|
Often in human society something can seem really dumb to an individual and they will ask "This is silly, why is this like this?" and often times they are answered with "It has always been that way." This answer, is simply put, unacceptable. We know our history, we know people used to think the world was flat, and that cutting yourself to bleed out the bad blood was the best cure to the flu. Sometimes you have to stand up for what you believe in and keep holding on until the world has crushed you or started to see things your way.
I must admit after over a year of playing Starcraft 2 I had become complacent myself, but fortunately a chain of events has occurred that has inspired me to start a movement. Firstly I watched a Broodwar game for the first time in a few months, even one I had seen before and thought something is different. It wasn't the cool lurker tactics or the muta micro, although missed they are just something from a different game, no something was wrong on a deeper level. As I looked at Jaedong's drone count I asked myself man why doesn't he just pop like 20 more drones they pay for themselves in about a minute.. So I talked to my friend about it and he said "You remember how dota had EM mode?"
-I said "EM mode?"
-He said "Oh right your not a noob, well all the crappy dota players play this mode where u get twice as much gold and the towers are weaker."
-So I said "Wouldn't that make the game really unbalanced clearly that would help some heroes way more then others."
-He said "Remember when they nerfed CLinkz even though he wasn't overpowered at all, well in EM mode he was just insane, the noobs couldn't handle him."
-"Gosh that must be ridiculous trying to balance a game based of EM mode."
-"Well just look at Starcraft 2"
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.
I know a few things:
-This post belongs on a Blizzard forum.
-The likely hood of this ever changing anything is almost zero.
-Blizzard has done really well trying to do the impossible, balancing an inherently broken game. It isn't TvZ thats unbalanced or ZvP, its Orbitial command >>> expansion.
-How ridiculously hard and how many balance issues a change like this will be/create.
I am posting this here to start a community movement, to see if it is even possible to get people to realize how important this is.
My proposed solution:
-Removal of mule, chronoboost, and inject larva from the game.
-Cost of drop supply depo from 50 energy to 75 or 100.
-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.
-Hatchery generate larva 15% faster. Hatchery build time reduced by 10 seconds.
I am prepared to be shot down, but I wanted to be able to say I tried, because "All it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing" -Albert Einstein.
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.
Why bother:
-Almost everyone of my friends who has played Starcraft: Brood War, has stated loudly and clearly this is the best game I have ever played. It is something else, its almost like a sport.
-There is no reason to give up on Starcraft 2, with this change it could someday replace Starcraft as the best game ever, and I want to do my part so that happens.
Note:
I will be posting this on blizzard forums when/if I can get support and see if this change can ever be possible. Blizzard you made the PTR for a reason, lets see if we can put it to its first real test.
Edit:
using mules/chronoboosts/larva injects consistently and efficiently adds apm, this hightens the minimum mechanics apm. By removing it and adding the same basic effects (larva come faster protoss builds faster) you are actually making EM starcraft.
At the bronze level I agree, but what I think is more relevant and yet forgotten is that there is no reason not to use these mechanics. Chronoboost you start with, and the other two are so powerful they have been gotten every game played since the first game of beta to the last game played today, (except maybe for 1 week when day9 did no queens for monday). These add slightly to your required APM however they are not true skill. True skill is when you have to decide whether or not to engage and army or go in for SCV kills with your muta. These are not apm they are TACTICAL decisions making it a strategy game. If something is so strong it is a must it isnt a test of skill just an unnecessary game mechanic. By your argument you should remove auto-mine and multiply building selection from the game. Beating someone shouldn't be about putting workers on minerals better it should be about making correction decisions in APM demanding situations.
Edit 2:
First of all I have to apologize, when I realized what a problem these mechanics create I jumped straight straight into the implications of removing them, what changes would have to be made in order to keep balance in the game. This was foolish and wrong, I completely skipped the most important step of explaining why this should be done.
I certainly agree with everyone that Starcraft 2 and Starcraft are different games, and I am not trying to make SC2 into Broodwar or state that dislike SC2 and want to play Broodwar.
To everyone worried about removing something that adds skill, something should not just be about adding mindless apm. If everyone would benefit from having larva injected, why isn't it just made autocast. I love automine and MBS, even though I am probably better then 99% of the community at setting my starting 4 workers to mine and dealing with no MBS, that is not how I want to win. Why is it ok for me to win off something mindlessly stupid like injecting larva? Why not make it so you have to do 10 push ups before your allowed to set a hotkey, or 20 sit ups before your allowed to build air units? This would obviously make the game harder and raise the skill cap, but it is clear as day that it is freaking stupid.
Now on to the real point: Why should these mechanics be removed, what is it they do that makes the game worse? The reason 4-warp gate was so deadly is 100% because of chronoboost. I understand most of the community doesn't see this so I will try to explain. The way it worked was because of warpgate making you able to catch up on unit production quickly and at your opponents base, you could spend all your CHRONOBOOST on probes untill 20 or so probes when you abruptly stop, then because you have done nothing but econ you can then outproduce your opponent right at his front door. Without chronoboost you would be stockpiling minerals while waiting for warpgate tech to finish, then you would need 5-6 gates to spend it abruptly enough for it to be affective, however with less overall resources from less probes and the extra gates you would never be able to catch up with the production of someone building units/workers constantly at their own base. Further, Chronoboost allows for abrupt changes with rapidly being able to produce higher tech units, and allows for super fast upgrades. All in and all it makes the game much more gimicking by giving you potentially stupid options which make scouting near impossible. For example up until the point you have a stalker out and can kill a worker a fast expand and a 4 warp gate look roughly identical. In other words scouting a no aggression fast expansion, and one of the scariest looking all ins look exactly the same, and you have to GUESS which one is coming.
With zerg almost the same concept is true, simply because of the inject larva mechanic. You can save up tremendous amounts of production potential, allowing for abrupt changes making it completely into a guessing game for your opponent as to whether your about to pop 20 drones or 20 roaches. Also because of the inject larva ability bad play can be rewarded with great success. Even a lot of higher end Koreans are complaining about late game muta switches because there is constant fighting where the zerg doesnt produce anything, but as long as they hit they larva injects they can save up to 4000 4000 minerals then bam mass build whatever unit you arent prepared for. For example you are constantly fighting off ling roach agression as protoss even tho thru many favorable exchanges you might have a slight econ lead or an army advantage because of an abrupt tech switch to mass mutas, you find yourself dead in the water. The Koreans are right to be worried about this, and once again its 100% because of larva injects. (Note: some people were complaining that queens make zerg feel really zergy and to that I would say yah I love creep tumors and transfuse having a queen is great, but what made zerg feel zergy was 10 hatches sorry but ggnore).
As for terran, contrary to what everyone thought of me, I think terran for the most part is pretty great in SC2, the 1-1-1 is a little stupid and yes it is made possible by the mule but in general I was just removing the mule to compensate for the huge blows the other 2 races would be receiving. As for everyone saying the nerf was hardest for terran, I can assure that you are dead wrong, supply depo call down is equal to about 125 minerals (100 for the depo 25 mining time) so it is about half as good as a mule and doesnt destroy your mineral line.
For everyone saying I was just trying to buff Protoss, I think people fail to understand what chronoboost really does. It roughly increases your income by 50% and makes it so every upgrade or unit produced out of a non-gateway structure comes out in half the time.
