any RTS, including SC): I'm slow, and I often fuck up my timing (actually I have quite good timing, but I always try to gain an advantage and think stuff like "I can hold this, just a few more drones..." and then get rolled over). So this really is NOT about me. I DO NOT care about playing good or becoming good or any of this. I'm too old for this stuff anyway, and I don't have enough time for it anymore. This is only about me wanting better games to watch. Really. I'll give you a *very simple*, very basic, somewhat contrived example about that "mechanical vs mental" thing which TL (at large) doesn't seem to "get", and why I think that MBS will help with that (while SBS does not). This might not be a great example, but it shows you exactly why the faster a game is, the less every player is able to take care of (maybe important) details. I've watched the games on GOM today. In one of Kal's games against that Terran (on Destination) he did some typical reaver/shuttle harassment. At one point, he unloaded the reaver within range of the tank, trying to get a shot off at that tank (which was sieged). However, the reaver was already quite a bit damaged, and once he unloaded the reaver it couldn't survive the tank shot. So the reaver unload was a mistake, he lost it without getting a shot off. Now just imagine SC would be 2 or 3 times slower (doesn't really matter, just that it would be slower. And no I'm *NOT* implying that I would like it to be 2 or 3 time slower, just to get that out of the way because I'm sure some retard would pick on me for writing that). If that were the case, Kal could have LOOKED at the reaver's health before loading it into the shuttle, then he would have KNOWN how much health it had, so then he could have "CALCULATED" if it could survive 1 more tank shot or not. But since SC is such an INCREDIBLY FAST game, the best you do is look at if the unit is green, yellow or red. You do not have TIME for details, you do not have TIME for calculating if your units could take another hit or not. You simply DO NOT! Neither you, nor progamers like Kal. And this is *just one* example of why frantic speed decreases the mental aspect of a game, why details become irrelevant, why even progamers make mistakes like this, why the game does not require intelligence, why it's not chess or Go where you have time to really think your actions through. It's not a great example, I'm not saying SC should be so much slower so that you should actually do that in every game for every unit. It's really just an example for that "speed vs. mental work" thing, and why the balance in SC is heavily leaned towards speed, making the other thing largely irrelevant (not completely). OK? I would like that balance to be somewhat in the center. I know that speed is essential for the players to have fun, but I also know that the game could be more intricate, complex, and reward "advanced thinking" like what I mentioned. For this to happen, you have to give the players *a little bit* more time, and MBS will do that. Other things, like advanced micro, could also be used with more time. But as I said, I just wanted to give ONE example and hopefully explain it well enough for TL. I really hope you somehow understood that now. It'll be my last post about that, I've posted enough here today. Don't pick at details on this post (I won't reply anyway), just try to understand the problem I've described on the whole.
All I ask is that you don't post stuff like that about a game you don't understand.
Without playing the game you simply can't understand it, so please don't make arguments about what kind of skill bw takes or doesn't take.
The reason you don't appreciate the advanced thinking in bw is because you have never experienced it. On the same token you will never appreciate the advanced thinking in sc2 either (MBS or no MBS), because you will never play the game enough to understand it on such a level.
Heck I am absolutely convinced a _lot_ of what went on in for example the last OSL finals went right over my head (and according to the last ranking poll I am in the upper 30% of this forum)
As I said, I don't bitch on wc3 forums how I want more strategy in the game since I don't enjoy watching units focus fireing and beeing pulled back over and over again and nothing else.
It's a game I don't understand since I haven't played it enough, I recognize that and keep silent.
Plese do the same.
As for you example:
Kal _tried_ to calculate the reavers health. The entire thing about bw is that he had only 0.1 second to do it and he got it wrong. As a result he was put at a disadvantadge and perhaps even lost the game (No idea I didn't watch). Someone else with a fast enough mind would perhaps have gotten it right, and would thus have earned an advantage.
