EPTA worse player will have a better chance winning with MBS than without.
Lets imagine SC1 with MBS. - Page 26
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Aphelion
United States2720 Posts
A worse player will have a better chance winning with MBS than without. | ||
|
InRaged
1047 Posts
On October 06 2007 02:03 FrozenArbiter wrote: No, I am not saying war3 is what it is because of MBS, but my point is that I don't want a game that plays more micro, less micro because I want the game to keep these aspects of SC1. "It is our goal to allow players to micro more vs. macro more. This is something that was great about the original StarCraft and it is something we want to maintain while we add new mechanics as well as interface features. We are still evaluating such features as automine as well as MBS. We don't have an answer for this at the moment, but we are working on it." That's an answer on your question from Blizz  God, that's exactly what I was repeating in this thread, but no one listens  On October 06 2007 02:32 Aphelion wrote: Some people are just too stupid to argue with. And Blizzard is going to read their opinions and think they're right too. Fuck I sort of wish SC2 wasn't coming out. "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen." On October 06 2007 02:53 Aphelion wrote: Its not a specific situation, its the overall probability. MBS reduces multitasking edges players have over each other. no it isn't. It's your speculation. | ||
|
Zanno
United States1484 Posts
| ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On October 06 2007 02:47 Zanno wrote: I cannot simply cannot conceive of a situation where one player would win if neither had MBS and the other would win where they both had it. The major game deciding scenarios are killing workers, killing expos, building new expos, and having a build order counter to your opponent. The situations where weaker players beat stronger ones is more often than not the latter. Automine lessens the effect of worker harassment, okay. If anything, I feel that MBS will bring refinement to lategame scenarios. 4z5z6z7z8z will still be useful lategame unless for some reason you want all of your gateways across the map rallying to the same spot and building the same thing. I'm not saying it will cause me to suddenly go 50-50 vs iloveoov. I'm saying it will lessen the edge by a tiny bit, which when the best players are already so close in skill, will have an impact IMO. "It is our goal to allow players to micro more vs. macro more. This is something that was great about the original StarCraft and it is something we want to maintain while we add new mechanics as well as interface features. We are still evaluating such features as automine as well as MBS. We don't have an answer for this at the moment, but we are working on it." That's an answer on your question from Blizz God, that's exactly what I was repeating in this thread, but no one listens Well, I hadn't seen that yet, pretty decent answer I suppose. Guess we just have to wait and see what they come up with. | ||
|
Meta
United States6225 Posts
On October 06 2007 00:39 FrozenArbiter wrote: When I check my APM in BWChart, I spend more time microing than I do macroing. And your last line is exactly what I perceive to be the problem: I WANT MICRO AND MACRO TO GET EQUAL MECHANICAL ATTENTION, I DON'T WANT MACRO TO BECOME GAME READING SKILLS OR PREDICTING YOUR OPPONENTS MOVES - THAT'S NOT MACRO, THAT'S UNDERSTANDING THE GAME. Yes, I want to have that in caps because nobody seems to listen -_- Also, Zanno, why did you ignore my reply to your post? then, it would seem your agrument (which i believe is the only argument for MBS) is entirely opinion based. i personally enjoy the micro aspect of the game more than the macro, and i am pro-MBS. it's a matter of opinion from both sides, which is why this debate seems to have no end. however, i see your rationale in wanting equal macro and micro time in any given game, and honestly hope they find some way to fix that, barring the elimination of MBS. | ||
|
Aphelion
United States2720 Posts
Your a moron. That statement is true by definition. If there is less to do (and that IS what MBS will cause), multitasking advantage decrease by definition. You can't even argue that. | ||
|
IdrA
United States11541 Posts
On October 06 2007 05:18 Meta wrote: i personally enjoy the micro aspect of the game more than the macro then go play war3, thats what its designed for starcraft is built on equal importance of both aspects | ||
|