Finally elimination of these mechanics will allow for builds that require so much skill and precision, I can't even begin to explain it to justice. Until I have the right words I'll just say "Less is more."
|
Netherlands45349 Posts
The problem with your theory is that the units(and thus, the entire game) are balanced around the macro mechanics.
|
You may think you were the first one to come up with this, but this is the 1000th time someone has suggested this... since before the beta even started.
|
Well, why remove them, just make it so that with perfect macro mechanic usage you get to the point you used to be in Brood War, instead of adding something on top of that.
E.g. make Larvae spawn slower and you have to fix it via injects and so on
|
Doing this would cause Starcraft 2 to be a completely different game, this is just something which Blizzard cannot do, a game cannot just change what thousands of people have spent money on this drastically, imagine the shit they would get from people who bought sc2 because they like it how it is.
|
On December 10 2011 23:34 Takkara wrote:
You may think you were the first one to come up with this, but this is the 1000th time someone has suggested this... since before the beta even started.
So your with me?
On December 10 2011 23:30 Kipsate wrote:
The problem with your theory is that the units(and thus, the entire game) are balanced around the macro mechanics.
The difficulty of the solution is does not always outweigh the issues caused by the problem.
|
I like how you want to compensate the removal of inject/chronoboost with some other buffs but think Terran would be fine as it is whitout mule. :[
|
You know, you've put a lot of effort into that post. But it's going to be closed and on battle.net it will be ignored or trolled for a while then forgotten. I hate to be so bleak with you Trevor but it's the truth. May I call you Trevor?
Okay Trevor here's the deal. You've offered no credentials in video game design or balancing. You didn't even qualify your opinion as one of a triple crown GM. No, no you showed up seemingly out of no where Trevor. And like a brilliant burning light you've blinded us all with your never before suggested balance changes. The most cunning part was you make an abomination of brood war and wings of liberty but failed Trevor. You failed to seamlessly blend the two games. Do you know why?
Because they're different games.
Good luck in the future Trevor. I'm sure Blizzard will introduce your amazing game restructuring design changes on the PTR any day now.
|
well first of all, your proposed changes heavily benefit protoss, but look at it from another way.
using mules/chronoboosts/larva injects consistently and efficiently adds apm, this hightens the minimum mechanics apm. By removing it and adding the same basic effects (larva come faster protoss builds faster) you are actually making EM starcraft.
|
I would really like to try a mode that allows more attacking units via ether high supply cap or lower unit supply cost, and in turn larger maps. Getting rid of the macro mechanics could also be interesting.
|
On December 10 2011 23:41 Neelia wrote:
I like how you want to compensate the removal of inject/chronoboost with some other buffs but think Terran would be fine as it is whitout mule. :[
Terran has supply depo drop and and scan both mechanics which are sometimes used instead of mule, although they are not as good, the nerf is theoretically harder on the other two races.
|
So now we don't have any macro abilities, we all produce workers at the same rate except zerg. Who will, by the way, get way too easy without inject larvae. On top of that, all the current pressure builds will turn into all ins for zerg because they can't drone up behind them.
You will need to do a lot more than just remove macro mechanics and tinker with build times to convince me it would be a better game, sorry man.
|
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.
|
If you want to remove larva inject from the game you should also get rid of reactors. Its not possible to keep up with unit production if T has X rax with reactor. Even increasing the larva refresh rate by 15% wouldn't solve that. Not sure about the other races. I think a cooldown on the MULE would be the better solution, and scan and depot call down would probably used more often then.
|
You basically just made it so protoss will never lose again. The changes to zerg are almost nothing and the changes to terran are nothing. I mean, maybe it would make for a goofy custom game to mess around with every once in a while, but I dont see it being popular.
|
On December 10 2011 23:42 darklight54321 wrote:
well first of all, your proposed changes heavily benefit protoss, but look at it from another way.
using mules/chronoboosts/larva injects consistently and efficiently adds apm, this hightens the minimum mechanics apm. By removing it and adding the same basic effects (larva come faster protoss builds faster) you are actually making EM starcraft.
At the bronze level I agree, but what I think is more relevant and yet forgotten is that there is no reason not to use these mechanics. Chronoboost you start with, and the other two are so powerful they have been gotten every game played since the first game of beta to the last game played today, (except maybe for 1 week when day9 did no queens for monday). These add slightly to your required APM however they are not true skill. True skill is when you have to decide whether or not to engage and army or go in for SCV kills with your muta. These are not apm they are TACTICAL decisions making it a strategy game. If something is so strong it is a must it isnt a test of skill just an unnecessary game mechanic. By your argument you should remove auto-mine and multiply building selection from the game. Beating someone shouldn't be about putting workers on minerals better it should be about making correction decisions in APM demanding situations.
|
On December 10 2011 23:49 ronpaul012 wrote:
You basically just made it so protoss will never lose again. The changes to zerg are almost nothing and the changes to terran are nothing. I mean, maybe it would make for a goofy custom game to mess around with every once in a while, but I dont see it being popular.
I am not sure if you understand how important chronoboost is, it has the potential to almost double your probe count.
|
On December 10 2011 23:52 Jyxz wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 23:49 ronpaul012 wrote:
You basically just made it so protoss will never lose again. The changes to zerg are almost nothing and the changes to terran are nothing. I mean, maybe it would make for a goofy custom game to mess around with every once in a while, but I dont see it being popular. I am not sure if you understand how important chronoboost is, it has the potential to almost double your probe count.
And I don't believe you understand the importance of larva inject, it has the potential to double your supply count.
|
LOL. This has got to be a troll the entire game is surrounding around the mules chrono and larvae inject. This isn't going to change. The game would be so dull. Why would you take out the mechanics that make the game complicated.
IF THEY WOULD DO THIS!
What are you giving to replace the mule for terran? How is terran ever going to win if they don't have the mule? Please leave your gold league rant to yourself
|
On December 10 2011 23:52 Jyxz wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 23:49 ronpaul012 wrote:
You basically just made it so protoss will never lose again. The changes to zerg are almost nothing and the changes to terran are nothing. I mean, maybe it would make for a goofy custom game to mess around with every once in a while, but I dont see it being popular. I am not sure if you understand how important chronoboost is, it has the potential to almost double your probe count.
I am not sure if you understand how important 15% speed increase on all buildings are. It has the potential to cut a gateway or two and make protoss all-ins extremely powerful. And removing mules is a much bigger hit than chrono boost is.
|
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.
|
You've ignored my post. I'm assuming you are taking me as serious as I'm taking you. To rectify this impasse I am formally requesting additional information.
Have you actually tested any of this?
How long did you spend considering the ideas you've purported as game saving?
Do you have any documentation of the information you used to reach these conclusions?
Does anyone else agree with your changes other than you? For example, game designers or professional players?
It's apparent from your post history that you did not like SC2 from the start. What I did not find was anything to suggest you were an expect in the field of game design or theory. Please elaborate on the points I have requested.
|
On December 10 2011 23:28 Jyxz wrote:This post belongs on a Blizzard forum.
Then why did you make this post?! This has been stated hundreds of times before, use the search function and discuss in one of the other threads.
|
On December 10 2011 23:56 Probe1 wrote:
You've ignored my post. I'm assuming you are taking me as serious as I'm taking you. To rectify this impasse I am formally requesting additional information.
Have you actually tested any of this?
How long did you spend considering the ideas you've purported as game saving?
Do you have any documentation of the information you used to reach these conclusions?
Does anyone else agree with your changes other than you? For example, game designers or professional players?
