EPTLets imagine SC1 with MBS. - Page 3
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Artosis
United States2140 Posts
| ||
|
lugggy
450 Posts
It's just like asking, what if all these games with MBS didn't have it? Would they be better then? What if SC1 was more like War2? What if it was like War1? What if War3 was SC? What if MTG cards weighed 30 lbs? We'll NEVER KNOW dude. If you want to show us that MBS can harm a game, show us where it has actually done so, not just in our imaginations. Name a game that was given MBS, and what happened to it? Still, we would need more than 1 example to really make a case. Probably a dozen or so. What's the point of one example? Tell me this though, are Pusan and iloveoov the best pro gamers? Are all other gamers inferior versions of them because they macro slightly less good than them? If not, then progaming will remain somewhat intact even if Pusan and iloveoov loose their alleged advantage and distinction of pressing 1a2a3a really fast. | ||
|
Klockan3
Sweden2866 Posts
Pros in sc2 will be more like Boxer and less like iloveoov. However if all Boxer lacked in terms of macro was clicking buildings i doubt that he wouldnt take the time to train up this ability making him the supreme God of starcraft progaming. However he cant, not beacuse he is mechanically inept since his micro shows that he is defenitely able to do it, but beacuse he lacks that type of thinking. So you will still have macro players and micro players, just that macro players will micro more than before and micro players will macro more than before since everyone have more time. The gap will be a bit lower due to macro skills giving less returns than before, but it will still be there. | ||
|
Fen
Australia1848 Posts
Also, most decent people dont forget that they need to macro even while attacking. They dont do it because it means they have to pull their attention away from the battlefield. Sure it may only take 2 seconds to get ure barracks building, but in that 2 seconds you have to leave your army by itself. And everyone knows that 2 seconds of bad micro is all it takes to lose a battle. Add MBS and nolonger do people have to worry about their macro while attacking. All they have to do is just click 9p 0z and their macro is taken care of. Macro is always a tradeoff. Spend time on macro and you'll have a larger army, stronger economy to take out the enemy later. Spend time on micro and you have the advantage in the here and now. You give someone the ability to macro without hindering their micro, then theres no longer a tradeoff, the players are no longer forced to chose where their time is best spent. The game becomes all about babysitting your army. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17850 Posts
Lets imagine SC1 with MBS. What the fuck has this to do with SC2? Edit: I also checked if the thread creator is someone who has contributed here in any way and all I can think of is that's a person who appeared here when the SC2 forum showed up. Artosis3 Posts 95 Nigga, please. | ||
|
lugggy
450 Posts
Imagine there's no macro It's easy if you try Pusan below us Above us only Sky Imagine all the people Microing today... Imagine there's no hotkeys It isn't hard to do Nothing to hurt your hands for And auto-workers too Imagine all the people Living life in peace... You may say I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope someday you'll join us And the world will be as one | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17850 Posts
On October 01 2007 00:20 lugggy wrote: Imagine there's no macro It's easy if you try Pusan below us Above us only Sky Imagine all the people Microing today... Imagine there's no hotkeys It isn't hard to do Nothing to hurt your hands for And auto-workers too Imagine all the people Living life in peace... You may say I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope someday you'll join us And the world will be as one Sorry, I'm majorly a WC3/DotA player. Your poem won't get through  | ||
|
Klockan3
Sweden2866 Posts
On October 01 2007 00:17 Manit0u wrote: Edit: I also checked if the thread creator is someone who has contributed here in any way and all I can think of is that's a person who appeared here when the SC2 forum showed up. I see a lot of people trying to get into the hardcore starcraft community(Or any large and strong community for that matter) by trying to agree with everything the "Cool" guys say. Theyre just the average pawn trying to get accepted to a strong group wich will strengthen their ego. Now i dont say that the OP here is such a person, just that ive a lot of posts wich are very likely to be with this purpose on this forum. | ||
|
Servolisk
United States5241 Posts
Not that I don't like the 1a2a3a4a5a6a7a t f3zzzddtk 1a2a3a tt f4zzzzzzzz 1a2a3a4a5a6a7a... After all, there is just something satisfying about 1a2a3a4a5a1a2a3a4a5a1a2a3a4a5a1a2a3a4a5a1a2a3a4a5a .. I could just sit here all day and do that  But it's pretty plausible they will find some substitute.. there are unlimited possibilities, so there is a small chance that they might make a better game. And I think it's best they don't just try to do an expansion to BW. If SC2 < BW, keep playing BW. | ||
|
IdrA
United States11541 Posts
he was pointing out how mbs could/would make sc2 a worse game by showing how mbs would have essentially destroyed sc1 progaming. Edit: I also checked if the thread creator is someone who has contributed here in any way and all I can think of is that's a person who appeared here when the SC2 forum showed up. Nigga, please. you have a little more than half as many posts as me, does that mean im free to disregard whatever you say? he made a well reasoned, well supported post. his post count is irrelevant to the quality of what hes saying. and, interestingly enough, he joined tl.net before you did. | ||
