|
On September 17 2015 17:50 Mahiriens wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2015 08:53 AgamemnonSC2 wrote:On September 17 2015 08:05 crazedrat wrote:
The no macro boosters was fun but I think there's all kinds of problems with that design that will pop up which people are not anticipating. The game has been so balanced around the mechanics that at this point it's ingrained into the fabric of the game. Let's say you get the the no macro mechanics and play with it for a while; yes it's fun and new at first, but that feeling wears off. Absolutely false. Macro Boosters didn't even exist until WOL. If you ever played SC1, than you would know that "no macro mechanics" is not new at all. And try telling the people who still love, stream, and watch BW that the "feeling wears off". I lol'd How is that absolutely false when the whole balance of the game was built on macro boosters for 5 years? Sc2 without MM is still a vastly different game than sc1, so if you're trying to brag about playing broodwar atleast try to be intelligent about it...
As you said. The issue is that the game was build around them for over 5 years. So when removing them, obviously many issues will rise to the surface. But the question is; Is Blizzard willing to review and balance accord? or just "screw it and deal with what we give you" type of behavior and keep them?
|
i just started playing the beta again with the new patch, and im absolutely disgusted at how much worse it is compared to last patch
the pace of the game is ridiculously fast, especially as terran it feels like im just mining way way way too many minerals
removal of macro mechanics was the best change ever, just give terran some love, buffing the siege tank or maybe even go wild and include medics to help bio early on?
in my perfect world, sc2 would have way more units and abilities from the campaign anyways. i think way too many good ideas and units have been stripped from the game for the sake of easier balancing
|
On September 17 2015 12:07 crazedrat wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2015 08:40 LSN wrote:On September 17 2015 08:05 crazedrat wrote:
The no macro boosters was fun but I think there's all kinds of problems with that design that will pop up which people are not anticipating. The game has been so balanced around the mechanics that at this point it's ingrained into the fabric of the game. Let's say you get the the no macro mechanics and play with it for a while; yes it's fun and new at first, but that feeling wears off. Gameplay and metagame with macro boosters and limited strategy has worn off after 5 years. The pressure of the ability to rush and macro up to 200/200 that quickly is too high in order to allow versatile strategical choices by players. Imo this lowers the skill ceiling of the game as in most cases there is not much to choose from and playing passive macro into 3-4 base push is the obvious one, paired with the business as usual harassment options like bio/prism drops, orcacle, helions, reapers, ling runby or muta harrassment. Or you go full commitment all-in. Without the macro boosters I am sure semi commitment play is getting alot more viable so that in a situation e.g. where one player has 3OC and the other 3 hatch, zerg is not fully all-in when delaying his 4th as the damage he can do to t is noticeable and can even out things, depending on both players performance in the battle. With macro boosters in place this would end up in a do or die situation for zerg as little dmg to eco of terran is getting overshadowed by 3+ OC mules afterwards and he couldn't catch up anymore so that he has to fully commit on all-in and kill the terran or write gg himself. Without the pressure of the macro boosters alot more styles of play get viable (e.g. bly aggressive Z play) that require all players to widen their overall skill ceiling while just the requirement of apm for injects is being lowered by a bit. Especially the TvP meta can only benefit from a slowed down macro pace as well. The lower availability of larva for zerg will also be good for the game as it requires better dealing with harassment and prevent spamming mass drones after an attack or in a general phase of inactivity. Zergs cannot hoard larva while building drones before an opponents attack anymore and build units only in last second, if the attack comes late z has big advantage, if attack comes 10 sec too early z dies and boredom/frustration amongst players and audience is being spread as all games go that way. How can a better metagame wear off? If you want to talk about a better metagame, during the no macro boosters patch every game was a macro opening. triple hatch, 3CC, nexus 1st... Early aggression from Z and P was so weak it wasnt worth doing. Every game same opening. As far as damaging the enemy econ, there are other ways to make harassment stronger. Right now the MULE change has made early aggression against T stronger. If they adjust the pylon change correctly it will strengthen harassment against Protoss. Zerg already has enough larvae either way. It's the difference between building a macro hatch or not. Zerg dominated so hard in that patch. You will never eliminate Zergs ability to quickly replinish drones. The patch was fun, Zerg dominated alot, alot of Terrans quit the game and Blizzard changed their minds. That's how it went.
The 2 larva and 0 mule state wasn't balanced. I'd prefer to try and see a 2 larva 15-25 mule or 1 larva and 0 mule scenario (chrono simply doesn't matter that much as it can be easily balanced with tweaking unit/upgrade production times of protoss). Of course the experience of an unbalanced state of the game isn't all that good, especially for the players of the disadvantaged race.
New metagames require everyone to sit back and explore the new pace first. Ppl usually do this in macro games as they then can better see when they and their opponents have which combination of units, upgrades and amount of bases etc. Hence the passivity in the games of the short period of testing this. Only after some time players can develop various early game strategies, applying pressure on opponents in this or that situation. This can take several months up to a year and will require the game to settle in this direction before it becomes fully visible.