It's apparent from your post history that you did not like SC2 from the start. What I did not find was anything to suggest you were an expect in the field of game design or theory. Please elaborate on the points I have requested.
Sorry I didn't see your post:
This is mostly theory craft at this time, people find inspiration at weird times and in weird ways, I want to see reaction and see if I can get any kind of support or if anyone thinks this is actually possible.
As stated in the original post I know the problems this will create, it is possible I shouldn't have thrown out numbers with my initial theory crafting but I wanted to get some the changes I thought would have to go with the major change out in the public eye for consideration.
Edit: I love starcraft 2, but your right I havent gotten the same pleasure from it that I have gotten from broodwar, but ask anyone who was pro in Sc1 and Sc2 if they feel different.
|
Well I think that you just didn't understood what the desingers of the game intended to do Jyxz.
They had 2 things to do :
-make sth that "noob players" (i.e non E-sport fans) would enjoy, so automine, large units selections and multi selection of buildings (a 2010 player of RTS would just be like "wtf is this sh*t" if it wasn't the case).
-have demanding macro mechanics that allows to have a higher skill ceiling
They come up with the idea that, instead of putting stupid constraints like not making automining (yeah that's quite stupid that your worker just look at the mineral patch when his rally point is on mineral), they could try to add macro mechanics that make you make choice (well mostly for cronoboost, for larva and mules you pretty much have to do it all the time when it's available). Removing them without removing automining (and they will never do that) would lower the skill ceiling, not making this game closer to bw....
bw is a great game, but let's face it it hadn't that many fans in foreign countries, and sc2 (even if bw is better) managed to bring many more people to E-sport (that atfer can look at bw and say : "this is the real deal, I should watch it")
|
>This is mostly theory craft at this time
Really..
In two years you've never seen these exact same threads before? Often with the very same suggestions?
You've find plenty of research material in the closed forum. I have nothing polite left to say so- Good luck. =/
|
On December 10 2011 23:55 Jyxz wrote:Show nested quote +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 believe you're right it's easy to bring up people to masters in some cases, but that more often has to do with a particular patch favoring a certain race and certain builds (usually terran). But if we took out macro mechanics people would find the "next 4 gate" or some other strong all around build that can crush everyone below diamond if the player doing it has some solid RTS skills.
|
I fail to see how macro mechanics that you need to attend to in a set cycle in parallel with your actual production are somehow equivalent to literally getting free money as in DotA's EM mode.
|
Netherlands45349 Posts
On December 10 2011 23:40 Jyxz wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 23:34 Takkara wrote:
You may think you were the first one to come up with this, but this is the 1000th time someone has suggested this... since before the beta even started. So your with me? Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 23:30 Kipsate wrote:
The problem with your theory is that the units(and thus, the entire game) are balanced around the macro mechanics. The difficulty of the solution is does not always outweigh the issues caused by the problem.
You offer a problem, yet you don't offer the full solution without taking all consequences of it taken into account.
If you are going to offer a solution, make it a good one, instead of blatantly spouting ''we should do this'' without taking into account what the consequences of those actions are.
|
On December 11 2011 00:00 Jyxz wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 23:56 Probe1 wrote:
You've ignored my post. I'm assuming you are taking me as serious as I'm taking you. To rectify this impasse I am formally requesting additional information.
Have you actually tested any of this?
How long did you spend considering the ideas you've purported as game saving?
Do you have any documentation of the information you used to reach these conclusions?
Does anyone else agree with your changes other than you? For example, game designers or professional players?
It's apparent from your post history that you did not like SC2 from the start. What I did not find was anything to suggest you were an expect in the field of game design or theory. Please elaborate on the points I have requested. Sorry I didn't see your post: This is mostly theory craft at this time, people find inspiration at weird times and in weird ways, I want to see reaction and see if I can get any kind of support or if anyone thinks this is actually possible. As stated in the original post I know the problems this will create, it is possible I shouldn't have thrown out numbers with my initial theory crafting but I wanted to get some the changes I thought would have to go with the major change out in the public eye for consideration. Edit: I love starcraft 2, but your right I havent gotten the same pleasure from it that I have gotten from broodwar, but ask anyone who was pro in Sc1 and Sc2 if they feel different.
Theorycrafting is generally not threadworthy on teamliquid without a lot of testing and data. If you actually did the testing you would realize how ridiculous removing the macro mechanics of sc2 is. The mechanics may not be perfect, but they make sc2 what it is. Try thinking about this before you make a thread in the future.
|
Also think of it this way:
All in's and 1a ball into 1a ball for the win happen when people aren't playing optimally and the game is still largely not figured out.
The macro mechanics just alter how these come out (Like terran pulling tons of workers).
|
I have been arguing for/about the removal of macro mechanics since before the game was released. This is of course provided that you want to make the game more like BW. I'm not sure if I want that anymore.
When I set out to write my macro analysis thread, it was supposed to focus on macro mechanics and their effect in speeding up the game. As I started collecting data and measuring timings of no macro mechanics vs macro mechanics build orders I found a culprit I thought was bigger than macro mechanics.
Macro mechanics, to be honest, didn't have much of an effect in the very early stages of the game. And macro mechanics making the early game volatile was the hypothesis I set out to prove when I began writing the thread.
Instead I think the changed worker AI, changed saturation limits, and the 5 minerals per trip did more for how SC2 plays out than macro mechanics. Along with macro mechanics, the differences in how saturation works has influenced unit balance and the types of units/spellcaster that can exist in the game in the first place.
tl;dr: Won't fix anything by just removing macro mechanics. Will require some fundamental changes to the design of the game. Pointless to argue, since it won't ever happen anyway. SC2 is still a good game.
|
Okay, so you remove Mules and increase the cost of dropping a supply depot, but give Terran nothing to compensate?
You gave Protoss and Zerg suggestions to compensate for the removal of their macro mechanics but Terran gets nothing? Even without that massive problem with your suggestions, I don't think the removal of the macro mechanics in the game would be beneficial.
Also, your "EM mode" analogy fails miserably for me because DotA was never balanced around that mode, no effort was made to make EM mode a viable way to play, at no point did IceFrog say, "We had to nerf clinks because he was overpowered in EM mode, if the focus was on balancing around that, then it would have been an entirely different story, item prices could be adjusted, hero scaling etc. Blizzard is balancing around the macro mechanics present in the game, they know the effects that MULES, Chronoboost and Inject larva have, it's not like some players play without them and then occasionally people say, "Hey, let's play with EM" only to find it breaks the game.
|
On December 10 2011 23:28 Jyxz wrote:
Often in human society something can seem really dumb to an individual and they will ask "This is silly, why is this like this?" and often times they are answered with "It has always been that way." This answer, is simply put, unacceptable. We know our history, we know people used to think the world was flat, and that cutting yourself to bleed out the bad blood was the best cure to the flu. Sometimes you have to stand up for what you believe in and keep holding on until the world has crushed you or started to see things your way.
After reading this first paragraph I thought you wanted to recruit us for a sect.....
|
A less drastic version of this is to remove the freaking gold expansions everywhere, GSL does it and some tournaments does it but still majority keeps it.
|
To be honest... the game is still far too young to have these kinds of huge balance discussions, especially considering we have one expansion in the near future and another one after that, both of which are bringing a huge amount of changes.
I think over time, and with the 2 expansions and lots more patching, the games skill level will rise dramatically.
I will give one example I know Artosis would agree with.