Thus slowing the game down, you take opportunities for those who think faster to outperform those who think slower.
|
This thread is hillarious because atleast to me, its so right on so many levels.
|
Vote no on Prop MBS this tuesday
|
MBS will make SC2 sucky in 2009, ok?
|
On November 03 2008 00:00 KOFgokuon wrote:
who voted no?!
Incontroll !?
|
On November 03 2008 00:24 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2008 00:15 maybenexttime wrote:I agree, although showing Moon's hands while playing SC2 proves absolutely nothing. After all, WC3 progamers are notorious for inflating their APM by spamming a lot. You need roughly 150 APM to play WC3 at the very top level (that's from an interview with Grubby conducted by WCReplays some years ago, if anyone wondered; I 'm not making tuff up, it's Grubby if anything ) whereas SC requires about 250. Yeah but it's not like Nada's 400 isn't inflated ;p So let's say you'll need 200 for SC2 - sure, it's a step back, but it's not the end of the world.
APM isnt the big deal
its the fact that you dont have to go back to your base. you just hit 6s and each of your command centers builds an scv, which automatically goes to the nearest mineral patches and starts mining.
Now instead of going back to all your bases, building scvs, telling them to mine etc, which plays a HUGE part in skill differential as fas as macro is concerned, is replaced by hitting 6s once every 30 seconds.
Instead of going back to your base, clicking on a barracks, building a marine repeating (you had to go back to your base because you cant possibly hotkey all your barracks/factories).
All you have to do now is hit 2m. You dont even have to look at your base.
which means while you are microing around the map, other than building buildings (and I should point out building queue) you just have to hit 2m6s or whatever and you dont have to take your eyes off the units.
Late game when you arent building buildings, its 100% micro, 100% watching your units.
Which is bad for a huge variety of reasons.
|
|
|
because in the sc2 forum this would probably be closed
so keep it in BW!
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On November 03 2008 01:08 fusionsdf wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2008 00:24 FrozenArbiter wrote:On November 03 2008 00:15 maybenexttime wrote:I agree, although showing Moon's hands while playing SC2 proves absolutely nothing. After all, WC3 progamers are notorious for inflating their APM by spamming a lot. You need roughly 150 APM to play WC3 at the very top level (that's from an interview with Grubby conducted by WCReplays some years ago, if anyone wondered; I 'm not making tuff up, it's Grubby if anything ) whereas SC requires about 250. Yeah but it's not like Nada's 400 isn't inflated ;p So let's say you'll need 200 for SC2 - sure, it's a step back, but it's not the end of the world. APM isnt the big deal its the fact that you dont have to go back to your base. you just hit 6s and each of your command centers builds an scv, which automatically goes to the nearest mineral patches and starts mining. Now instead of going back to all your bases, building scvs, telling them to mine etc, which plays a HUGE part in skill differential as fas as macro is concerned, is replaced by hitting 6s once every 30 seconds. Instead of going back to your base, clicking on a barracks, building a marine repeating (you had to go back to your base because you cant possibly hotkey all your barracks/factories). All you have to do now is hit 2m. You dont even have to look at your base. which means while you are microing around the map, other than building buildings (and I should point out building queue) you just have to hit 2m6s or whatever and you dont have to take your eyes off the units. Late game when you arent building buildings, its 100% micro, 100% watching your units. Which is bad for a huge variety of reasons.
.... You do realize I'm against MBS and I've probably written this exact post you just wrote about 500 times?
The only point of my first post in this thread is that while I agree it's bad, I don't think it's AS BAD as some people think.
The only reason APM was brought up was because ITW posted a vid of nada playing SC, so I posted a vid of Moon playing SC2 (showing his hands are super fast as well), and then maybenexttime commented on the apm being inflated (which Nada's is as well).
My point is simply this:
You WILL have a competitive game with or without MBS.
You WILL have a game that (greatly) boosts e-sports internationally, with or without mbs.
Will you have a better game with MBS? I don't think so, no.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
