|
On June 09 2012 08:07 CtrlShiftAltGrrrrrrr wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2012 08:04 Batch wrote:
Great change, should have been added a long time ago.
I don't want to see games won by the player who has the best counting skills. I want to see the player with the best strategies, best macro, and best micro to win. U are a stupid human being. ok mb not but maynarding workers, saturating bases perfectly is part of managing an economy, aka macro. why should players like Bomber, who put hours of work to make sure they het the perfect income at any given time get their efforts dismissed ? its like saying i dont want to see the player who split their marines better have more success, it should only be about talent, and talent is reflected by strategy. Stupid views like that piss me off so much...
Well you are really immature, close minded and not even slightiest material to talk with.
Peace.
|
On June 09 2012 08:03 Heavenlee wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2012 07:57 jidolboy wrote:On June 09 2012 07:53 Heavenlee wrote:On June 09 2012 07:51 StarBrift wrote:On June 09 2012 07:45 Fenrax wrote:On June 09 2012 07:32 FinestHour wrote:
Makes no difference at high level of play, and helps out lower level players.
Why so much complaining? because COMPLAINING.... people effing always complain, no matter what. good change for once blizz. now give us lan Yeah its complaining. So what? Customers complain when a company makes a product worse than it used to be. Usually companies then try to meet the customers needs. It's not ungrateful to complain about a product you paid money for. Serious companies want people to complain when there's something wrong with their product so that they can make it better. Blizzard is a company that takes pride in listening to the community and will be prepared for complaints. Its a natural part of buisness. Stop being outraged about something natural and completely acceptable. Because it's illogical complaining. People aren't even thinking of any actual negative ramifications, they're just posting in outrage about nothing. That's not helpful community feedback, it's people being elitist saying the UI is being dumbed down when this only helps casual players get into the game easier. This is not going to affect any remotely high level play in any whatsoever and just makes people in the lower spectrum have a bit of an easier time playing a game that can be overwhelming to them. Then same thing can be said for Auto chrono,mule or inject lol High players doesnt have much trouble with them. Casual players do. Now, we dont want an easier game do we? Auto chrono, mule, and inject are 100% different. If you don't understand why you've never even played this game. Just stop.
Man. Dont tell me to stop when you cant even support your own claim. Automatic mule/inject/chronos are not much different then looking at looking at your own base and counting workers. Both require less multitasking.
|
I don't like it.
It should be some "skill" to have good control of how many workers you have.
|
This is a good change, the only people disagreeing want things to be difficult for the sake of difficulty...this is like a tiny version of the multiple building selection issue. In any case, it makes things easier for scrubs without affecting good players at all, any change like that is good for the game overall
|
hopefully this is spectator only, it's an awful idea
|
People whining about making the game easier for competitive players obviously aren't competitive players. If you lose a game because this feature was added and it helps your opponent beat you, you probably aren't very good anyway.
|
On June 09 2012 08:01 StarBrift wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2012 07:51 roymarthyup wrote:
lol at someone in this thread saying counting workers is the only thing that seperated really high master zergs from low master zergs
lmao. im pretty sure every every top30 master zerg knows exactly how many workers they have at all times and i garuntee all of their builds are mapped to a T in determining when they will have X amount of workers in order to pull off Y timing or Y action
and below top30 master is pretty much just an extension of diamond in my opinion so you cant compare diamond to top30 masters Nah, I said its the only thing that separates a top pro from a masters player ECONOMY WISE. If you're gonna be a douchebag and try to earn cool points atleast try to actually read the post. Also there's a quote feature on this forum. That "some guy" person is really easy to find and quote in a short thread like this. And NO, top 30 master zergs do not have perfect econ management in this build. I watch maybe 10 hours of top zerg streams every week. Players like Idra, Ret, DRG, Nestea, Losira, Stephano, Revival etc. All of them have 2-5 too many workers on their main mineral lines from time to time in the early to midgame. Small things that give you maybe 100 more minerals in the long run so they wont break a game for you but its still something every pro can to improve on. Every single top pro mind you. Forget top 30 GM being able to do it. If this change is not for obs only but also for players then all these pros will have perfect ammounts of workers at their bases at all times. Blizzard has then sucessfully removed something that separates the very top of progamers from the rest of the top echelon of players. That is purely negative. This change will make macro easier especially for zerg players as econ management is very heavily based on how many workers you can squeeze out to mine from the maximum ammount of bases without dying. Zergs that bind their hatcheries individually (like Nestea, DRG, Losira, Revival etc) will be able to jump in between their hatches during battles or slightly before/after and VERY easily allways have the optimal counts.
