|
On December 11 2011 00:11 forsooth wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 23:55 Jyxz wrote:On December 10 2011 23:47 Muki wrote:
I don't agree that SC2 to BW is what -em is to standard in dota.
SC2 is different and updated to 2010 expectations and a spiritual successor to BW, while -em in dota is just a gamemode that retains every item, hero etc. but they make early gamers less useful.
The skill ceiling in SC2 is still very high even though some old mechanics from BW aren't ported. It's not like a noob could hit master league while in -em it's a LOT easier for bad players to get good stats. 2012 looks so promising for SC2 skillwise, why would you want to hold people back with ancient mechanics that take up apm and aren't that interesting to watch. I have to disagree with you here, even though a lot of what you say is true, it is possible for a noob to hit masters. The amount it takes to bring someone to diamond level in SC2 is absurdly easy. With terran just teaching someone a proper 2 rax push used to be enough to get to masters it is still enough to get to diamond, protoss 4 warpgate was enough to get high diamond before masters was even out. As to the second part of your post, I am saying I don't want to hold people back? I want to remove these mechanics that have no decision making just mindless APM. I agree with the first paragraph of your post at least. I played BW for years and even with 2-3 hours of games every day (sometimes more on the weekends) I remained very average with both Zerg and Protoss, and my Terran was always abysmal no matter how much time I put in. SC2 is a different story. I didn't start playing until March of this year, I barely even play 1v1 ladder anymore, and I maintain diamond league with win rate comfortably above 50%. It's too easy if I can maintain a skill level that much higher than the majority of players with no practice whatsoever.
Well if you are diamond that just means that 80% oare placed below you. This has nothing to do with how hard or diffucult the game is.
|
Cute, pvp will be dead tho
|
Ummm I don't really like this change. Takes away all the macro mechanics, taking out a huge part of the game, completely lowering part of the skill cap.
|
On December 10 2011 23:28 Jyxz wrote:
Theory:
-This will drastically reduce the amount of viable all ins, and potentially make expanding much more valuable.
-It will allow bigger maps without causing huge balance issues, allowing for better games.
-This will drastically reduce every races income, making games where you have 200/200 because you need it to stay alive then you end up sacrificing your units to get out better tech, much less common.
-Instead of reducing the skill cap, which is why I believe these mechanics were implemented, I truly believe it will raise it.
Upon re-reading, this is really the core of your argument and it's a really crappy one. You provide no reason to actually believe this is the case and I don't agree with any of your points aside from the third one which isn't really an issue at all, I don't mind players sacrificing units to free up supply, it's not really an issue, it also leave some minor differentiation in how players utilize units they want to discard, efficiently? or just trashing them.
I see no reason to believe your first point is true.
I see no reason to believe your second point is true.
I don't see how something that adds more stuff to do reduces the skill cap, you've really given no reasoning to prove that this is the case.
|
Another one of these? really?
If Brood War was such an amazing game, then just go play that and ignore the fact that StarCraft II even exists.
They are different games, stop trying to make one into the other.
|
This looks like a troll post tbh. That quote isn't by Einstein and the suggestions all seem to be worse than bnet forum quality. Start a movement for these changes? I think not.
|
On December 11 2011 00:11 forsooth wrote:
[...] I played BW for years and even with 2-3 hours of games every day (sometimes more on the weekends) I remained very average with both Zerg and Protoss, and my Terran was always abysmal no matter how much time I put in.
SC2 is a different story. I didn't start playing until March of this year, I barely even play 1v1 ladder anymore, and I maintain diamond league with win rate comfortably above 50%. It's too easy if I can maintain a skill level that much higher than the majority of players with no practice whatsoever.
When did you play BW? (Probably at a time when most active players were 'hardcore').
You're playing SC2 casually while a lot of others are playing casually. Don't think that the mechanics you developed being "average" at BW translated into you being (and maintaining) an above average skill level in SC2? You really can't compare in the way you did.
|
Your suggestion would simply be the worst thing that ever happened to SC2, potentionally killing it. You know why did Blizzard include macro mechanics in the first place? Because the game was damn too one dimensional with features like MBS and auto-mine. Without macro mechanics, you would only return to your base for placing buildings, nothing else. That's not the case with BW, where you had to manually select buildings to make units. I agree that SC2 is easier, but not bacuse of the macro mechanics, but beacuse of the UI. And thats still not necessarily a bad thing: there is a reason why BW is dead everywhere except Korea.
|
On December 11 2011 00:20 DusTerr wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2011 00:11 forsooth wrote:
[...] I played BW for years and even with 2-3 hours of games every day (sometimes more on the weekends) I remained very average with both Zerg and Protoss, and my Terran was always abysmal no matter how much time I put in.
SC2 is a different story. I didn't start playing until March of this year, I barely even play 1v1 ladder anymore, and I maintain diamond league with win rate comfortably above 50%. It's too easy if I can maintain a skill level that much higher than the majority of players with no practice whatsoever. When did you play BW? (Probably at a time when most active players were 'hardcore'). You're playing SC2 casually while a lot of others are playing casually. Don't think that the mechanics you developed being "average" at BW translated into you being (and maintaining) an above average skill level in SC2? You really can't compare in the way you did.
I was most active between 2001-2006, then dropped off steadily until going pretty much inactive a couple years ago. I do understand that the mechanics I developed in BW gave me an initial edge over people who were being introduced to StarCraft through SC2, but when I beat someone easily who's in diamond with hundreds of 1v1s played each season in comparison to my couple dozen, it's both surprising and off-putting. I don't feel like I should be beating people who put in vastly more time than I do.
|
On December 10 2011 23:28 Jyxz wrote:
My proposed solution:
-Protoss gateway units all 10% faster build time, Robo bay units 15% faster build time, Stargate 15% faster build time. Warp gate research 160 --> 120.