|
Servolisk
United States5241 Posts
On October 01 2007 00:47 IdrA wrote: he was pointing out how mbs could/would make sc2 a worse game by showing how mbs would have essentially destroyed sc1 progaming. Manit0u was pointing out how illogical that is... Anything major you add from SC2, or elsewhere, to BW is going to make BW, a balanced game, bad. | ||
|
lugggy
450 Posts
On October 01 2007 00:52 Servolisk wrote: Manit0u was pointing out how illogical that is... Anything major you add from SC2, or elsewhere, to BW is going to make BW, a balanced game, bad. This is a really good point. What Artosis is trying to do, whether he will admit it or not, in an SC2 forum, is show this: M. MBS must be/might be bad (some vague degree), if it would make a good game bad. S. Adding MBS to SCBW would make it bad. // Therefore MBS is(maybe) bad (M). Not only is this only a probable truth "proved" by one example, the validity of S is called into question by what you said, because: Adding almost anything major from War3 or SC2 to SCBW would make it bad. Yet those things aren't necessarily bad. For instance, if we add Grunts to SC1, that would be bad. Doesn't mean Grunts are bad. etc. Nice point Servolisk. | ||
|
Artosis
United States2140 Posts
Manit0u : you obviously did not read a single post. thank you for being a detective and checking me out. this is my 3rd artosis id. i forgot the passwords to the first 2. i was actually on bnet in the main channel at the time when nazgul himself popped on and told us about teamliquid.net. i only post important things like tournaments that people dont know about or to defend my friends from time to time so sorry i dont have an amazing 2500 posts like you ya damn old schooler. | ||
|
IdrA
United States11541 Posts
he was talking about how it would dumb down the game, prevent all the diversity that is available in the progaming scene right now. the fact that there are many different components to being a good sc player means that people can have different styles, play different ways, and still be succesful. adding mbs(taking away macro) essentially kills the oovs and pusans of progaming, and all the sudden casy and boxer are much less special as they are all thats left. | ||
|
Aphelion
United States2720 Posts
Oh, and Artosis I think Manitou is just pulling your leg. | ||
|
lugggy
450 Posts
On October 01 2007 01:03 Artosis3 wrote: luggy : i am using sc as an example on how progaming would not be as entertaining with MBS. i am not proving that SC2 should not have MBS. i am showing ways that MBS affects the game that people are not thinking about. some people like to watch oov or pusan because of their style. some people like to watch boxer and casy because of their style. some people like nalra's style. all these players have different strengths and weaknesses. MBS does infact detract from something like this. that is what i am saying. almost every single other rts has MBS. i have played 4 other RTS games at the top level. when there is MBS i assure you that every single game looks the same up top. its boring as hell to watch. most people have never even watched these other games because they are boring to watch. taking away =any= excitement from an already fringe profession such as progaming is hurtful to eSports as a whole. i never said iloveoov or pusan were the best progamers. no other players are not inferior versions. pusan and iloveoov both view the game as a macro based game. they play games with the idea to make more units then their opponents. it is one of the many ways that people can play. "...progaming will remain somewhat intact even if Pusan and iloveoov loose their alleged advantage and distinction of pressing 1a2a3a really fast." progaming will remain somewhat intact ...i dont mean to say that progaming would die from MBS. but again i would not watch progaming if everyone macroed perfectly. Manit0u : you obviously did not read a single post. thank you for being a detective and checking me out. this is my 3rd artosis id. i forgot the passwords to the first 2. i was actually on bnet in the main channel at the time when nazgul himself popped on and told us about teamliquid.net. i only post important things like tournaments that people dont know about or to defend my friends from time to time so sorry i dont have an amazing 2500 posts like you ya damn old schooler. oh give me a break now you've reduced your argument to this "some people like to watch oov or pusan because of their style." that's your real reason for being anti-MBS? for the Pusan and oov fans? Lots Of Laughs, dude, Lots Of Laughs. Blizzard should not implement some feature because, then, Pusan and OOV fans will be lost. AHHH. Do you want us to believe all other RTS are inferior to SCBW because they have MBS? That is unlikely sir... | ||
|
Artosis
United States2140 Posts
lugggy : if this was an Age of Empires 3 forum i would make posts about MBS in AoE3. but its not. the people here have played SC1 and know about the SC1 progaming scene. all im talking about is how MBS affects competitive play. if you look at every other RTS ever then MBS is not a positive. it is a negative. the easier you make a game the less diverse it will be. SC1 has the greatest diversity so it is a good example. | ||
|
Artosis
United States2140 Posts
| ||
|
lugggy
450 Posts
edit: I'm with you in your preference for games without MBS, but using fallacies is not the way. | ||
|
Artosis
United States2140 Posts
| ||
| ||