You DO realize that having the number on the screen is not the same as automatically moving workers around right? It still takes time, thought, practice, planning, and execution to manage your workers; they simply removed a single step of the process: boxing your workers. Now all you have to do is look at the number! You'll probably see lots of mid/low-tier pros with over/under saturation often because there's simply too many other important things to do in the game that demand your APM and concentration. Don't deny the infinity that is the potential options at any given moment in the game-you can always be doing something more, even if 99% of the game is automated.
|
All this does is save you the second it takes to highlight your worker line and add 2 for the workers inside geysers.
Why are people complaining about this?
|
Renders the macromanagement aspect a tad easier; but on the other hand, this apm can now be invested elsewhere, and may make for higher-quality games.
|
Its fairly amusing reading so many replies saying 'it doesn't make any difference if you can count' etc.. Considering at least 90% of grandmaster players I watch on streams (as well as many pros) don't have perfect saturation in ANY of their games.
I understand why so many people are saying its a good change - it lets people focus more with their APM on controlling army, spending time making decisions/multitasking; which they think makes the game better for spectators - but realistically this is not done at same time as multitasking engagements almost always.
However, changes like this always have a negative impact (albeit a very small one) on the competitive scene. It does help players who have low APM, have a very strategical focus; but it also slightly makes the game more volatile as a lesser player will have a bigger advantage from a build order win (this is extremely important - it makes the game more luck based which is never a good thing), and it has always been a part of starcraft that a player will do better throughout the game simply by having better mechanics (this rewards practicing ..).
Don't simply write of people who disagree as being elitist or it being a meaningless change. It also doesn't really make the game any better for spectators as some people have said.
But I am not saying it is a big deal or will ruin anything, but small changes like this slowly have negative impact, if very small one, to competitive play.
|
On June 09 2012 08:07 CtrlShiftAltGrrrrrrr wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2012 08:04 Batch wrote:
Great change, should have been added a long time ago.
I don't want to see games won by the player who has the best counting skills. I want to see the player with the best strategies, best macro, and best micro to win. U are a stupid human being. ok mb not but maynarding workers, saturating bases perfectly is part of managing an economy, aka macro. why should players like Bomber, who put hours of work to make sure they het the perfect income at any given time get their efforts dismissed ? its like saying i dont want to see the player who split their marines better have more success, it should only be about talent, and talent is reflected by strategy. Stupid views like that piss me off so much... I didn't know counting to 24 was such a hard skill to obtain.
|
On June 09 2012 08:10 Embir wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2012 08:07 CtrlShiftAltGrrrrrrr wrote:On June 09 2012 08:04 Batch wrote:
Great change, should have been added a long time ago.
I don't want to see games won by the player who has the best counting skills. I want to see the player with the best strategies, best macro, and best micro to win. U are a stupid human being. ok mb not but maynarding workers, saturating bases perfectly is part of managing an economy, aka macro. why should players like Bomber, who put hours of work to make sure they het the perfect income at any given time get their efforts dismissed ? its like saying i dont want to see the player who split their marines better have more success, it should only be about talent, and talent is reflected by strategy. Stupid views like that piss me off so much... Well you are really immature, close minded and not even slightiest material to talk with. Peace.
Nice ad hominem there.
|
On June 09 2012 08:08 iYiYi wrote:
I find it funny that most the master/grand master players in this thread don't care about the change. So who exactly are the people complaining? When pro players are asked they will just say they don't care.
Excuse me dude but WTH are you talking about? There is ONE former grandmaster in this thread that has been in favor of this. Your assertion that pro players will not care based on your own logic is highly improbable. Of course there's gonna be some pros that like it because their job just got significantly easier but we as viewers should be up in arms about the game becoming less complex and thus progamers becoming less impressive.
|
On June 09 2012 08:13 uSnAmplified wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2012 08:07 CtrlShiftAltGrrrrrrr wrote:On June 09 2012 08:04 Batch wrote:
Great change, should have been added a long time ago.
I don't want to see games won by the player who has the best counting skills. I want to see the player with the best strategies, best macro, and best micro to win. U are a stupid human being. ok mb not but maynarding workers, saturating bases perfectly is part of managing an economy, aka macro. why should players like Bomber, who put hours of work to make sure they het the perfect income at any given time get their efforts dismissed ? its like saying i dont want to see the player who split their marines better have more success, it should only be about talent, and talent is reflected by strategy. Stupid views like that piss me off so much... I didn't know counting to 24 was such a hard skill to obtain.
No single thing in this game is hard. Doing everything simultaneously as fast as possible is what's hard. Selecting and counting takes more attention than looking at a number.
|
It'll be something the TL community gets up in arms about, and then when it is implemented it will make no difference. I understand and can to a certain extent relate to the reason why people don't like it, but in practice, it is almost irrelevant.
|
On June 09 2012 08:13 uSnAmplified wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2012 08:07 CtrlShiftAltGrrrrrrr wrote:On June 09 2012 08:04 Batch wrote:
Great change, should have been added a long time ago.