Eventually in TvT, people will eventually find a way to slap bio on the head and render it extremely weak, using the Mech strategy. Then you will have to go mech, or go home. - That may or may not be a perfect example, but it describes the point.
Starcraft 2 is still very young. Remember that.
|
On December 10 2011 23:55 Jyxz wrote:Show nested quote +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.
Edit: As to the second part of your post, the only macro mechanic that's actually mindless APM is larva inject. There are stages of the game where Protoss has to choose which things to chrono due to limited energy, and there is a decision making process where dropping MULEs is concerned as well. Granted, it tends to be simply dropping them at your furthest/least defensible expansion, but there seems to be an ideal method as opposed to just selecting your queens and hitting V every 30 seconds or whatever it is.
|
I agree with Lalush!
Also, sad to say but plenty of people have said this many times before, and it's never getting done. It's a huge change to the game itself and it would take a ton more balancing to do. Not to mention how upset everybody else will be when the game has changed so drastically.
|
I do understand "getting rid of 'mindless' APM" - similar to how workers now auto-mine and multi-building selection, I just don't understand how this doesn't make sc2 easier. Please explain better how getting rid of the sc2 "macro mechanics" makes it less easy?
|
You're not losing on ladder because the game is fundamentally broken, you're losing on ladder because your macro hasn't hit the skill ceiling, even the best have room for improvement, no changes need to be made, you just need to get betetr at the game.
|
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?
|
Unfortunately, while removing these mechanics it will make the game less volatile it will also remove basically the only macro the game has left. Also, the broken P mechanic isn't chrono but warpgate. I'd like to see the mechanics be less powerful. e.g. 3 larva spawned per inject, mule on cooldown etc rather than a complete removal.
If you remove them you'd have to add no MBS or automining, which I'd be completely for, but unfortunately bronze players would cry about it and blizzard would listen to them.
|
If you were all about bringing SC2 closer to it's BW counterpart, then I'm sure you were the first to bitch at blizzard about removing the carrier after nerfing it from BW, and now replacing it with the Tempest.
Right?
RIGHT?!
gotcha
|
On December 10 2011 23:28 Jyxz wrote:
At the bronze level I agree, but what I think is more relevant and yet forgotten is that there is no reason not to use these mechanics. Chronoboost you start with, and the other two are so powerful they have been gotten every game played since the first game of beta to the last game played today, (except maybe for 1 week when day9 did no queens for monday). These add slightly to your required APM however they are not true skill. True skill is when you have to decide whether or not to engage and army or go in for SCV kills with your muta. These are not apm they are TACTICAL decisions making it a strategy game. If something is so strong it is a must it isnt a test of skill just an unnecessary game mechanic. By your argument you should remove auto-mine and multiply building selection from the game. Beating someone shouldn't be about putting workers on minerals better it should be about making correction decisions in APM demanding situations.
So what you're saying is that we should remove probes, SCVs and drones? They're so strong that they're a must; they're just an unnecessary game mechanic.
Anyways, who are you to determine what skills the game "should" require?
|
oh i do believe the primary source of difficulty in any game is your opponent. starcraft two can be rather easy or unbelievably difficult dependent on who your playing. Yes you do have more room for error given some macro mechanics but so does your opponent. Your friends comments comparing EM dota to sc2 to Bw actually has no logical foundation given that EM dota was a version of dota as opposed to different games.
|
Problem. I like inject. It feels right. It makes zerg more zergy than it ever was in broodwar. It is the best part of starcraft2. :S
|
You can't just take out these mechanics, lol.
The game is much, much more finely balanced than you make it seem. Doing anything like that would destroy basically the entire metagame instantly.
Sort of a silly topic.
|
I used to have a problem with macro mechanics. Then I realized I was mad because everyone else was using them better than me. I learned, then problem solved. I still think dropping 30 mules on the gold is lame, but i can deal.
|
Hey guys, let me post my dumb ¨How I would change the game¨ topic, this has never been done before!
But hey at least I shoved in a quote so that makes it OK.
Also an inherently broken game? Seriously? Winrates has always been hovering around 50% bañlance whiners be damned game is as reasonable balanced as it can be.
I am in a nad mood, but of all dumb ¨changes I would make to the game¨ threads this one is amongst the Dumbest. But the fact that it stemmed from a conversation over DotA I guess I can see why its so dumb.
This changes add nothing to the game, don´t add more depth, don´t add more strategy, don´t make it more interesting.
|
The OP must be a protoss player... His suggested resolutions are so toss-favored.
|
You forgot to remove warpgate tech too
|
On December 11 2011 00:11 forsooth wrote:
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.
I am in bronze league right now (I should be higher but I haven't laddered much, instead opting to practice my mechanics offline), and I often play people in standard games and I destroy them (I max out when they are sub 80 supply). Then I look at their profile and they have 200-300 league wins in comparison to my 20. I used to be confused as to how I beat them but you can't judge someones skill off the number of wins they have in a given season. They could have been smurfing in a low league before coming up to diamond, cheesing a bunch, or in my case [of looking at the league wins] play a bunch of non 1v1 ladders. A better way to judge their skill would be to look at their most recent game, maybe calculate their SQ and compare it with yours.
|
I really thought we as a community were past the point of having threads like this, where someone random asserts a bunch of baseless complaints with no evidence and then proposes sweeping, random changes to the game.
I guess I was wrong.
|
-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.
OH LOL are you serious??
|
On December 11 2011 03:54 Awatsu wrote:
-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.
OH LOL are you serious??
LOL, that would make protoss all ins vs zerg unstopable. by themselves, and getting rid of larva inject will break both of zergs legs. OP needs to analyze games a bit harder.
|
On December 11 2011 03:47 Lunaro wrote:
You forgot to remove warpgate tech too
No no no, he actually proved that warpgate research time should be *faster* than it currently is. Didn't you read about the evidence in the OP.. geez
|
this thread is lol, your claims are based on a bad example of a DOTA issue, and suggested solutions are laughable. balance changes are not for people who are not trained for it, i would never even try to think of a balance change, theres just too many factors
|
@OP, you still haven't explained how taking away mechanics will make the game less easy mode!
On December 11 2011 00:13 jnc wrote:
I do understand "getting rid of 'mindless' APM" - similar to how workers now auto-mine and multi-building selection, I just don't understand how this doesn't make sc2 easier. Please explain better how getting rid of the sc2 "macro mechanics" makes it less easy?
|
On December 10 2011 23:28 Jyxz wrote:
At the bronze level I agree, but what I think is more relevant and yet forgotten is that there is no reason not to use these mechanics. Chronoboost you start with, and the other two are so powerful they have been gotten every game played since the first game of beta to the last game played today, (except maybe for 1 week when day9 did no queens for monday). These add slightly to your required APM however they are not true skill. True skill is when you have to decide whether or not to engage and army or go in for SCV kills with your muta. These are not apm they are TACTICAL decisions making it a strategy game. If something is so strong it is a must it isnt a test of skill just an unnecessary game mechanic. By your argument you should remove auto-mine and multiply building selection from the game. Beating someone shouldn't be about putting workers on minerals better it should be about making correction decisions in APM demanding situations.
You... do realize that this is what people hated about SC2 right?
|
On December 10 2011 23:55 Jyxz wrote:Show nested quote +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.
When people say rank means nothing in this game, they mean it. Lets think about the pro players who learn all-ins and performed them constantly..... BitbyBityPrime? Anyone know where he is? Or that Zenex player that 6 pooled Losira TWICE IN A ROW ON A 4 PLAYER MAP.