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On October 06 2007 05:18 Meta wrote: then, it would seem your agrument (which i believe is the only argument for MBS) is entirely opinion based. i personally enjoy the micro aspect of the game more than the macro, and i am pro-MBS. it's a matter of opinion from both sides, which is why this debate seems to have no end. however, i see your rationale in wanting equal macro and micro time in any given game, and honestly hope they find some way to fix that, barring the elimination of MBS. Nah, that's ONE of my arguments. Personally it's probably also the biggest reason I dont want it, I enjoy it the way it is now. But I do honestly believe MBS would hurt the skill difference between players. | ||
|
ZaplinG
United States3818 Posts
![[image loading]](http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/5014/nombscy2.png) | ||
|
Failsafe
United States1298 Posts
On October 06 2007 02:47 Zanno wrote: I cannot simply cannot conceive of a situation where one player would win if neither had MBS and the other would win where they both had it. The major game deciding scenarios are killing workers, killing expos, building new expos, and having a build order counter to your opponent. The situations where weaker players beat stronger ones is more often than not the latter. Automine lessens the effect of worker harassment, okay. If anything, I feel that MBS will bring refinement to lategame scenarios. 4z5z6z7z8z will still be useful lategame unless for some reason you want all of your gateways across the map rallying to the same spot and building the same thing. read the thread or don't post | ||
|
FieryBalrog
United States1381 Posts
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. Why don't we see how it pans out? Starcraft 1 already has no MBS. We already have the perfect Starcraft-style RTS. Lets see what happens. | ||
|
Aphelion
United States2720 Posts
| ||
|
Failsafe
United States1298 Posts
| ||
|
InRaged
1047 Posts
On October 06 2007 05:22 Aphelion wrote: Your a moron. That statement is true by definition. If there is less to do (and that IS what MBS will cause), multitasking advantage decrease by definition. You can't even argue that. The only fucking moron here is you. You're a moron for supporting "5z6z7z8z9z0zTzYzUzIzOzPz" idea in one thread and in other saying that clicks isn't important and important is going back to the base. You're a moron for thinking your opinion is only right and important here. And in the end you're a moron for calling morons those who disagree with you and actually find the time to sound why exactly they don't agree, especially like in other mbs thread where no one attacked you. Multitasking is a mind control of the game. Multitasking is about Attention. No matter how you produce your units using F2-F4 or using 5z6z7z8z or 5z, no matter how many marines you produce once in 10 seconds - 2 or 20, difficulty of keeping right timing in the heat of battle is equal and whole multitasking of macro lies in the right Timing. Starcraft has features witch only purpose is to help with timing - unit's "ready" sound, the resource count and the ping at the minimap, and when someone has problems with moving his attention from microing battle to this features nothing will help, especially feature like mbs that doesn't remind player about macro in any way. The only way to reduce Multitasking skill is to make one of the "tasks" less important or completely remove that task. Auto-mining removes one of the tasks and would be sending workers to the minerals crucial gameplay could seriously suffer. But we are talking about MBS and it doesn't remove macro neither makes it less important. Yes, Macro and Macro timing in Starcraft will be equally important with MBS or without and as important as Micro precision as long as having more units at the right time could give serious advantage for the player. Tearing off yourself from important micro battle for the sake off macro doesn't require more Multitasking because of simple reason - you remember and jump to your base After you heard alarm in your head singing about macro. But Multitasking is skill of Hearing this alarm. If before mbs all Terran players had to jump to their base to click at the buildings and after neither of them do so Multitasking skill gap Between these players won't reduce in any way, as long as the reason why they had to jump is still in the game, still important and still requires same attention as before. Multitasking is not among all things that *could* become easier with MBS. Most crucial thing that could be affected is "clicking skill" for those who use 5z6z7z8z9z0z. I honestly don't really care about this skill. I understand those who care but why the hell they don't support idea of 5zdzdzzzt? That's much more productive than arguing about MBS affect over the game and chances Blizz will change that before beta-testing is much bigger. | ||
|
Aphelion
United States2720 Posts
