EPTMy wc3 clan, we have the Peru wcg winner, argentina best player, and me best venezuelan player, we also have usa players and 2 koreans night elfs, we were going to start playing BW on february before the sc2 hype because we saw some replays and we were quite tired of wc3 imbalance (right now with the new strategies this imbalance is not as bad tho) but after 2 months of BW we all came back to wc3 cuz we got sick of macrowhoring instead of outmicroing, see sc scene could have 8 more players now. And like us theres a lot of people who think the same way.
Why MBS Is Essential To a Competitive SC2 - Page 18
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
aW]Nevermind
Venezuela73 Posts
My wc3 clan, we have the Peru wcg winner, argentina best player, and me best venezuelan player, we also have usa players and 2 koreans night elfs, we were going to start playing BW on february before the sc2 hype because we saw some replays and we were quite tired of wc3 imbalance (right now with the new strategies this imbalance is not as bad tho) but after 2 months of BW we all came back to wc3 cuz we got sick of macrowhoring instead of outmicroing, see sc scene could have 8 more players now. And like us theres a lot of people who think the same way. | ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
obviously my push failed and then he macro whored me and won, i was so damn pissed i outmicroed him so bad in every battle if i had MBS like in wc3 i wouldn't lose everything to 3 high templars just because i had to go back to my base 3 or4 seconds to mass click some stupid larvas, 1) 4sh5sh6shs7sh8sh9sh0sh There is no going back to your base, wtf. 2) If you lost the game because you lost 12 hydras to 3 storms (that's pretty standard..) then you were barely ahead/not ahead. I'm done arguing for or against MBS but I disagree with your reasons for wanting it. On September 13 2007 22:48 aW]Nevermind wrote: Anyways what i tryed to say is, i want to be in battle trying to vulture mine micro his goons, trying to repair my tanks, trying to drop something, trying to get a perfect positioning, etc i don't want to go back to my base every 15 seconds to mass click some factorys and shit like that i don't find that fun, fun for me, and to the majority of wc3 players is to actually outmicro opponents, and using a better unit mix, not just massing some random units, some friends of mine said that goons are bad vs terran but if you have a good macro u can mass so much zealot goons that it doesn't matter using a bad unit (since you have to be very freaking fast to be good using vulture mines to beat goons & massing from ur 12 factorys, you could actually lose to a retard who was good only at smashing his keyboard on his gateways, if MSB was implemented terrans would try to micro a lot more making goons quite useless but at the same time protoss would be using more HT /drop micro to beat tanks because they won't be using most of their time to mass probes on their 5 expos or massing goons from 15 gateways. My wc3 clan, we have the Peru wcg winner, argentina best player, and me best venezuelan player, we also have usa players and 2 koreans night elfs, we were going to start playing BW on february before the sc2 hype because we saw some replays and we were quite tired of wc3 imbalance (right now with the new strategies this imbalance is not as bad tho) but after 2 months of BW we all came back to wc3 cuz we got sick of macrowhoring instead of outmicroing, see sc scene could have 8 more players now. And like us theres a lot of people who think the same way. Whoever told you goons suck vs terran is not very good. Dragoons are the standard unit vs terran, it's the unit you have the most of pretty much always. They just can't fight tanks when they reach a certain number, which is why you mix in zealots and shuttles (with templars dropping from them, cause otherwise vultures will rape the templars before you get to the fight), and later arbiters or carriers. I don't know why your experience with BW was that of every game being a macrowar, when I first started out I always used the most micro intensive strats I could think of cause I found that more fun and my macro was pretty bad. So I'd be reaver dropping, dt rushing, zealot rushing etcetcetcetc every game. I didn't start playing macro strats until much later. | ||
|
aW]Nevermind
Venezuela73 Posts
On September 13 2007 22:53 FrozenArbiter wrote: 1) 4sh5sh6shs7sh8sh9sh0sh There is no going back to your base, wtf. 2) If you lost the game because you lost 12 hydras to 3 storms (that's pretty standard..) then you were barely ahead/not ahead. I'm done arguing for or against MBS but I disagree with your reasons for wanting it. Yes okay sorry for beign a noob, be proud of having less noobs and more pros (like you) in your community, that's the way to go, not like one of us could be good any day because we don't have a brain or a point. | ||
|
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