These are only two examples, but the point is that while you could learn a build and get to masters, that doesn't mean you're truly at the Master level of skill. It does mean your build is pretty damn solid, and you can probably play as a well as a TRUE Master leaguer, provided you're doing the same builds... but what if they're a different race? What if they do something you're not expecting? What if the person you're playing only has one build and it happens to counter your build?
Being in Master league or even Grand Master means crap in terms of true skill evaluation. What it does mean though, is that you may have the abilities to become one of the best due to your vigilance in achieving the top of the worst (when comparing to ALL ladder players).
It's like that part in the original Pokemon game where you get all the badges only to realize you have to go defeat the Elite 4 and Mewtwo. You haven't truly beat the game, but you are on your way if you keep going at it.
|
Problem: The game is probably too easy (maybe).
Your solution: Remove everything that rewards good mechanics thus reducing need to have skill and making the game a macro-fest.
Wait a minute here...
|
How come Protoss get a hotkey for warpgates ('w')? Why can't I have a hotkey for all my barracks, or for my hatcheries when I play Zerg? I never understood the reasoning behind this...
|
On December 10 2011 23:28 Jyxz wrote:
At the bronze level I agree, but what I think is more relevant and yet forgotten is that there is no reason not to use these mechanics. ... These add slightly to your required APM however they are not true skill. True skill is when you have to decide whether or not to engage and army or go in for SCV kills with your muta.
By your own argument, BW had a ton of mechanics that used a lot of APM but were not "true skill", such as having to manually select and mine with workers that are built, and having to individually select every building instead of having them in a group. Is there any reason not to tell your workers to mine when you build them in BW?
Also, the quote you used was completely irrelevant in this discussion, it just sounds like you're trying to sensationalize it.
|
Y'all postin in a troll thread, there is no way this guy can seriously think these ideas are any good.
|
I find that the OP has a completely flawed argument and his propositions are quite outrageous. Note that he wants to stop allins, But wants to lower the research/build times of EVERY PROTOSS UNIT AND WARPGATE which would lead to -> Protoss doing a massive amount of 4 gate/3 gate immortal allins.
Its also not the macro mechanics that are making the game "easier" its the fact that you can have "unlimited" amount of units on a hotkey (i know its 255, but that only really comes into play if you are zerg that masses zerglings only), you had to individually tell each worker to mine, all your production facilities, and you can easily select individual groups of units from a single hotkey. In BW you couldn't hotkey every barracks/gateway/factory/stargate ect. You had to hotkey one and go from there which made actually microing FAR more difficult, however in SC2 its not as hard to master the macro so you are able to do alot more micro related tactics. This is why we are seeing more allin's not because of mules/chrono/inject.
This thread is just you begging for protoss buffs and thinly trying to veil it as SC2 is easy mode because of the fact of mules. When if anything it looks like protoss doesn't need a buff at all atm.
|
-Removal of mule, chronoboost, and inject larva from the game.
-Cost of drop supply depo from 50 energy to 75 or 100.
-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.
-Hatchery generate larva 15% faster. Hatchery build time reduced by 10 seconds.
you say its too easy so you want to just remove the macro mechanic so people don't even have to worry about it? you are just causing people to have to use lets clicks for the same production, making the game slower
|
I think it you want SC2 to resemble BW in difficulty, imo a better suggestion would be removing the ability to box all your units into 1 control group. I like some of the differences in SC2 compared to BW such as the macro mechanics you propose to remove, I think they add to the mechanical requirements to play well. The "box all your units into one hotkey" thing is probably the only thing I wish was not here, since it was so much fun when you were forced to control multiple control groups.
|
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.
1) Why is that a good thing again? I'm guessing you enjoy watching games where the first 10 minutes can be spent making yourself a snack. A better suggestion would be to just give us all 2 bases to start the game off. Why not?!
2) How in the world does it allow for bigger maps without causing balance issues? Your suggestions do nothing to address the problems larger maps already have on the game.
3) All it does is slow the game down. And high tech isn't "ignored" because games are over fast, it's because higher tech doesn't scale fast enough beyond lower.
4) These mechanics were added to help highlight more differences between the races. It also gave people something to do since babysitting workers to mine is no longer a concern. What your suggestions do is simplify macro to the game further.
Welcome to 2011, where games are good and difficult based on the depth of the game, and not by inflating difficulty with poor interface and game mechanics.
|
|
|
in other words, you want bw with sc2 graphics.
|
I thought "this is how i think the game should be" threads were not allowed?
|
On December 11 2011 04:37 aksfjh wrote:
Welcome to 2011, where games are good and difficult based on the depth of the game, and not by inflating difficulty with poor interface and game mechanics.
Pretty much sums it up.
On December 11 2011 04:41 Nate.F wrote:
in other words, you want bw with sc2 graphics.
|
On December 11 2011 04:43 Snorkle wrote:
I thought "this is how i think the game should be" threads were not allowed?
The "why i think stephano is da best" is not really allowed either, but mods seem to ignore threads if the OP types out 5 pages of dribble.
|
So.... why are larvae spawns and Protoss build times recompensated for the lack of chrono and inject but Terrans get nothing for removed mule AND nerfed supply drop?
Bias much?
And I really think the people who keep harping on how Brood War was the better game because of X problem with SC2 should just let Blizzard do their thing and see how things go. As new players like Fin come around we're already seeing quite a refreshing style of play.
|
On December 11 2011 04:49 S_SienZ wrote:
So.... why are larvae spawns and Protoss build times recompensated for the lack of chrono and inject but Terrans get nothing for removed mule AND nerfed supply drop?
Bias much?
And I really think the people who keep harping on how Brood War was the better game because of X problem with SC2 should just let Blizzard do their thing and see how things go. As new players like Fin come around we're already seeing quite a refreshing style of play.
Yea, this seems like a veiled "T OP" thread. From the 1 base all-in hate, the desire for larger maps and "more" macro, and the idea that an orbital is more valuable than an expansion.
|
seems like your changes would massively favor protoss, free chrono on everything but upgrades and the nexus, all the time. take mules away from terran and make supply drop more expensive (there are so many problems with this its insane, you just need to suggest removing orbital commands at that point.) and giving zerg a %15 increase to larvae is a complete joke compared to the decreased build times of everything for protoss. queens give you +4 larvae over the ~ 40 seconds it takes for a hatch to make 3 larvae, thats over 100% increase in larvae production. you're suggesting making the game much more mineral intensive (referring to importance) with most of these changes. so zergs would have to make 3 hatches for every 1 with a queen that they would have before, thats investing 900 minerals for sheer production, when zerg has to make drones and units from the larvae they get anyways and dedicate drones to static d and tech. yes these things were okay in bw, but so many things were different, unit control is very different in how easily things group in sc2 compared to bw, and all of the macro mechanics are different for a reason, its a different game. if you want to play broodwar, go play broodwar
|
On December 11 2011 04:22 Gnosis wrote:
How come Protoss get a hotkey for warpgates ('w')? Why can't I have a hotkey for all my barracks, or for my hatcheries when I play Zerg? I never understood the reasoning behind this...
maybe just maybe you can rebind your 0 hotkey to w its the same.... and a lot of top protoss pros dont use the w key anyway, they put them in a control group
|
I just don't get how you come to these mind boggling conclusions. Explain exactly how decreasing protoss build time + warpgate time is going to make the game less allin friendly? At the same time removing larvainject and mules so neither Z or T will be able to defend even against a simple 4gate. And its not just that, how does this make bigger maps more viable? And i don't see how the hell removing mechanics is going to make it harder!? If anything it will be easier now you don't have to bother with checking your larva injects and i don't even see how it makes it one bit more strategical. Starcraft is not chess, you need more than just good decision making to win.