Do you truly think that going 5z6z intermittently is the same multitasking wise as going back to click each gate individually? Almost any player can unconsciously go 5m every 10-20 seconds in TvZ. Most of these players will lose mm vessel vs lurk scourge when they are forced to go back to individually click each rax. Do you even think about the meaning of what you type? Multitasking isn't just thought. It is thought and attention about different tasks, and then the actual ability to juggle them simultaneously. Many a player have thought throughout a game - "my macro is terrible, I have so much money, I need to make troops". But the same player will still be unable to pull away from their army in a frantic game of expo killing, scouting, spell casting, and keeping their army intact. He is compelled to keep babysitting his army. Another player would be able to quickly throw down a storm, a move a few zealots, then go back to make some more templar and zealots. Both players have the same thoughts. But only the second player has good multitasking. With MBS however, the second player could just intermittently spam 5z6t once in a while without losing sight of his army. After 4-5 games going 5z6t will be so natural that he won't even consciously think he is doing it. How is that not reducing multitasking skill? The fact that you don't realize this only shows how much you lack actual game experience and credibility. Try to think a little bit before you post. | ||
|
xtian15
Philippines29 Posts
On October 06 2007 10:03 Aphelion wrote: Keyboard requirements to go 5z6z7z8z9z is important. So is going back to base to individually macro gates when your hotkeys are not sufficient. I fail to see how supporting one point precludes me from supporting another. Do you truly think that going 5z6z intermittently is the same multitasking wise as going back to click each gate individually? Almost any player can unconsciously go 5m every 10-20 seconds in TvZ. Most of these players will lose mm vessel vs lurk scourge when they are forced to go back to individually click each rax. Do you even think about the meaning of what you type? Multitasking isn't just thought. It is thought and attention about different tasks, and then the actual ability to juggle them simultaneously. Many a player have thought throughout a game - "my macro is terrible, I have so much money, I need to make troops". But the same player will still be unable to pull away from their army in a frantic game of expo killing, scouting, spell casting, and keeping their army intact. He is compelled to keep babysitting his army. Another player would be able to quickly throw down a storm, a move a few zealots, then go back to make some more templar and zealots. Both players have the same thoughts. But only the second player has good multitasking. With MBS however, the second player could just intermittently spam 5z6t once in a while without losing sight of his army. After 4-5 games going 5z6t will be so natural that he won't even consciously think he is doing it. How is that not reducing multitasking skill? The fact that you don't realize this only shows how much you lack actual game experience and credibility. Try to think a little bit before you post. First and foremost, not agreeing with you doesn't equate to not thinking before posting. Anyway, what you demonstrated here is the tension between choosing macro or micro. The delicate balance that must be maintained in order to achieve victory. What MBS does though, I think (though it's kind of hard to be completely sure at this point in time, before beta), is that it now requires people to macro and micro at the same time (instead of sacrificing one for the other) as MBS enables it. | ||
|
Aphelion
United States2720 Posts
InRaged argued for 4 nonsensical paragraphs that multitasking was somehow not affected by MBS. He either didn't think or was incapable of thinking. | ||
|
xtian15
Philippines29 Posts
On October 06 2007 12:36 Aphelion wrote: No, I demonstrated that SBS requires significantly more multitasking, and that MBS takes away from it. InRaged argued for 4 nonsensical paragraphs that multitasking was somehow not affected by MBS. He either didn't think or was incapable of thinking. IMHO, MBS would require a significantly different type of multitasking. Blizzard would make sure of it (I hope, but I trust them) AND pro-gamers themselves would find/invent/innovate other things to do with the absence of some of the manual work from SC1. Anyhow, MBS surely affects multitaskng. However, the kind of effect remains to be seen. (But I'm betting that it would create a positive effect as you know by way of my posts and arguments.) | ||
|
Aphelion
United States2720 Posts
Your definitions and assumptions are getting so vague and out there they are starting to lose all meaning. What the hell is this Orwellian speak? Next we are going to have a "different" kind of pro scene based upon "egalitarian" gameplay so as to "reaffirm" the chances of the new player? | ||
|
uriel-
Singapore1867 Posts
Well, they aren't. So until a demo comes out and MBS + Automine are the only added features, all the bullshit here is just that. Bullshit. | ||
| ||