Maybe we just have different personalities, but when I lost because I couldn't keep my money down while microing I didn't blame the UI, I tried to learn how to do everything faster or more effeciently so I didn't get 2000 minerals all the time. I did blame things like imbalance for a short period tho, but after a while I just stopped thinking that way cause I realize it wasn't true. Although I still occasionally blame map balance (or external circumstances cause I'm a sore loser ;D). But you say you want to micro your vultures, you want to repair your tanks (not much fun doing this with auto-cast imo..) etcetc, well, so do I, and I already do! To me MBS only represents a step back in terms of how much fun you can have, since I measure fun by how much I have to do pretty much. I enjoy sending 2 groups of vultures across the map while expanding, scanning, making units from my factories and simultaneously sending my siege tanks towards one of his expansions since he committed too many units to chasing one of my small vulture groups, while the second has now placed a minefield covering their way back etc. MBS makes it slightly easier so I don't like that. | ||
|
aW]Nevermind
Venezuela73 Posts
| ||
|
Klockan3
Sweden2866 Posts
On September 13 2007 23:00 FrozenArbiter wrote: I'm just saying that blaming the UI for your loss instead of blaming yourself is not the way to go.. Maybe we just have different personalities, but when I lost because I couldn't keep my money down while microing I didn't blame the UI, I tried to learn how to do everything faster or more effeciently so I didn't get 2000 minerals all the time. I did blame things like imbalance for a short period tho, but after a while I just stopped thinking that way cause I realize it wasn't true. Although I still occasionally blame map balance (or external circumstances cause I'm a sore loser ;D). But you say you want to micro your vultures, you want to repair your tanks (not much fun doing this with auto-cast imo..) etcetc, well, so do I, and I already do! To me MBS only represents a step back in terms of how much fun you can have, since I measure fun by how much I have to do pretty much. I enjoy sending 2 groups of vultures across the map while expanding, scanning, making units from my factories and simultaneously sending my siege tanks towards one of his expansions since he committed too many units to chasing one of my small vulture groups, while the second has now placed a minefield covering their way back etc. MBS makes it slightly easier so I don't like that. What he means is that at lower levels microing is useless since macroing>>>>Microing and when macro takes up most of your time its impossible to micro well so it becoms a spamfest. Now, in his oppinion hed rather micro than spend his time spamming units on his enemy, an di think this goes for most average skilled players. Also note that starcraft got a much higher average skill than other games, just beacuse reasons like this. Its not noob friendly. And also the into to being good to starcraft isnt really fun: First you learn how to spam units, first when you mastered unit spam to a degree were you dont have to think about it can you start with learning how to micro, since micro dont do any good without units. Now, average skilled players from other games that are used to micro their units will get owned in starcraft simply beacuse in starcraft you earn a lot more per apm building units than microing them. Those will say that they lost due to the UI, and they have the right to say so since the UI makes mundane tasks very time crawing to such a degree that average players hardly have time to do the things they like to do. For those that can micro+macro at the same time it doesnt matter since you still get the kick out of good micro, but to those that arent used to having a lot of their attention drawn away from the battles will not get the great feeling of good micro and instead will dismiss the game as a spamfest. The masses wants to be able to micro, and since the masses are many more than the starcraft community Blizzard does the right thing to cater to them instead of making a starcraft expansion with better graphics. And do you know, now people have a reason to play the old starcraft just like some palys the old warcraft 2. And the worst thing that can happen to sc2 is revieweres saying: "You can really feel that Blizzard is 10 years behind the rest of the rts industry" People dont like to feel as if they buy a 10 year old game full price, and more than anything the word of noobs and reviewers are very iportant for the success of a game. If you look at CoH, its a sucky as hell game with no depth at all at higher levels, it got piss easy micro and no macro elements whatsoever, however it earned a ton of GOTY awards and is praised by every reviewer and most noobs just beacuse its easy to play and got near to no basebuilding elements. So as such starcraft 2 needs to be fun at the most basic level to be a huge success, noobs and such dont want a game to force you train a ton before they can come to the fun aspects of it, they want the fun right here and right now. And thats what makes blizzard blizzard, they do give people as much fun as possible at the lower levels without sacrifising much depth at higher levels at all. Like when starcraft was released it was the most accesable multiplayer rts out there wich was easy to get into for its time but hard to master. Starcraft 2 needs to do the same, it needs to be the most accesable RTS on the market without sacrifising the depth of higher end play. If you want to play a game with the aspects of '96 UI has to offer, then play a game from '96, making a game with dated controls is a death sentence in the gaming world. Imagine if someone made an fps were you aimed with the keyboard again just like you did in the old FPS games such as doom2 or Dark forces? Edit: Sorry for the long post, it just grew and grew somehow. | ||