The way i see it your not even trying to make the game any harder just easier, at the same time your trying to make protoss OP as FUCK!
|
his solution of taking the macro mechanics out is bringing the game to be more like bw and we dont need that we need a game similar but it has to be its won game
|
Responding to the OP mostly:
I think your entire premise is wrong, and the analogies you are trying to draw between dota -em and sc1/sc2 are also wrong.
The problem with -em was not that it was inherently imbalanced. You mentioned that heroes like Clinkz needed to be nerfed because they were too strong in -em. The problem, therefore, is that the game cannot be balanced for BOTH MODES (regular and -em), NOT that -em is imbalanced. The same situation does not exist (at all) for starcraft 2.There is no "balance" between different game modes that needs to be considered. Just because the macro mechanics are easier than starcraft 1 does not make the game imbalanced, because the game can be balanced around that.
In short, starcraft 1 is balanced around difficult macro, starcraft 2 is balanced around easy macro. There is no conflict there because they are completely separate games, unlike dota, which was balanced around regular mode but allowed you to play with -em.
The two scenarios are completely different.
|
On December 10 2011 23:28 Jyxz wrote:
-This post belongs on a Blizzard forum.
.
excactly......
This is just what I like to call, pointless whining.
If you don't like the game, fine but you fail to see that theese things require mechanics, dota requires none.
stop making "arguments" that doesen't make any sense plz......
|
On December 10 2011 23:50 Jyxz wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 23:42 darklight54321 wrote:
well first of all, your proposed changes heavily benefit protoss, but look at it from another way.
using mules/chronoboosts/larva injects consistently and efficiently adds apm, this hightens the minimum mechanics apm. By removing it and adding the same basic effects (larva come faster protoss builds faster) you are actually making EM starcraft. At the bronze level I agree, but what I think is more relevant and yet forgotten is that there is no reason not to use these mechanics. Chronoboost you start with, and the other two are so powerful they have been gotten every game played since the first game of beta to the last game played today, (except maybe for 1 week when day9 did no queens for monday). These add slightly to your required APM however they are not true skill. True skill is when you have to decide whether or not to engage and army or go in for SCV kills with your muta. These are not apm they are TACTICAL decisions making it a strategy game. If something is so strong it is a must it isnt a test of skill just an unnecessary game mechanic. By your argument you should remove auto-mine and multiply building selection from the game. Beating someone shouldn't be about putting workers on minerals better it should be about making correction decisions in APM demanding situations.
You are right it doesn't require skill to never miss an inject on 3-4 hatcheries all game or to know exactly when and what to chronoboost. This is not Warcraft 3. This game is NOT DESIGNED AROUND MICRO. And actually beating someone is VERY MUCH SO about better resource collection and the APPROPRIATE DECISIONS ON HOW TO USE THOSE RESOURCES. Guess in bronze you don't have to worry about macro since you are too busy microing the shit out of that 1 muta you built.
|
basically you're trying to remove the skillcaps in the game?
No Thanks.
|
On December 10 2011 23:54 [17]Purple wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 23:52 Jyxz wrote:On December 10 2011 23:49 ronpaul012 wrote:
You basically just made it so protoss will never lose again. The changes to zerg are almost nothing and the changes to terran are nothing. I mean, maybe it would make for a goofy custom game to mess around with every once in a while, but I dont see it being popular. I am not sure if you understand how important chronoboost is, it has the potential to almost double your probe count. And I don't believe you understand the importance of larva inject, it has the potential to double your supply count.
I'm not sure you don't believe you don't understand the importance of mules, it has the potential to double your economy.
... Oh wait.
|
On December 11 2011 05:54 sebusca wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 23:50 Jyxz wrote:On December 10 2011 23:42 darklight54321 wrote:
well first of all, your proposed changes heavily benefit protoss, but look at it from another way.
using mules/chronoboosts/larva injects consistently and efficiently adds apm, this hightens the minimum mechanics apm. By removing it and adding the same basic effects (larva come faster protoss builds faster) you are actually making EM starcraft. At the bronze level I agree, but what I think is more relevant and yet forgotten is that there is no reason not to use these mechanics. Chronoboost you start with, and the other two are so powerful they have been gotten every game played since the first game of beta to the last game played today, (except maybe for 1 week when day9 did no queens for monday). These add slightly to your required APM however they are not true skill. True skill is when you have to decide whether or not to engage and army or go in for SCV kills with your muta. These are not apm they are TACTICAL decisions making it a strategy game. If something is so strong it is a must it isnt a test of skill just an unnecessary game mechanic. By your argument you should remove auto-mine and multiply building selection from the game. Beating someone shouldn't be about putting workers on minerals better it should be about making correction decisions in APM demanding situations. This game is NOT DESIGNED AROUND MICRO.
you probably play zerg.
|
On December 11 2011 06:06 kofman wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2011 05:54 sebusca wrote:On December 10 2011 23:50 Jyxz wrote:On December 10 2011 23:42 darklight54321 wrote:
well first of all, your proposed changes heavily benefit protoss, but look at it from another way.
using mules/chronoboosts/larva injects consistently and efficiently adds apm, this hightens the minimum mechanics apm. By removing it and adding the same basic effects (larva come faster protoss builds faster) you are actually making EM starcraft. At the bronze level I agree, but what I think is more relevant and yet forgotten is that there is no reason not to use these mechanics. Chronoboost you start with, and the other two are so powerful they have been gotten every game played since the first game of beta to the last game played today, (except maybe for 1 week when day9 did no queens for monday). These add slightly to your required APM however they are not true skill. True skill is when you have to decide whether or not to engage and army or go in for SCV kills with your muta. These are not apm they are TACTICAL decisions making it a strategy game. If something is so strong it is a must it isnt a test of skill just an unnecessary game mechanic. By your argument you should remove auto-mine and multiply building selection from the game. Beating someone shouldn't be about putting workers on minerals better it should be about making correction decisions in APM demanding situations. This game is NOT DESIGNED AROUND MICRO. you probably play zerg.
no he is right, starcraft is based on the idea of economy management that is the core of the starcraft
|
On December 10 2011 23:28 Jyxz wrote:
Often in human society something can seem really dumb to an individual and they will ask "This is silly, why is this like this?" and often times they are answered with "It has always been that way." This answer, is simply put, unacceptable. We know our history, we know people used to think the world was flat, and that cutting yourself to bleed out the bad blood was the best cure to the flu. Sometimes you have to stand up for what you believe in and keep holding on until the world has crushed you or started to see things your way.
I must admit after over a year of playing Starcraft 2 I had become complacent myself, but fortunately a chain of events has occurred that has inspired me to start a movement. Firstly I watched a Broodwar game for the first time in a few months, even one I had seen before and thought something is different. It wasn't the cool lurker tactics or the muta micro, although missed they are just something from a different game, no something was wrong on a deeper level. As I looked at Jaedong's drone count I asked myself man why doesn't he just pop like 20 more drones they pay for themselves in about a minute.. So I talked to my friend about it and he said "You remember how dota had EM mode?"
