Lets imagine SC1 with MBS. - Page 11

On October 01 2007 20:18 Zanno wrote:
Yes, it will be easy to max. Yes, macro will no longer be so much of a strain on multitasking. However, once both players are maxed, that means there is nothing left to do but concentrate all tasks into microing a 200/200 battle on several fronts on the map. All that time spent on building units isn't going to vaporize into a dead zone - instead of microing a battle on 3 fronts, they'll be microing battles on 7 fronts. Harrassment will still be effective as long as you manage to kill some workers, for forcing a player to keep some units on defense, and for sheer mind game value alone.

On October 01 2007 21:52 Aphelion wrote:
Edit: Even if MBS just means that APM gets spent on multifront micro, I don't want it. Its simply not the same as having your multitasking result in the brutal, quantifiable effect of a bigger army. Your version of SC2 sounds like a real pussified version of the game.

On September 30 2007 20:56 Artosis3 wrote:
Savior doesn't have enough sunkens. Nada rushes in with his marine medic force. Savior grabs all his sunkens at once and targets perfectly. Bam medic gone. Bam medic gone. Bam marine gone. Bam marine gone. here come the drones. Sorry Nada, Savior doesn't need enough sunkens anymore.

I hope you are lucky enough to have seen Pusan PvT. He maxes in like 12 to 14 minutes. It is one of the most scary ridiculous things you can witness. An unreal amount of units everywhere so fast its overwhelming. With MBS suddenly hungtran doesn't need maphack to be good. He too can max in 12 to 14 minutes. 1z. Every gate is making zealots. 1click. All the gates are rallied to the same place. 1d. Every gate is making dragoons.

Have you ever seen iloveoov play? Without a doubt the best terran macro in the world. Any time you look at his army you will be amazed because he will have more then you ever thought possible. This is his strength. He is a sloppy player but he makes up for that in pure macro. 1v2t. Look at me I'm iloveoov jr. Try it. 1v2t. Sorry oov you are out of a job. Even Casy can TvP now.

At low levels MBS won't make a difference. The smarter player will still win. Both newbies will still forget depots and make strategic blunders. They will attack poorly into a well defended position. The game will in essence be the same. MBS does not make the game more fun. No one has ever played SC1 and thought "well if this had MBS I would really like it".

At high levels MBS will ruin competition. SC2 will be WarCraft 4. Have you played WC3? The supply limit is 90. Units are like 2 to 4 supply a piece. Every single competitive player can get the same amount of units in the same time. StarCraft is much older and much more well developed. Korea supports 300 progamers and all of them are at different levels of play. Not one player can macro like iloveoov except for iloveoov. There is no other protoss like Pusan. There is not another Reach. While we have a diverse and interesting pro scene that allows players to be macro style (oov and pusan) or to be micro style (boxer and casy) war3 does not. MBS makes games easier. Every time you make a game easier you hurt the competitive scene. Newbies will have fun either way.

Please say no to MBS.

On October 01 2007 22:47 Klockan3 wrote:

Thats your oppinion though, and even if its shared by many on these forums its not shared by many on other forums.

You should get more units beacuse you outplay him by getting more expos or denying more expos, wich can be done with micro(To kill more worth of units to gain the mins to exp) or strategy(To kill his expos and knowing when its safe to expo yourself even if you dont always have the units to do it with brute force). As an effect micro and strategy can lead to you having macro advantages and thus it means that you can scrap together a huge army beacuse you are more skilled.

It makes the lategame macrofests into lategame multifront micro fests were both tries to get to their opponents supply lines and you have frenetic 200 vs 200 micro instead.

On October 01 2007 23:00 lugggy wrote:
They can make maxing harder despite MBS, if that is so damned important.

For instance we could have a little box in the corner that you must click constantly to keep your supply limit up. But require them to press some keys while they do it. Maybe instead of a box, it could be a circle. Or a bunch of circles. They could start out big and get smaller and smaller, and come faster and faster, and if you misclick too many you auto-lose.

On October 01 2007 22:51 Aphelion wrote:


SC is a macro game. SC2 should stay that way. And Pros are already microing the way you said now - but macroing without MBS. MBS already makes maxing easier already, I don't want every game to turn into a sandbox 200/200 micro fest.