I don't want to see games won by the player who has the best counting skills. I want to see the player with the best strategies, best macro, and best micro to win. U are a stupid human being. ok mb not but maynarding workers, saturating bases perfectly is part of managing an economy, aka macro. why should players like Bomber, who put hours of work to make sure they het the perfect income at any given time get their efforts dismissed ? its like saying i dont want to see the player who split their marines better have more success, it should only be about talent, and talent is reflected by strategy. Stupid views like that piss me off so much... I didn't know counting to 24 was such a hard skill to obtain.
If you trul,y can't understand how counting workers at 3-4 bases in a hectic game is an advanced skill then you are really really ignorant and know close to nothing about high level startcraft. Stop trying to be a smartass and call other people stupid when you don't understand the fundamentals of the game.
|
On June 09 2012 08:10 jidolboy wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2012 08:03 Heavenlee wrote:On June 09 2012 07:57 jidolboy wrote:On June 09 2012 07:53 Heavenlee wrote:On June 09 2012 07:51 StarBrift wrote:On June 09 2012 07:45 Fenrax wrote:On June 09 2012 07:32 FinestHour wrote:
Makes no difference at high level of play, and helps out lower level players.
Why so much complaining? because COMPLAINING.... people effing always complain, no matter what. good change for once blizz. now give us lan Yeah its complaining. So what? Customers complain when a company makes a product worse than it used to be. Usually companies then try to meet the customers needs. It's not ungrateful to complain about a product you paid money for. Serious companies want people to complain when there's something wrong with their product so that they can make it better. Blizzard is a company that takes pride in listening to the community and will be prepared for complaints. Its a natural part of buisness. Stop being outraged about something natural and completely acceptable. Because it's illogical complaining. People aren't even thinking of any actual negative ramifications, they're just posting in outrage about nothing. That's not helpful community feedback, it's people being elitist saying the UI is being dumbed down when this only helps casual players get into the game easier. This is not going to affect any remotely high level play in any whatsoever and just makes people in the lower spectrum have a bit of an easier time playing a game that can be overwhelming to them. Then same thing can be said for Auto chrono,mule or inject lol High players doesnt have much trouble with them. Casual players do. Now, we dont want an easier game do we? Auto chrono, mule, and inject are 100% different. If you don't understand why you've never even played this game. Just stop. Man. Dont tell me to stop when you cant even support your own claim. Automatic mule/inject/chronos are not much different then looking at looking at your own base and counting workers. Both require less multitasking.
My claim is supported by actually playing the game. Comparing knowing worker saturation at a base to zerg always having perfect injections. Cool story bro. Like I said, I accept your bet, $1,000,000 to the person who is right. I'll PM you in ten years.
|
Let's put it this way -- you could increase the skill cap of Chess by making all the pieces white and forcing players to remember who's is what, or forcing players to move their pieces with chopsticks.
But that's not how chess is intended to be challenging.
Anything that improves the user interface of a game for both players and fans should be welcomed. It improves the experience for entry level players and spectators but will have almost no impact on the game at the professional level.
Edit: SC2 is a strategy game, not a game about counting moving objects.
|
On June 09 2012 08:14 StarBrift wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2012 08:08 iYiYi wrote:
I find it funny that most the master/grand master players in this thread don't care about the change. So who exactly are the people complaining? When pro players are asked they will just say they don't care. Excuse me dude but WTH are you talking about? There is ONE former grandmaster in this thread that has been in favor of this. Your assertion that pro players will not care based on your own logic is highly improbable. Of course there's gonna be some pros that like it because their job just got significantly easier but we as viewers should be up in arms about the game becoming less complex and thus progamers becoming less impressive.
Less army management = more kung fu fighting. SC2 is supposed to be the future of e-sports, the chosen one, not an accountancy simulator. I think the new additions is alright, nothing special. Too much drama these days, less complex lol.
|
On June 09 2012 08:10 Embir wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2012 08:07 CtrlShiftAltGrrrrrrr wrote:On June 09 2012 08:04 Batch wrote:
Great change, should have been added a long time ago.
I don't want to see games won by the player who has the best counting skills. I want to see the player with the best strategies, best macro, and best micro to win. U are a stupid human being. ok mb not but maynarding workers, saturating bases perfectly is part of managing an economy, aka macro. why should players like Bomber, who put hours of work to make sure they het the perfect income at any given time get their efforts dismissed ? its like saying i dont want to see the player who split their marines better have more success, it should only be about talent, and talent is reflected by strategy. Stupid views like that piss me off so much... Well you are really immature, close minded and not even slightiest material to talk with. Peace.
i dont mean that hes actually stupid just the way it was presented, but starting the sentence with i dont want to see players win through"whatever skillset i dont respect" is actually really close minded and thats what annoys me ? i dont mind hes happy with the change, but the argument
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
