EPTSmart casting hurts the game - An in depth look - Page 3
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Wr3k
Canada2533 Posts
| ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
Would completely make the game better without question imo. Storm is retarded as it is, EMP can be argued the same, you could easily make NP buffed if you disable smart casting (ie. increase range by 1), etc. I've always thought this, still believe in this. It's not even MILDLY impressive to see your opponent carpet storm in SC2. In fact, instead of getting a "wow" feeling, you get a "this stupid fucking game is broken" feeling. And the fact you can eliminate all that with a single EMP... even more stupid. You go from extreme to extreme with smart casting. On December 29 2010 09:27 Wr3k wrote: Its the same deal as mbs imo, the apm and skill are just going to shift into other aspects of play. Disagree entirely. One just aids macro to leave APM elsewhere (MBS), while smart casting is near game breaking with carpet storming everywhere. Also completely removes the "awe" factor from esports. | ||
|
Bluetea
United States185 Posts
On December 29 2010 09:25 Musketeer wrote: Starcraft is a strategy game, and should be treated as such. Smart casting has nothing to do with "helping new players". It's simply the most efficient and practical means to allow the player, the strategist, to translate his thoughts into action without having to overcome meaningless hurdles in order to do so. I wish I could speak as eloquently as you. I completely agree. | ||
|
Clickety
Portugal196 Posts
| ||
|
0mgVitaminE
United States1278 Posts
When you see Jangbi and Reach storm you just sit there like holy shit. I can't get this with sc2. Granted, there are other things that make me jealous, but I miss the power that storm had in bw | ||
|
JakeBurton
74 Posts
On December 29 2010 09:28 Clickety wrote: You shouldn't be amazed by carpet storms, you should be amazed by smart tactics and good strategies. Why do you value apm more than decision making? Definitely agree. I was pretty shocked that people could possibly feel like Starcraft 2 is not as good as Brood War. After reading more responses it makes a lot more sense to me. The general division seems to be people who value Starcraft 2 as a strategy game, and people who want it to be BW and feel that deviation from this model means the game is worse. | ||
|
Mr. Daisy
United States17 Posts
You have a reasonable idea that smart casting lessens the skill gap between the high and low level players, and it's true to an extent, but the other interface improvements balance it out. All players can micro more effectively than they could in BW with basically all their units because of control groups, MBS, and smart casting. Starcraft 2 is a game that is meant to be played before it is a sport meant to be watched. I love the excitement of insane plays in BW, but new BW players can barely macro off of one base, let alone control a maxed army with templars and arbiters. I'd much rather have a highly competitive game with well designed controls and (relatively) diverse strategies at every level than one I can barely play but is awe inspiring to watch. | ||
|
Immanis
United States21 Posts
User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
Co-lol-sus
Bulgaria141 Posts
I hope you're also in favor of re-introducing the zerg's production nerf. (let's be real, it only hurts zerg players). | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On December 29 2010 09:28 Clickety wrote: You shouldn't be amazed by carpet storms, you should be amazed by smart tactics and good strategies. Why do you value apm more than decision making? Hardly. It's an essential part of an esport and the people hailing "strategy games should be about strategy," fail to grasp the concept that strategy doesn't encompass the entire game, it's merely a facet of it. For a video games to succeed competitively, there needs to be a relatively high skill ceiling. Strategy is broken down quickly and becomes stale for long periods before innovation kicks in. Sorry, most strategies are merely copied from other people. If you're going to only be impressed by strategy you're going to be let down with nearly any video game. Even in BW, how often were you impressed by strategy? Every game? Hardly. You'd be hard pressed to find any "impressive" strategy in an entire Proleague day. It gets old, it won't keep you interested. Tactics are only exciting when they are hard to pull off. Otherwise, they are boring. I don't value APM more than decision making, necessarily. However, I don't place any value in things like carpet storming, which waters down the game into something stupid and not entertaining. Are you telling me you aren't impressed by things that professional athletes do in sports? Almost everything impressive in sports comes down to the athletes being miles ahead of average competition. When a hockey player dekes around 2 defensive players on the opposing team, the fakes out the goalie and gets an impressive shot, we are amazed because of how well he can control that puck. It is no different in SC2. We're impressed by APM, by control, by multitask, by strategy, by tactics, all of it combined. And it's all essential to a spectator sport. On December 29 2010 09:37 Mr. Daisy wrote: I'm all for making the game as competitive and "skill based" as it can be. But storm in BW is basically impossible to use (effectively) for anyone that wasn't a C+ or better. Looking at the highest level games, the best players still don't hit all of their storms/emps/fungals perfectly, and with unlimited units in a control group taking away smart casting would basically cripple casters, even if you buffed storm back to its BW power. Imagine frantically trying to clone your storms with 5-6 HTs against a big bio ball, which can easily stim out of it. I know I certainly couldn't do it well enough that I would feel comftorable going for storm, and I'm a mid level