That second game by Lucifer is pretty one-sided. The night-elf never made a real army, and just harassed/expoed/towered so there were no major battles, although there were lots of small encounters.

If you want to see an actual intense game with many battles where that apm will kick in, then watch this Sky vs Moon FPVOD (also ~300 apm)

NotSorry

United States6722 Posts

October 09 2007 17:06 GMT

#584

One question...what the hell does apm in war3 have to do with MBS being in SC2?

SoleSteeler

Canada5472 Posts

October 09 2007 19:24 GMT

#585

On October 10 2007 02:06 NotSorry wrote:
One question...what the hell does apm in war3 have to do with MBS being in SC2?

I've not caught up on the past few pages, but I assume it's having to do with the whole "MBS = less skill due to less mouse speed required" thing. Many others have pointed out that's not the point of having to single target buildings... which is something that you need to decide to do, to look away from battle to create more units, to order a scv to mine, you take the time to do that and it can hurt your micro, rather than having everything automated for you (automine), or being able to mass produce with a few button presses, without having to look away from the field of battle.

zobz

Canada2175 Posts

October 10 2007 00:24 GMT

#586

sky didn't look at his base once for like 8 minutes. then again he was also one-basing. but it's nice in starcraft having that obligation to look away from your army from time time, or rather very regularly. and it takes a nother kind of speed to be able to click a probe and b-p then back to your army as efficiently as possible. and it is easier to forget to macro i think when it's a much more significant amount of time and a less natural thing than just some blind finger movements. though clicking buildings is easy and anyone can do it, the same is not true for macroing in a game of starcraft.

lugggy

450 Posts

October 10 2007 12:07 GMT

#587

in that clip (most recent by orangedude) the game looks impeded by the 3d--moving the screen seems to lag. the computer isn't fast enough? won't this also be a problem in sc2?

also it seems a little less intense than scouting while keeping 2 fac going. like scouting with an 800 hp scv. what does this have to do with sc2 anyways. sc2 is going to have lower hp and more units right? if it's requirements are anything like war3's though i think the lag in a vid like this can be a real problem for making it watchable and playable for koreans?

Fen

Australia1848 Posts

October 10 2007 13:54 GMT

#588

Ok, came here because I thought of a good analogy

Take 2 chess players, put em up against each other in a no time limit game. What happens? They get into a stalemate, or one person makes a mistake due to lapse in concentration and the other capitalises and wins.

Take 2 chess players and put em in a game of Suicide chess (5 seconds to move your piece). Suddenly the game takes on a new dynamic, they have all this info they need to process and not enough time to do so. The winner in this game is the person who can quickly analyse whats going on and make the correct decision.

This is how RTS games should be. Players should be constantly in a race against not only the player they are against, but time itself. They have a whole lot of info they have to process, they have a very short space of time to chose a course of action. The person who is able to make good decisions fast wins.

How this relates to starcraft and MBS?
The more stuff you automate, or improve the UI (as you prombsers will call it), the less the players have to process. Suicide chess is hard (and a whole heap of fun) because there is a lot of thought processes that are requried to execute a good chess move, and these are not doable. In starcraft, the thought processes are not as complex, but there are a lot more of them, once again flooding the person and requiring them to make quick decisions and actions. Take out a whole heap of the thought processes, and you get stuck with a much more boring game.

MiniRoman

Canada3953 Posts

October 10 2007 15:24 GMT

#589

That is a very good analogy Fen. A very good one! The fact that there is too much to do during Starcraft is what makes it fun. The better you become the more stuff you are able to do. That's how I see improving. Speed should definantly not be cut down and an increase in speed should be rewarded. "Improving UI" is not the same as handicapping a game. MBS will only hurt the overall funfactor of the game imo.

Manit0u

Poland17831 Posts

October 10 2007 16:03 GMT

#590

On October 10 2007 21:07 lugggy wrote:
in that clip (most recent by orangedude) the game looks impeded by the 3d--moving the screen seems to lag. the computer isn't fast enough?

Lags you see in this video are due its very poor quality (you can only upload certain amount of data to youtube, ~100MB I guess) because someone downgraded it/used shitty codecs, the sound is very bad too. No screen lag during normal wc3 playing.

s4life

Peru1519 Posts

October 17 2007 21:47 GMT

#591

Agree with the op. Part of the reason SC is so popular for viewers is that each player has a unique personality, a way of approaching the game and the macro part of it is a determinant factor. Speed to make decisions is at the core of everything, and these progamers are absolutely incredible at doing this... if you reduce the number of decisions then you put almost everyone on the same starting line... . yeah yeah all of us (including the pros) might have more time to micro, but this formula hasn't worked in WC3, why would it work in SC2? I don't understand why Blizzard cannot see things this way... perhaps they are not interested in producing a game that is expectator-friendly.

fight_or_flight

United States3988 Posts

October 17 2007 21:55 GMT

#592

I have not (more or less) commented in this thread till now. The main reason is that the title "Lets imagine SC1 with MBS" is flawed. Its not SC1 that will have MBS its SC2. We can't really predict all the ways it will be different, and how it will play. So I think everyone's basic argument about speed is right, but in the context of SC2 we can't say much, mainly because we aren't super smart and cant simulate the current build, much less all possible builds, in our brains.

s4life

Peru1519 Posts

October 17 2007 22:25 GMT

#593

On October 18 2007 06:55 fight_or_flight wrote:
So I think everyone's basic argument about speed is right, but in the context of SC2 we can't say much, mainly because we aren't super smart and cant simulate the current build, much less all possible builds, in our brains.

True, but this idea is already implemented in most current RTS, and to my knowledge none of them has become as popular as SC, at least with the audience (including WC3). I am hoping the devs and designers will figure out something for SC2, but it wouldn't be the first time that a group of people is trying hard to 'solve' a 'problem' which didn't need a solution in the first place.

Prev 1 28 29 30 All

Please or register to reply.

Live Events Refresh