|
On October 06 2007 03:22 ForAdun wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2007 01:51 Manit0u wrote:
What's important here is how will SC2 really play with MBS because only very few people here know that. Sorry to not quote the rest of your post, I don'thave enough time. These few people who know how MBS plays were complaining about it, all of them. They say it makes SC2 boring.
The other day i played a person in starcraft. I could expand everywere, try whatever goofy strat i wanted and i owned the whole map with units everywere. It was boring as hell tbh, why dont this game "Starcraft" put pressure on me?
Or is it really so that the pressure is not from the game but also a big part from the other player? Nah, that sounds to logical...
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On October 06 2007 03:43 Klockan3 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2007 03:22 ForAdun wrote:On October 06 2007 01:51 Manit0u wrote:
What's important here is how will SC2 really play with MBS because only very few people here know that. Sorry to not quote the rest of your post, I don'thave enough time. These few people who know how MBS plays were complaining about it, all of them. They say it makes SC2 boring. The other day i played a person in starcraft. I could expand everywere, try whatever goofy strat i wanted and i owned the whole map with units everywere. It was boring as hell tbh, why dont this game "Starcraft" put pressure on me? Or is it really so that the pressure is not from the game but also a big part from the other player? Nah, that sounds to logical...
Hehe and this is why I agree we need the beta before we make any final decisions 
I just think that at the current time, evidence speaks against MBS.
|
On October 06 2007 03:43 Klockan3 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2007 03:22 ForAdun wrote:On October 06 2007 01:51 Manit0u wrote:
What's important here is how will SC2 really play with MBS because only very few people here know that. Sorry to not quote the rest of your post, I don'thave enough time. These few people who know how MBS plays were complaining about it, all of them. They say it makes SC2 boring. The other day i played a person in starcraft. I could expand everywere, try whatever goofy strat i wanted and i owned the whole map with units everywere. It was boring as hell tbh, why dont this game "Starcraft" put pressure on me? Or is it really so that the pressure is not from the game but also a big part from the other player? Nah, that sounds to logical...
Your example shows that you were clearly better than your opponent in a game of SC. I will follow your point and claim that you will have harder times beating the same guy in SC2 because with MBS he can lack some of the skill he needed in SC which makes him a more dangerous opponent for you in SC2.
My conclusion is that your example didn't refute anything, instead my opinion seems even more obvious.
|
On October 05 2007 22:18 Aphelion wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2007 18:08 xtian15 wrote:On October 05 2007 04:38 Aphelion wrote:
We're not saying that War3 shows MBS is bad. We're just saying you can't say War 3 was fine (some posters think so), so MBS isn't bad. We are also pointing out that War3 has a dearth of macro , a style which we don't want to see in SC. We're using War3 to show why constant base management and hectic unit production should be kept in SC, and one of the prerequisites for that is to disinclude MBS. The lessening of Macro is War3 was in no way connected to MBS. In War3, there will be a maximum of 3 battlefronts as fighting without your hero is nonsense (infact, the best harassers are heroes like the Blademaster). The game mechanics itself prevents macro. Not MBS. The number of required peasants in War3 (which is quite low compared to SC) mainly dictates how much you can harass. Not MBS. High cost per unit and upkeep has the general effect of limiting the number of units in battle therefore lessening the action in the game. Not MBS. But nevertheless there will be a loss in macro. It may not be due to MBS, but it sucked. MBS will cause a similar loss in macro and multitasking, and so it will play much more like War3. You didn't really understand my post, did you?
SC2 with MBS can be closely related to War3 by virtue of having the same controls (as well as being both highly successful real time strategy games and both being made by Blizzard). However, no one outside of Blizzard knows exactly for sure (well, not even Blizzard themselves, I think) how SC2 will play with MBS. No one. SC2 might have taken its roots from SC1 but the controls being different (which would be a big factor, I know), the play style in SC2 would be a lot more different. We know (and agree) as much as that. However, what we won't know until Beta (or even a few years after release) is if the difference will be for the better or for the worse. Beta might be too late (I don't think so, for Blizzard kills projects that they aren't satisfied with, however late in to development) for you but until then...that is the reason why most people here use analogies...and why my theory that more action will replace the old macro seem hard to believe. Yes, the new UI improvements will affect SC2 playstyle big time but as to what kind of effect...we could use more and more analogies or theories but those will always be just analogies and theories.
|
all we can do is hope for the best... blzzards response to frozen has given me SOME hope they will retain the balance achieved in sc between macro vs micro... pray to the gods and cross ur finger they wont mess up this awesome franchise..
|
I have no idea why people think that SC2 would have more strategical depth and tactics involved with MBS. If you want strategical depth and tactics, without having to make decisions in a matter of seconds, go play chess without time limit. It's called REAL TIME strategy for a reason...
|
|
|
no no no no no mbs will completely destroy competeive sc2 plz blizzard no mbs automine insc2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
United States7166 Posts
wow if it isnt Flearfor the retarded kid who thinks spamming NO MBS all over is going to do anything
|
Because the other thread got deleted (talk about arbitrariness):
MBS will probably reduce the need of cheats. In SC1, many newbs can't handle the "real game", that's why they either cheat or play on money maps.
If you help them somewhat (MBS will), there will hopefully be less cheating overall.
I think this point hasn't been brought up before.
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