diamond player. It would be totally unreasonable to expect a bronze, silver, or gold level player to pull it off. You have a reasonable idea that smart casting lessens the skill gap between the high and low level players, and it's true to an extent, but the other interface improvements balance it out. All players can micro more effectively than they could in BW with basically all their units because of control groups, MBS, and smart casting. Starcraft 2 is a game that is meant to be played before it is a sport meant to be watched. I love the excitement of insane plays in BW, but new BW players can barely macro off of one base, let alone control a maxed army with templars and arbiters. I'd much rather have a highly competitive game with well designed controls and (relatively) diverse strategies at every level than one I can barely play but is awe inspiring to watch. What? Storm was significantly more effective at lower levels than higher levels, you have everything backwards. It was ungodly hard to storm dodge in BW, and you'd end up letting almost all the units inside die. Considering your opponent's army is now made of bio than mech, it's going to be even stronger, not to mention forcefields on top of that. Did you even play BW? Spells were retardedly strong at lower levels, people leave a massive clump of MM idle --> perfect plague on the center, etc. Anyways, why do you think Protoss was "easymode" up until around C/C+ in BW? For the exact opposite of what you're saying. | ||
|
Wesso
Netherlands1245 Posts
| ||
|
drlame
Sweden574 Posts
On December 29 2010 09:28 Clickety wrote: You shouldn't be amazed by carpet storms, you should be amazed by smart tactics and good strategies. Why do you value apm more than decision making? This is true, but the thing is SC2 doesn't offer much of smart decision-making, the way it's built now is Build X beats Build Y and Build Z loses to Y and beats X, if both players decide to go the same build (if the races are different try comparing the 3 builds to 1. Cheese, 2. Fast expand and 3. Early pressure) a short game or a macro game will ensue. Unless, _unless_ one player does stupid mistakes and/or the other player heavily outplays him/her. Imo, there are two problems leading to this: 1. Damage bonuses (i.e + damage to armored) and 2. Retarded maps If we could see an improvement to at least number 2. I think that smart casting will become a "problem" of the past. | ||
|
farseerdk
Canada504 Posts
| ||
|
red_hq
Canada450 Posts
Smart casting is a good thing for the health of this game because it increases the potential skilled player pool. | ||
|
LegendaryZ
United States1583 Posts
On December 29 2010 09:12 Clickety wrote: I still don't get why clicking fast is considered more important than decision making. SC2 helps you with unnecessary annoyances so you can focus on the strategy in a strategy game, instead of having to mash your keyboard franticly. That's your opinion. Others may see the dexterity, speed, and precision required to execute your strategy ("clicking fast" as you call it) as a meaningful challenge that should be just as important as strategy. The beauty of the RTS genre really comes from its balance of thought and physical precision to make that thought reality. People always seem to be arguing about being limited by the interface, but the fact is that you're always going to be limited by one thing or another, whether it's the keyboard layout or your reflexes. So long as it's fair and we all have to deal with it, I really don't see what the problem is. As for the OP, I would agree to an extent that the smart casting system needs to be examined again. My reason for this opinion is mainly because of the imbalace between the effort required for someone to cast effectively and the effort required for the player on the other end to dodge them. Basically they made it easier to spread your Psi Storms, but at the same time made it more difficult to minimize the damage due to the way units tend to clump up more. Also my disagreement with the current system is that it benefits Protoss more than any other race due to the Warp In mechanic and the Amulet-upgraded High Templars. I would definitely like the casting to require a little more effort. I wouln't say I would like to see it at Brood War levels, but rather maybe make it less optimal by default. That way you keep the game accessible, but also leave room to reward a little extra effort. | ||
|
FrodaN
754 Posts
Imagine if Terran bio had their army on 3 control groups and dodged storms while taking on gateway units with every group. Now THAT would be SUPER impressive. Those are the kind of plays that will define SC2 once people stop putting everything onto the same number. I know you put a lot of time/effort into this thread, but this hypothesis is pretty unsupported. | ||
|
Blyadischa
419 Posts
On December 29 2010 09:28 Clickety wrote: You shouldn't be amazed by carpet storms, you should be amazed by smart tactics and good strategies. Why do you value apm more than decision making? Yeah, because T-CLICK-T-CLICK-T-CLICK-T-CLICK-T-CLICK-T-CLICKing an army larger than yours that took better decision making, tactics, macroing, etc. to produce and winning the battle is amazingly good tactics and strategy? | ||
|
Phyrigian
New Zealand1332 Posts
| ||
|
LegendaryZ
United States1583 Posts
On December 29 2010 09:28 Clickety wrote: You shouldn't be amazed by carpet storms, you should be amazed by smart tactics and good strategies. Why do you value apm more than decision making? Why shouldn't you be amazed by both and why can't you value them equally? | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On December 29 2010 09:45 Blyadischa wrote: The main problem with storm isn't smart casting, it's that high templar can hold 4 storms, and can storm right when they pop with amulet, and that they are cheap. I wouldn't mind storms being nerfed with by making them non smart castable though By 4 storms you mean 2? | ||
| ||