And Pros are already microing the way you said now

On October 01 2007 23:16 Klockan3 wrote:

They wont ofcourse.

Roughly as many games that got to 200/200 in sc will get to that point in sc2 since untill you get a ton of factories and expos the effect of mbs is minimal.

Not really, when the armies gets big their micro and general army movements gets very very flawed compared to what it can be without mbs.

On October 02 2007 00:19 Fen wrote:


It should be flawed. Are you saying when you watch a tennis match you never see someone make a mistake? Its important that people make mistakes due to the games difficulty even at the highest level. It shows that there is still a way to go before perfection and that someone who is better can beat that person. Why should we be making the game viable for someone to play a perfect game?

On October 02 2007 00:23 Klockan3 wrote:

You say that anyone can micro a 200/200 army flawlessly unless its a carrier army?

On October 02 2007 02:12 1sd2sd3sd wrote:
i would never want to see players be flawlessy create a 200/200 army just so they can micro it. If you want that just play a micro map. being able to produce a 200/200 supply and keep it up is a part of starcraft, whats the point of making it so easy excluding that it will be more friendly for the less skilled players?

It should be flawed. Are you saying when you watch a tennis match you never see someone make a mistake? Its important that people make mistakes due to the games difficulty even at the highest level. It shows that there is still a way to go before perfection and that someone who is better can beat that person. Why should we be making the game viable for someone to play a perfect game?

You say that anyone can micro a 200/200 army flawlessly unless its a carrier army?

On October 02 2007 02:14 Aphelion wrote:


See, half the posters here don't even like or play Starcraft. They just want the flashy units, fanbase, storyline and progaming glamor of Starcraft in their own imaginary noob game with features perfectly suited to showcase their "strategic genius".

On October 02 2007 02:20 iamke55 wrote:


I can generalize the anti-MBS side as Starcraft fanboys who want to be good at SC2 as soon as it comes out without learning anything new. You guys have already made the game essentially SC1.5, now you want to get it closer to SC1.2? The danger is that appealing to the guys who want 1.2 will ruin the game for new players, and then the old players won't like it and go back to SC:BW anyways so nobody will play the game.

On October 02 2007 02:20 iamke55 wrote:


I can generalize the anti-MBS side as Starcraft fanboys who want to be good at SC2 as soon as it comes out without learning anything new. You guys have already made the game essentially SC1.5, now you want to get it closer to SC1.2? The danger is that appealing to the guys who want 1.2 will ruin the game for new players, and then the old players won't like it and go back to SC:BW anyways so nobody will play the game.

On October 02 2007 02:20 iamke55 wrote:


I can generalize the anti-MBS side as Starcraft fanboys who want to be good at SC2 as soon as it comes out without learning anything new. You guys have already made the game essentially SC1.5, now you want to get it closer to SC1.2? The danger is that appealing to the guys who want 1.2 will ruin the game for new players, and then the old players won't like it and go back to SC:BW anyways so nobody will play the game.

On October 02 2007 02:18 MyLostTemple wrote:

You also need to stop asserting that pros "really" can't do all that stuff i just said. I've seen savior, reach, oov and others do all of it cleaner than me and in first person. It's impressive to say the very least. It doesn't mean they do it every single game, or when the pressure is on the most, but they are still capable of doing it.

On October 02 2007 02:26 lugggy wrote:


I think Blizz should have aimed a lot more for SC 1.2 than they seem to be doing. Simply making a new campaign and new graphics engine and sounds, and heros, would sell the game to the mass market they care the most about. The multiplayer can allow the money maps and popular UMS of War3/SCBW fame, as well as the competitive mode of SCBW, like an expansion. Instead they have opted to retry making another 3d RTS, balanced, good for multi, from scratch, with all their cool new ideas. I hope they pull it off. I have a feeling I will prefer SCBW in the end. But I also have a feeling War3 players and potential would-be War3 players are going to love SC2. And if it is better for Korean TV than War3 (very likely, only a question of how much better) then the game will be a huge success.

On October 02 2007 02:31 FrozenArbiter wrote:
This is what will happen if SC2 does not live up to SC1, cause there's just no way SC1 will survive as a real competitive alternative, regardless of how good or bad SC2 is.