|
aW]Nevermind
Venezuela73 Posts
But you say you want to micro your vultures, you want to repair your tanks (not much fun doing this with auto-cast imo..) etcetc, well, so do I, and I already do! Autocast is for noobs, because i rather be specific at what i want to repair auto repair scv is pretty much usless in battle, ofc if u have like 4 suply damaged thats when auto repair works good, that is on wc3 but is rarely used. Yes i said i wanted to micro but no matter what i can't because i have to take care of macro wayy too much and i don't care what you say but Long games on BW is all about macro, on the game i want, i want to micro as much as i can, without artificial limitations because micro is one of those things that doesn't have a limit you can't have perfect micro. | ||
|
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On September 14 2007 00:08 aW]Nevermind wrote: Autocast is for noobs, because i rather be specific at what i want to repair auto repair scv is pretty much usless in battle, ofc if u have like 4 suply damaged thats when auto repair works good, that is on wc3 but is rarely used. Yes i said i wanted to micro but no matter what i can't because i have to take care of macro wayy too much and i don't care what you say but Long games on BW is all about macro, on the game i want, i want to micro as much as i can, without artificial limitations because micro is one of those things that doesn't have a limit you can't have perfect micro. You can't have perfect macro either. Well, not without MBS (lol just kidding!! dont kill me)!! And your point about auto-repair makes me hope they leave that out of the game, if you forget to repair a burning building it should burn down, the AI shouldnt repair it for you. Anyway, I've played BW for 5 years so I'm obviously not going to feel the same way about macro limiting your micro, it's just natural to me that you can't spend all your energy microing, even though that's what I used to do for a long time when I first started playing. On September 14 2007 00:05 aW]Nevermind wrote: I had a much better micro than him, but i couldn't beat the UI, and i won't waste my time trying to because on sc2 i won't have to beat the UI and every noob who wants to suicide his entire army won't make a come back macro whoring lol. Well he obviously had way better macro than you or you wouldn't have lost just because you lost 12 units. You have to realize that losing 12 units in starcraft is NOTHING. Unlike in warcraft 3, players can trade entire armies with eachother time and time again. If macro isn't part of SC2 I won't be playing it seriously, if at all, I'll probably just say good bye to gaming and focus on something else. Klockan: Also note that starcraft got a much higher average skill than other games, just beacuse reasons like this. Its not noob friendly. And also the into to being good to starcraft isnt really fun: First you learn how to spam units, first when you mastered unit spam to a degree were you dont have to think about it can you start with learning how to micro, since micro dont do any good without units. I'm not disagreeing with you here, but I can't really sympathize with it either as I never found it boring at all. And I always microed a lot, meh. | ||
|
Klockan3
Sweden2866 Posts
On September 14 2007 00:15 FrozenArbiter wrote: Klockan: I'm not disagreeing with you here, but I can't really sympathize with it either as I never found it boring at all. And I always microed a lot, meh. I didnt found it boring either when i started but a lot of people arent like that and want more instant gratification. Blizzard titles are usually the most accessable on the market wich gives them the large fanbases. Then they have a ton of depth also wich gives them their lasting fanbases. Those 2 in combination gives large and lasting communities, wich is almost exclusive to Blizzard games in general. If you look at D2, D1, SC, WC2, WC3, WOW, they were all the most noobfriendly for its time but still they have more depth than most/all of their concurrents, wich is why they all were the successes they were. If you look at TA, it got better reviews and more awards than SC, it was a deep game and all that. But it was a total PITA to play the game wich turned most of the game, but the depth of it have kept a small community playing it untill now but as i said the frustration of learning the game is why it never became a real hit. | ||
|
CFDragon
United States304 Posts