-I said "EM mode?"
-He said "Oh right your not a noob, well all the crappy dota players play this mode where u get twice as much gold and the towers are weaker."
-So I said "Wouldn't that make the game really unbalanced clearly that would help some heroes way more then others."
-He said "Remember when they nerfed CLinkz even though he wasn't overpowered at all, well in EM mode he was just insane, the noobs couldn't handle him."
-"Gosh that must be ridiculous trying to balance a game based of EM mode."
-"Well just look at Starcraft 2"
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.
I like how you started with a philosophical rant about standing up for what you believe in and use it to justify your comments. You talk like you're starting a civil rights movement. Most of us aren't "complacent" with the problems that you believe are in the game, we actually just like Starcraft 2 the way it is (generally speaking).
As people in the thread have mentioned, you can't compare Dota's easy mode to starcraft 2. Economy affects dota in a completely different way from starcraft 2.
If you want to try something like this you can make a custom map for you and your friend to play with your changes built in. Personally I think you'll find your version worse.
|
-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.
Can you elaborate on any of those theories? I don't see how any of those correlate with your changes(except the third one).
|
So exactly why do people want to make the game harder? isn't that very silly? clearly the skill ceiling is quite huge - I don't see any of you competing in the NASL? (maybe lalush could :D)
People seem to be rallying here against volatility, but really that has more to do with a lack of good gameplay than anything else... scout more for early cheeses/all-ins etc etc... I won't bother going on about that when it's clear there are solutions.
And why do people think it's bad that the average person can get into diamond league? Ugh.. that's how the system works... there are lots and lots of casual players out there, clearly people who come on TL and most likely going to know a few things about the game and SHOULD be better than all the first time/casual players. Noobs CANNOT maintain diamond unless their skills were already quite highly tuned... 4gate requires micro and macro... just because you're not thinking about building order doesn't mean you're not thinking of a hundred other things to be successful.
So really, what is the OP's real point? Why fill teamliquid with garbage like this?
tldr; the game is great, it's working well, the changes make zero sense... go play broodwar if you want a game that is hard because of the lack of engine refinement. De-tuning the game engine or macro abilities will just ruin a game we like.
|
Get better at playing against terran and stop complaining.
|
I'm sorry, but you contradict yourself. Your edit doesnt sense at all. If you want the game to be harder and less luck based, you need to add MORE macro mechanics, not less. Yes, decision making is important to, but look at BW players who have to macro, which was actually a skill in BW unlike SC2, and make the right decisions. If you remove the macro components of SC2, you will essentially add more luck into the game. I don't think you really thought out your point. Just seems to contradictory to me.
|
There's about a hundred threads on this, why is your opinion so different you feel it deserves its own thread?
|
Jxyz sir, I salute you. Your cause is doomed but I shall always consider you a martyr.
|
it's interesting but we're going to need more proof whether those mechanics make all-ins stronger more so than it helps you defend against them, if you know how to respond
and this will be shot down just like you say, why even bother posting it on TL? you're intentionally breaking a rule for your own goal, and you mention that you know you are breaking such a rule
|
Your changes basically say:
make protoss overpowered
make the game easier for zerg
nerf terran
|
On December 10 2011 23:55 Jyxz wrote:Show nested quote +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.
This is the kind of argument that makes me scream....
Yes you can get to diamond or masters by doing all-ins every game, they are powerful and take less skill in general than doing a macro based play or later timing attacks, however if you only ever all-in you know nothing about the rest of the game. The amount of people that can only stay in diamond and up because they cheese 50% or more of the time would probably astound us all. If you took these people who cheese their way up and then said, for 1 whole week you can not attack without expanding first and waiting until after 15 minutes to attack.... they would probably drop a league or two in that week alone. Eventually they would learn to play a macro oriented game and be a much more well rounded player for it... and guess what... they'd probably end up top diamond or master with ease.
Besides, getting to diamond or masters isn't so easy these days, everyone has gotten better at defending cheese and the skill level over all has gone up dramatically. Diamond now is probably equivalent to high master in early season 2....
|
On December 10 2011 23:34 Takkara wrote:
You may think you were the first one to come up with this, but this is the 1000th time someone has suggested this... since before the beta even started.
This again and again and again.
We've had this thread a billion times, as he says, since before SC2 was even released. If you want to play Brood War, by all means please do so.
EDIT: Seriously why when the games at the top level are getting better and better do we still have threads claiming that it's gimmicky and luck based? I just genuinely don't see it; it's a one year old game and we're seeing some really cool play. We're seeing the same people win most of the time. It's not the plethora of one base/two base all ins we saw in the first few months.
|
Besides, getting to diamond or masters isn't so easy these days, everyone has gotten better at defending cheese and the skill level over all has gone up dramatically. Diamond now is probably equivalent to high master in early season 2....
That's a bit of an exaggeration, but the rest of the post seems true. Honestly, any top 8 master now, put into the first GSL, would probably have won the whole thing.
|
Dota has heroes. They level up.. They buy items.. Don't compare..
|
300 supply would make the game much better.
|
Oh look another sc2 is easy bw is hard post -_-
e: LOL Probe1, great post.
|
Yawn another Brood war versus sc2 thread.
|
hmmm,
I personally that having Chrono, Mule, and Inject adds depth to this game, and actually Adds even more contract to good players and great players.
Just look at Liquid Ret, Who NEVER misses injections. Unless somone pushes him out of his chair.
Yesterday, I missed a round of injections early in the game, and lost the game because of it.
|
Okay, I actually read through your entire post, and i have to say that while you put in decent effort in trying to convince us that SC2 is SOO much easier in BW, i can tell you that the blizzard designers DON'T want SC2 to be like BW (changing many BW units such as zerglings, zealots, or adding/removing others such as vultures, lurkers, dragoons). You're saying that we should revert back to the manual mining and eliminate chrono, larva inject, and mules. So basically BW in with new units in an SC2 graphics engine. Well, and this is coming from an ex-BW player, if you feel like SC2 is 'easy-mode', then don't play it. Stay with BW like thousands of others do. Don't try to convince others that SC2 should for whatever reason become SC1: Wings of Liberty. The topic has been brought up so many different times on both Bnet and TL, and i really don't see the point of discussing changes that will never occur. And quite frankly, your opinion doesn't really mean anything, who are YOU to tell us what changes SC2 should be made?
|
There's a game that does this. It's called BW. It still exists and is great. You should play it.
I play both and I'm happy. I wish everyone did this. But they don't, and that's ok.
|
Simplifying the game (and dont tell me that isnt what you are doing because it is) and lowering the viability of allins makes the game one dimensional and actually easier to play. I like starcraft two because the challenge of reading allins, defending timings, ect. I dont believe that scii is at its best when a wide variety of strategies arent possible. Sometimes a better player will lose to a worst player, but no game is immune from this occurence. The author doesnt seem to understand that it does require skill to defend allins. Furthermore SCII is not always at its best in a 200v200 fight. You are making the maneuvering to max supply easier in the hopes that it will make the game better, but in reality, 200 vs 200 is just as skilled as maneuvering through the early portions of a game without dying. You are making scII more one dimensional, and you are moving the game in the wrong direction.
|
I gotta say I am pretty tired of all those BW versus starcraft 2 threads.
There is no reason to give up on Starcraft 2, with this change it could someday replace Starcraft as the best game ever, and I want to do my part so that happens.