Theory:
-This will drastically reduce the amount of viable all ins, and potentially make expanding much more valuable.
I don't mean to sound rude, but can't you see how you contradict yourself here?
|
Is this a troll?
If not... wow, this is so terribly thought out I can't believe it
Early game it takes 17 seconds between making workers for Protoss and Terran (without Chrono).
A hatch produces a larvae every 15 seconds allowing for zerg to already make workers faster than the other two races..
and NOW you want zerg to be able to make them every 12.75 seconds compared to 17 for both races? Can I have some of what you're smoking...
|
While dota isn't balanced around EM dota, SC2 is balanced around its macro mechanics. this is a huge difference.
|
Have to disagree with macro mechanics making the game easier. It adds to the decision making process (something that adds to the skill of the game as mentioned at the end of the OP).
Anyone who feels they are too good/crutch for lower level players is either not keeping up with his macro or has sub optimal decision making regarding how to use mineral spike from mules, more larvae, chrono etc. The game is balanced around macro mechanics. Also your suggested changes would break toss (1 base timings will be way too good).
I agree that the income off a base in SC2 is pretty significant but that just makes the game much faster and you hit pop cap way quicker. Many pros have stated that this makes SC2 a much faster game and is one aspect in which it is actually harder than BW. Just because SC2 does not have the same UI limitations doesn't mean there is nothing to do with your APM. A 300+APM player will always have an advantage over the 100APM player provided the actions are being used properly. Just look at forGG when he micros reapers, banshees while macroing behind it. Its also pretty obvious from the games that even the best of the best are no where close to hitting the skill ceiling and make a lot of mechanical mistakes.
BW was very difficult because it had UI limitations which made it very mechanically demanding. For example, it was near impossible to play TvZ in BW unless you had crazy high APM because of all those raxes that you had to macro off while pushing the zerg. IMO as people figure out the game more and more, they will get way better at multi-tasking in SC2 and the skill ceiling will eventually be very high. Just look at jjakji and leenock game 1 from the GSL where they were both very active with their armies trying to out position the other throughout the entire game while doing the usual TvZ macro and harass, eventually there will be very few periods of passivity and good players will be pressuring and trying to get good positions through out the game.
|
orbital just for scans, hell terran will know everything you are doing (after they will buff tons of terran units supply cost wise, and reduce cost on some t1,5s to make up for the reduced amount of workers they have compared to the other races). toss builds faster wee. return of the 4 gate in every matchup, but now with only 3 gates.
Anyway thanks for this funny post op. It made me laugh and shake my head. But i feel for you, your nexus is probably at full energy most of the time :/ .
PS: A fan of bw will always say its the best game ever unimportant if its true or not ;o until they find something more fun to watch and play, then they will start to hate on bw  .
|
On December 11 2011 00:17 Mordiford wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 23:28 Jyxz wrote:
Theory:
-This will drastically reduce the amount of viable all ins, and potentially make expanding much more valuable.
-It will allow bigger maps without causing huge balance issues, allowing for better games.
-This will drastically reduce every races income, making games where you have 200/200 because you need it to stay alive then you end up sacrificing your units to get out better tech, much less common.
-Instead of reducing the skill cap, which is why I believe these mechanics were implemented, I truly believe it will raise it.
Upon re-reading, this is really the core of your argument and it's a really crappy one. You provide no reason to actually believe this is the case and I don't agree with any of your points aside from the third one which isn't really an issue at all, I don't mind players sacrificing units to free up supply, it's not really an issue, it also leave some minor differentiation in how players utilize units they want to discard, efficiently? or just trashing them. I see no reason to believe your first point is true. I see no reason to believe your second point is true. I don't see how something that adds more stuff to do reduces the skill cap, you've really given no reasoning to prove that this is the case.
Pretty much this... all your conclusions sounds "nice", but you've provided absolutely no justifications for how your changes will lead to them. This is why B.Net forum theory craft posts are not being taken seriously by Blizzard and thank god for that.
Your proposal is basically:
Step 1. Remove mechanics from the game (that require skill to use)
Step 2. ?????
Step 3. Profit
TBH, this kind of sounds like a crappy English essay or something, with a lot of flowery language to dress up the situation and convince the reader, but with completely fail logic.
|
Because of the chronoboost, mule, and inject larva abilities, Starcraft 2 is to Starcraft, as easy mode dota is to regular dota. It feels gimmicky and massively luck based.
Umm....what? As opposed to making a freaking million hatcheries and hotkeying all of them, I actually have to do something now. Why do these mechanics make it gimmicky and what the heck does not missing your injects have to do with luck? I just don't see the point behind your post.
Sure, BW was harder, but that was because of primitive design like the horrible pathing AI and also, SC2 is a different game. If I wanted a BW clone, well.. I wouldn't. I would play BW.
|
i'd be down with these changes.
|
Yeah, I'm pretty sure this is just supposed to be a troll.
The first post doesn't even argue anything anything; it's just meant to be inflammatory. He provides no justification for his point other than "I feel that..."
We've had this discussion here countless times: if you think BW is a better game, go play it. The rest of us are happy that SC2 is not identical.
|
Lord_J
Kenya1085 Posts
All I see here is some suggested changes and then conclusory statements about the effects you expect them to produce with no reasoning or expectation to link the two together.
How will making Protoss units build faster reduce the number of viable all-ins? What does removing chrono boost have to do with improving balance on large maps? How does reducing players' incoming increase the skill cap? Why does the idea of a skill cap even matter when no one ever has or ever will approach flawless play?
|
your argument is contradictory. you think if takes more skill to not do larva inject/mule/scan/chrono than to actually have to do it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