On September 14 2007 00:05 aW]Nevermind wrote: I had a much better micro than him, but i couldn't beat the UI, and i won't waste my time trying to because on sc2 i won't have to beat the UI and every noob who wants to suicide his entire army won't make a come back macro whoring lol. That's why there is both macro and micro. You out micro'd him, but he out macro'd you. He wasn't a noob, he just didn't or couldn't micro. You can be a good Starcraft player without really good micromanagement, if you make up for it with very great macromanagement. That's one of the things I like about that game is that if someone is really good at their macro, then I won't be able to win the game on the back of my micro skills alone. | ||
|
orangedude
Canada220 Posts
I had a similar experience to you. I started off playing SC in about 97 when it first came out and played it for a couple years as a noob back then, until War3 was released. When I switched to War3, I actually got a bit more serious and found that I also really enjoyed micro and got to a very high level there. However, because some of my friends were still playing SC (for fun), I eventually switched back to SC in around 2005. When I came back, I was also frustrated for a long time in not having enough time to micro, because the macro took up most of my apm and concentration. Since we kept playing though, after several months I eventually got used to the macro/micro aspects of SC and didn't mind too much. An important point here I'm trying to make is that if I didn't have an incentive to keep playing SC because some of my buddies were playing there making it fun, I would've never stuck to it and learned how both macro and micro can be enjoyable. I'm sure the vast majority of people who are used to a newer UI from any recent game (including War3) would feel the exact same way after playing SC2 if it didn't include MBS. Many would not keep playing long enough or give it a chance, before they can actually become better at the game. | ||
|
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
I tried playing War3 several times and never made it past a dozen or so ladder games before returning to BW. I think the two biggest factors were that I just didn't like war3 and that replays were unwatchable online :/ | ||
|
aW]Nevermind
Venezuela73 Posts
I will enjoy multitask on sc2, with the AK system and versatily to deply troops, like Drop pod and Warp in multitask is going to be insane, or thats i hope, that's what you guys arguee about macro, is not really important smashing your keyboard to mass more zealots and goons, is the fact that you need to be on 2 or 3 places at the same time, in that case i find multitask very very entertaining, makes the game feel faster with the new AK system players must be really careful about something like a Reaper harras, so many ideas. You could send a SCV to built that special rax that builts Reapers, since you can built like 4 of them really fast you could do that to harras your oponnent, and then "salvage" that rax to get your money back. Drop pods are going to be a pain, in harras and versatility. The add ons are going to be used on a very special way by pros. etc etc the game will have more multitask that brood war, and i just hope blizzard puts enphasis on having an insane multitask with battles all over, but not a multitask to built more troops, but to actually fight or something more fun to do. | ||
|
Klockan3
Sweden2866 Posts
On September 14 2007 03:52 aW]Nevermind wrote: I dunno how we arguee here about macro been more fun than micro honestly that's just plain stupid smashing keyboard on ur factorys is not fun, fun is becomming a master using spider mines. Everyone knows that, but mastering spidermines when you dont have to think about buildings every 10 seconds is much easier than the other, wich would make the goal of mastering spidermines something not as distant wich would take out the "Im so awsome since i can micro spidermines" from those that really can. In short, more apm to micro= Old microfeats that were impressive wont be impressive anylonger. Thats a fact, then you can argue about a ton of sensless shit on if there will be more harder micro feats than before or if everyone will micro at the same degree now etc, but since theres no concluding arguments to that i wont take them up here. | ||
|
aW]Nevermind
Venezuela73 Posts
On September 14 2007 03:58 Klockan3 wrote: Everyone knows that, but mastering spidermines when you dont have to think about buildings every 10 seconds is much easier than the other, wich would make the goal of mastering spidermines something not as distant wich would take out the "Im so awsome since i can micro spidermines" from those that really can. In short, more apm to micro= Old microfeats that were impressive wont be impressive anylonger. Thats a fact, then you can argue about a ton of sensless shit on if there will be more harder micro feats than before or if everyone will micro at the same degree now etc, but since theres no concluding arguments to that i wont take them up here. Yes okay im pretty sure the average gamer will have a spider mine micro as good as boxer if we just implement MBS sir you got a point here. Micro doesn't have a limit on how much you can improv. | ||