No one is giving up or losing hope. Starcraft 2 became quite decently balanced for being out for such a short amount of time, especially compared to the amount it took for SC 1.
If you enjoy Starcraft BW more than Starcraft 2, well just go play it, it is not going anywhere. They are 2 different games.
|
How do BW vs SC2 threads not get locked immediately?
The OP is flat out stupid... yeah let's completely change SC2. Why? Because my friends said so.
Logic = flawless
|
I thought this thread might be rapidly closed but since it wasn't I did a large edit attempting to address some concerns =).
|
On December 11 2011 10:00 Jyxz wrote:
I thought this thread might be rapidly closed but since it wasn't I did a large edit attempting to address some concerns =).
i wondered why it wasn't closed too.
no amount of editing is going to change your central point. and blizzard will not change the game because of a small minority of people say 'less is more'.
|
ohhhh brubber.
l2play please.
|
If you thought this thread would be closed why did you post it...
I think you have this idea of "what sc2 should be like" and it's ok not to be just completely thrilled with it. However, drastically changing the game is just an objectively terrible idea. Some macro mechanics may seem like bs, but it balances out. Sure, zerg can get 100000 larvae, but terran can sac all their scvs and rely on mules, and toss can save up chrono and use it on their gates to get reinforcements faster. I don't really see a reason to complain because their isn't really a problem with it.
The zerg larvae thing really perplexes me too. Like, as a zerg, I may be able to get out >9000 mutas or whatever at a time, but requires me having 90000/90000 and if i am floating that much I suck. I kind of get the feeling you don't understand zerg with statements like "Why is it ok for me to win off something mindlessly stupid like injecting larva". Zerg macro is kind of a pain. I have seen Ret have 0 energy on his queens on 4 bases. That is impressive as fuck. Hitting larvae injects allows for zerg to get that swarm eZ. missing them means you are behind because you don't have cost effective units. You can easily lose games by missing injects.
I think you and your bros are alone in this thought. Maybe you guys should go play something else if you aren't happy. I, and the vast majority of people who have responded to your inane idea, do not want to start some stupid community movement to change SC2. This ain't Occupy Tarsonis. You are the 1%, bro.
|
On December 11 2011 10:19 heroofcanton wrote:
If you thought this thread would be closed why did you post it...
I think you and your bros are alone in this thought. Maybe you guys should go play something else if you aren't happy. I, and the vast majority of people who have responded to your inane idea, do not want to start some stupid community movement to change SC2. This ain't Occupy Tarsonis. You are the 1%, bro.
too epic to not repost.
|
So much rage in this thread lmao
I can't believe that people are denying that the macro mechanics contribute to all ins and timing attack better in SC2. They're not the only cause mind you, but they definitely are contributing.
|
On December 11 2011 08:53 EndOfLine wrote:
hmmm,
I personally that having Chrono, Mule, and Inject adds depth to this game, and actually Adds even more contract to good players and great players.
Just look at Liquid Ret, Who NEVER misses injections. Unless somone pushes him out of his chair.
Yesterday, I missed a round of injections early in the game, and lost the game because of it.
that's completely a lie, no one who isn't a pro executing a specific strategy against another specific strategy lost solely because they did not inject/chrono/mule. it may have made it worse for you but in no way shape or form did IT and SOLELY it make you lose the game.
|
There is so much wrong with those edits it's not even worth bothering to explain, suffice to say; OP is wrong.
You mentioned "Sometimes you have to stand up for what you believe in and keep holding on until the world has crushed you or started to see things your way."
Nice bullshit, it's time for you to get crushed k? 
|
On December 11 2011 10:26 Silidons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2011 08:53 EndOfLine wrote:
hmmm,
I personally that having Chrono, Mule, and Inject adds depth to this game, and actually Adds even more contract to good players and great players.
Just look at Liquid Ret, Who NEVER misses injections. Unless somone pushes him out of his chair.
Yesterday, I missed a round of injections early in the game, and lost the game because of it.
that's completely a lie, no one who isn't a pro executing a specific strategy against another specific strategy lost solely because they did not inject/chrono/mule. it may have made it worse for you but in no way shape or form did IT and SOLELY it make you lose the game.
ZvZ
Both 14 gas 14 pool. Same amount of drones, queens, etc. Let's assume they both have 30 lings, and start brawling in the middle of the map. Player 1 misses an entire inject cycle (his queen has 25 more energy than it should) so that's 8 less lings. Player 2 now has a massive advantage and if both players hit their injects perfectly from then on player 2 will be able to overwhelm player 1.
|
I don't think these mechanics will be removed. For one, they make the game much more interesting.
Interesting post, but i find myself wondering if TL is really going to become a trashbin for everyone to post their half-baked ideas in really long-winded posts thinking that they've said something extremely profound. Even the posts with stats are only mildly interesting. they just point out things that people already knew, i.e. practicing more makes a difference or bo5's make better players stand out. really? Do you have to post your ingenious analysis of how x player is the best ever because of a day you watched him stream?
|
I would support removal inject larva and remaking queens into something else... Though that would mean Zerg units having to be completely rebalanced to more cost and larva efficient... Which might not be appropriate in WoL but possible in future expansions. (one can always hope ^.^)
In SC2, Zerg has to be both the expanding player and the aggressive player which (yes yes again) compared to BW, Zerg players were usually defensive and the Terran/Protoss players had to constantly attack them to prevent them from maxing out. This led to a very interesting dynamic where the Zerg player was constantly trying to expand/max-out and Terran/Protoss players trying to prevent that from happening.
From a story perspective I also preferred that as a Zerg infestation had to be "cleansed" (attack!!!) before it got too strong or too widespread (i.e. not letting the Zerg expand too much or max-out).
From an implementation standpoint though I doubt that would happen...
|
Hmm i like this changes , I would switch from broodwar to sc2 if they removed the so called Macro mechanics in sc2 , I see chrono boost,mules and larvae inject as something that is not in the starcraft universe . who needs chrono boost while I can just make more gateways to get more units and even mass probe to get more minerals just like broodwar ? Inject larvae ? I can just make more hatcheries to get more larvae , Mules ? I will make more scvs to get more minerals .
I support you op ....
|
Hahaha oh boy. I love how you within one single post manage to go from one extreme to the complete opposite. A lot of people are pretty inconsistent in their posts but even so, you've reached a special level not seen often.
You manage to go from "SC2 is too easy" to "SC2 isn't easy enough" and you don't even notice it yourself...
Sorry to be the one to break it but there is a good chance you might have some kind of split personality, or maybe you just forgot to think before you posted (happens from time to time I suppose)
Because of the chronoboost, mule, and inject larva abilities, Starcraft 2 is to Starcraft, as easy mode dota is to regular dota. So it's the easy version of the best game ever made (according to yourself)
These add slightly to your required APM however they are not true skill. True skill is when you have to decide whether or not to engage and army or go in for SCV kills with your muta. These are not apm they are TACTICAL decisions making it a strategy game. If something is so strong it is a must it isnt a test of skill just an unnecessary game mechanic. Yet it's not easy enough?! How could you possibly come to that conclusion. How can easier than perfect be too hard? :s
Here I'll draw you a picture
This is the easy scale:
Less mechanically demanding<----------SC2----------BW----------->more mechanically demanding
So you wanna make it more like BW by making it less like BW? :D
|
Osaka27154 Posts
Not an acceptable thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/userfiles/92255.jpg?1323487280)