The impressions you got probably are not a valid indicator of the general effects of the removal of these macro mechanics on the metagame and how they will play out in the end.
|
|
|
What else can be said that all pro player in Korea wants to REMOVE MACRO.
|
That post is way too old to upvote it. Also it is forbidden to ask for upvotes and it will likely get the post removed.
|
Oh, oops. Shows how much I know about reddit.
|
To be fair I don't see the value in posting in reddit. It is pointless.
|
Yes... Post in reddit and we can get all the votes needed to compel blizzard to change their minds.
|
It's funny. I played both WOL and HOTS for years with Chronoboost (I play protoss), and I never had a single complaint about it being in the game. In fact, I don't think I ever even questioned whether it should be in the game or not.
Until one day during the LOTV beta, Blizzard removed Chrono. My initial thoughts were: "Wow, that is a brave move by Blizzard! Such a fundamental change. They have guts. I'm glad to see that they are willing to make big changes for the benefit of the game." I was really impressed. Didn't know if it was good or bad, just impressed that they would try something so drastic.
Then I played. And I LOVED IT!!! I didn't know how nice it felt to not play with Chrono until it was gone. Timings became more predictable. I could focus more on my army, buildings, research. It also made me feel that I could really start to improve. You see, lower level players like myself, probably use Chrono (and to an extent Mules), after making a mistake or falling behind. It felt like a crutch to me now. For example: "Oh crap, he has DTs, CHRONO OUT THE OBSERVER!!!" As opposed to, scouting well and knowing that my opponent is probably going DTs.
I feel like Chrono and Mules essentially bail you out if you screw up. And therefore it's harder to learn and get better.
Bottom line, I was enjoying the game so much more!
The game was imbalanced of course. But from a design perspective, I just loved it. I was looking forward to the next patch, that would (hopefully) have some number/cost/time tweaks to help balance the game out further.
It never happened.
The very next patch Blizzard released saw the reintroduction of Macro Boosters in a different form. Automated Macro, sort-of. I hated it. And it killed my desire to play. I loved having no Chrono, but I disliked having my Chrono automated.
So, I made this poll.
Which I would have never done if Blizzard hadn't teased me with a game patch that I fell in love with.
|
"Calldown: MULE, Calldown: Extra Supplies, and Scanner Sweep now all function as they do in Heart of the Swarm."
hahaha
|
September 17. The dream is over. RIP Poll. 
|
United Kingdom20322 Posts
On September 18 2015 07:20 AgamemnonSC2 wrote:
It's funny. I played both WOL and HOTS for years with Chronoboost (I play protoss), and I never had a single complaint about it being in the game. In fact, I don't think I ever even questioned whether it should be in the game or not.
Until one day during the LOTV beta, Blizzard removed Chrono. My initial thoughts were: "Wow, that is a brave move by Blizzard! Such a fundamental change. They have guts. I'm glad to see that they are willing to make big changes for the benefit of the game." I was really impressed. Didn't know if it was good or bad, just impressed that they would try something so drastic.
Then I played. And I LOVED IT!!! I didn't know how nice it felt to not play with Chrono until it was gone. Timings became more predictable. I could focus more on my army, buildings, research. It also made me feel that I could really start to improve. You see, lower level players like myself, probably use Chrono (and to an extent Mules), after making a mistake or falling behind. It felt like a crutch to me now. For example: "Oh crap, he has DTs, CHRONO OUT THE OBSERVER!!!" As opposed to, scouting well and knowing that my opponent is probably going DTs.
I feel like Chrono and Mules essentially bail you out if you screw up. And therefore it's harder to learn and get better.
Bottom line, I was enjoying the game so much more!
The game was imbalanced of course. But from a design perspective, I just loved it. I was looking forward to the next patch, that would (hopefully) have some number/cost/time tweaks to help balance the game out further.
It never happened.
The very next patch Blizzard released saw the reintroduction of Macro Boosters in a different form. Automated Macro, sort-of. I hated it. And it killed my desire to play. I loved having no Chrono, but I disliked having my Chrono automated.
So, I made this poll.
Which I would have never done if Blizzard hadn't teased me with a game patch that I fell in love with.
Now is the time to post it everywhere and get in their throats. They'll never remove macro mechanics if it goes live in 8 weeks.
|
On September 18 2015 09:07 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2015 07:20 AgamemnonSC2 wrote:
It's funny. I played both WOL and HOTS for years with Chronoboost (I play protoss), and I never had a single complaint about it being in the game. In fact, I don't think I ever even questioned whether it should be in the game or not.
Until one day during the LOTV beta, Blizzard removed Chrono. My initial thoughts were: "Wow, that is a brave move by Blizzard! Such a fundamental change. They have guts. I'm glad to see that they are willing to make big changes for the benefit of the game." I was really impressed. Didn't know if it was good or bad, just impressed that they would try something so drastic.
Then I played. And I LOVED IT!!! I didn't know how nice it felt to not play with Chrono until it was gone. Timings became more predictable. I could focus more on my army, buildings, research. It also made me feel that I could really start to improve. You see, lower level players like myself, probably use Chrono (and to an extent Mules), after making a mistake or falling behind. It felt like a crutch to me now. For example: "Oh crap, he has DTs, CHRONO OUT THE OBSERVER!!!" As opposed to, scouting well and knowing that my opponent is probably going DTs.