|
Klockan3
Sweden2866 Posts
On September 14 2007 04:02 aW]Nevermind wrote: Yes okay im pretty sure the average gamer will have a spider mine micro as good as boxer if we just implement MBS sir you got a point here. Micro doesn't have a limit on how much you can improv. Yeah i know, but the difference between good and bad micro will get lessened if you remove the apm drain called macro. I dont really care if its in or not, but i respect blizzards choice and i dont like when people ignore the positive aspects of having mbs in the game. | ||
|
SoleSteeler
Canada5420 Posts
For me, I have given up really caring whether or not the game has MBS or not. I played SC for years before War3, I enjoy both games immensely, I am pretty good at both games (probably better at War3 though, didn't take SC as 'seriously', I was younger etc.) I will play SC2 regardless. I also think it's extremely difficult to say that the game MUST or MUST NOT have MBS until beta arrives and people are actually playing it seriously. I think the whole "oh, I played it for 4 hours at Blizzcon so I know the game will suck with MBS" is a bit silly (not pointing out anyone in particular). I mean, those games were solely 2v2 right? With a 15-20 minute game limit? And 99% of your opponents were shitty? With unfinished races? You really cannot say with solid evidence what the game will be like with or without MBS. | ||
|
Phyre
United States1288 Posts
- "stupid smashing keyboard on ur factorys is not fun, fun is becomming a master using spider mines." This is a matter of opinion. Of course building units alone would be boring, but the challenge comes from being able to keep up your macro while microing at the same time. This is simply a difference of game taste though. If you want to micro all the time and ignore macro entirely, perhaps you are playing the wrong game. Starcraft had a balance of macro and micro. WC3 leaned more on micro. If you want ALL micro, perhaps you should play DotA? Then you've got 1 unit to control most of the time and it's entirely micro. Please don't argue about making SC2 cater to an entirely different audience. That's like trying to argue that in SC2 you should be able to go into first person view of a unit and strafe/aim/snipe with it to appeal to the Unreal/CounterStrike gamers. I've got a friend that really likes C&C3 and he complains that Starcraft should have C&C's signature vertical UI. They are different games, let them cater to their respective audiences. - People that complain that noobs will get bored because SC boils down to macro wars confuse me. The vast majority of noobs do not know how to macro well and they will simply micro. As long as they play against players of similar skill there will be plenty of low unit count micro wars. When I didn't know about the pro scene and just played friendly games with my nooby friends the focus was mainly on micro. Think back to when you just started Starcraft, just finished the campaign and play mainly against friends on BGH. The game was SIMPLE. No macro involved, just basic base building and trying to micro as best you could. At the low levels you will continue to see this trend of micro > macro provided the game is simple enough to learn and play initially. Starcraft did this nicely as it did not have very complex systems to learn and play but the depth was there once you mastered those basics. When you get to higher levels of competition why shouldn't there be more to do? The addition of macro raises the bar on what is possible, preventing a player from hitting a point where they really can't get better. This keeps competition healthy and ongoing. Without this very high upper bound we probably wouldn't see new up and coming pros in the Starcraft pro scene. There is a reason why the WC3 pro scene seems very stagnant in comparison. From what I'm told, practically every tournament in WC3 worth mentioning has largely the same collection of pros. This is one reason why SC's proscene kicks the crap out of the WC3 scene. | ||
|
Phyre
United States1288 Posts
On September 14 2007 04:02 aW]Nevermind wrote: Yes okay im pretty sure the average gamer will have a spider mine micro as good as boxer if we just implement MBS sir you got a point here. Micro doesn't have a limit on how much you can improv. Maybe they should remove dribbling from basketball or let you carry the ball in your hands in soccer (football) so they can focus on the important fun stuff like shooting goals. In fact, we should have all the players line up, stand still, and take shots at the goal/hoop. This way they can focus entirely in the more important stuff and ignore all the tedious stuff like actually getting to the goal/hoop... | ||
|
Bub
United States3518 Posts
On September 09 2007 13:29 KaRnaGe[cF] wrote: I agree with Nony's post 100%. Starcraft's UI is a blank canvass on which the player creates art. Adding MBS and automining takes much of the fun and competitiveness out of the game. Same here and also agree with TLT and LonelyMargarita It should NOT be included. | ||
| ||