I feel like Chrono and Mules essentially bail you out if you screw up. And therefore it's harder to learn and get better.
Bottom line, I was enjoying the game so much more!
The game was imbalanced of course. But from a design perspective, I just loved it. I was looking forward to the next patch, that would (hopefully) have some number/cost/time tweaks to help balance the game out further.
It never happened.
The very next patch Blizzard released saw the reintroduction of Macro Boosters in a different form. Automated Macro, sort-of. I hated it. And it killed my desire to play. I loved having no Chrono, but I disliked having my Chrono automated.
So, I made this poll.
Which I would have never done if Blizzard hadn't teased me with a game patch that I fell in love with. Now is the time to post it everywhere and get in their throats. They'll never remove macro mechanics if it goes live in 8 weeks.
Help please, I don't know what else to do.
|
United Kingdom20322 Posts
On September 18 2015 09:30 AgamemnonSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2015 09:07 Cyro wrote:On September 18 2015 07:20 AgamemnonSC2 wrote:
It's funny. I played both WOL and HOTS for years with Chronoboost (I play protoss), and I never had a single complaint about it being in the game. In fact, I don't think I ever even questioned whether it should be in the game or not.
Until one day during the LOTV beta, Blizzard removed Chrono. My initial thoughts were: "Wow, that is a brave move by Blizzard! Such a fundamental change. They have guts. I'm glad to see that they are willing to make big changes for the benefit of the game." I was really impressed. Didn't know if it was good or bad, just impressed that they would try something so drastic.
Then I played. And I LOVED IT!!! I didn't know how nice it felt to not play with Chrono until it was gone. Timings became more predictable. I could focus more on my army, buildings, research. It also made me feel that I could really start to improve. You see, lower level players like myself, probably use Chrono (and to an extent Mules), after making a mistake or falling behind. It felt like a crutch to me now. For example: "Oh crap, he has DTs, CHRONO OUT THE OBSERVER!!!" As opposed to, scouting well and knowing that my opponent is probably going DTs.
I feel like Chrono and Mules essentially bail you out if you screw up. And therefore it's harder to learn and get better.
Bottom line, I was enjoying the game so much more!
The game was imbalanced of course. But from a design perspective, I just loved it. I was looking forward to the next patch, that would (hopefully) have some number/cost/time tweaks to help balance the game out further.
It never happened.
The very next patch Blizzard released saw the reintroduction of Macro Boosters in a different form. Automated Macro, sort-of. I hated it. And it killed my desire to play. I loved having no Chrono, but I disliked having my Chrono automated.
So, I made this poll.
Which I would have never done if Blizzard hadn't teased me with a game patch that I fell in love with. Now is the time to post it everywhere and get in their throats. They'll never remove macro mechanics if it goes live in 8 weeks. Help please, I don't know what else to do.
Any blizzard guys to message on twitter?
|
This patch is absolutely ridiculous. Heart of the Swarm 2.0. No comments, no explanation. Is the "design team" actually trying to design anything or were they just screwing around the past months?
I thought we had some momentum going and what we get is even worse than the auto mechanics.
|
At this point I want them to focus on reworking units like the infestor and balancing the late game. Right now carriers are not fun to play against. I can only speak from a Zerg perspective. The swarm host sucks, too. The mechanics we have now are fine, Blizzard needs to move forward.
|
Why the fuck do so many people want the removal of macro mechanics. Just bring them back. No macro mechanics will make the game so boring short or long term. If you don't like macro and multitasking, SC2 is not your game. Play it on your level or move on to something else. This game doesn't have to be played by everyone ever. Why does LotV have to be so much more different from HotS than HotS was from WoL? The macro is fine, good unit design is all what is needed to make it more fun and everything. And by good unit design I do not talk about widow mines, oracles, medivac boost, disruptor, liberator...
|
United States702 Posts
I feel like I haven't played enough games to have a worthwhile opinion but I remember feeling like I really enjoyed the "pacing" of the game without macro boosters, so it's not the 'mindless clicking' part I'm against. I'm not sure what could replace/supplement that, though or if it's needed at all. I do like the idea of macro being difficult to master, I just liked the pace of the game when things weren't 'boosted'. That's probably not a very well worded opinion, that's what I get for commenting right before sleep
so I voted remove macro mechanics just on that premise but I'm actually pretty unsure.
|
On September 18 2015 10:49 Obsi wrote:
Why the fuck do so many people want the removal of macro mechanics. Just bring them back. No macro mechanics will make the game so boring short or long term. If you don't like macro and multitasking, SC2 is not your game. Play it on your level or move on to something else. This game doesn't have to be played by everyone ever. Why does LotV have to be so much more different from HotS than HotS was from WoL? The macro is fine, good unit design is all what is needed to make it more fun and everything. And by good unit design I do not talk about widow mines, oracles, medivac boost, disruptor, liberator...
SC2 is complex enough not to need MM Boosters. IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
