|
On October 02 2007 09:09 AA-RaVaGeR wrote:
What is wrong with "long intense micro battles"? They seem far more enjoyable than not even looking at the battle because you are too busy clicking your gateways.
Snoopysnacks=Fagtard K thx.
Read the OP and gtfo.
I put my name on the list, and I will elaborate more as soon as I get time to formulate my thoughts.
|
there are pictures of him there, along with tasteless and the rest of the tl.net crew
all of whom also wrote blogs and posts about how easy the game was and how they dominated everyone else.
|
Valhalla18444 Posts
On October 02 2007 09:03 AA-RaVaGeR wrote:None of you have actually played sc2 and seen what it plays like with the new abilities and many new things that you can do instead of the boring click each of your 15 gateways individually gayness zzzzzz. Finally sc2 is being made by the former wc3 team so Gee Gee. And yes, I really enjoyed wc3 and it does have a pro gaming community etc. www.wcreplays.com for pro wc3 matches.
You'd do well to mind your manners.
Voicing your opinion is always encouraged, but if you continue to do so in such an abrasive manner, you'll find yourself without a voice with which to be opinionated.
|
On October 02 2007 09:11 useless wrote:
We could also go the safe route and keep all the old units. We know what works already, so why fix what aint broken, mirite?
agreed. Who wants retarded crypt fiend stalkers and immortals when we can have good ol dragoons.
After all no one will be able to use the stalkers blink anyway because they will be sop busy clicking their buildings.
|
It doesn't have to be so black and white, there have been many compromises posted in the discussions on MBS that are neither pure non-MBS nor pure MBS.
Being "safe" is not necesarily the best thing to do. If you're always safe you'll never enjoy anything new, you'll be stuck in your comfort zone forever. Don't be afraid to let go of things you are used to once in a while, you just might find something better. If it's not better, you won't see the reasons why if you don't have a clear head. No reason to get angry at the world.
It's hard to reason with someone that is juiced up on emotion. Stop, relax and think. Put the torch down, rebellion isn't the way.
|
On October 02 2007 08:51 AA-RaVaGeR wrote:
I have never seen such a biased and disgusting topic before. Mbs is going to be in sc2 and if cavemen like you don't like it you can stick to sc1. quit trying to crapify sc2 for the 99% of non korean players who want mbs.
NONE of you guys have even played sc2 and you have NO IDEA what it plays like.
wait so u know MBS is going to play out perfectly?
Honestly I don't see the logic in some peoples arguments in this forum... I'm a newbie with 150 APM not even a decent player at all and I don't want MBS because unless Blizzard makes other tasks that will fill up all the time for original macro.. i somehow doubt it will be as fun because what made me change from a WC3 player to a SC player is that fast pace and the feeling that you have to do so much in so little time which is why SC is such a amazing game...
Side Note..
I honestly cant tell why anyone who plays non-money and semi competitively would want MBS added... other than for those who are too lazy to improve and instead want wins over a decent player with little effort.
Also I don't see the point how MBS will keep new players away, if they do play the game chances are they will look at guides and see how other people play.. from there they will usually mimic them. I dont see how clicking a few buildings and pressing z instead of pressing 1z would make a newbie say "wow this is too hard im going to quit now"
Also I personally find it a load of crap if a newbie would say "Oh wow I'm playing Starcraft 2... but it turns out i cant select all my buildings at once and ill built slower therefore I'm going to quit now"
"quit trying to crapify sc2 for the 99% of non korean players who want mbs."
"Quit trying to crapify SC2 for the 99% of players who ACTUALLY want a competitive and intense game"
|
On October 02 2007 09:14 AA-RaVaGeR wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2007 09:11 useless wrote:
We could also go the safe route and keep all the old units. We know what works already, so why fix what aint broken, mirite?
agreed. Who wants retarded crypt fiend stalkers and immortals when we can have good ol dragoons. After all no one will be able to use the stalkers blink anyway because they will be sop busy clicking their buildings.
no, YOU will be unable to use blink because you are a 60 apm war3 newb who has decided that sc2 has to be dumbed down to the point where even you can be good at it, no matter what that does to everyone else.
|
Ravager, you would be wise to ignore this thread. Its like being black and walking into a KKK meeting in the south.
Anyways someone should use that petition website and post a 'PRO MBS' petition as well as a 'ANTI MBS' one.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On October 02 2007 09:14 AA-RaVaGeR wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2007 09:11 useless wrote:
We could also go the safe route and keep all the old units. We know what works already, so why fix what aint broken, mirite?
agreed. Who wants retarded crypt fiend stalkers and immortals when we can have good ol dragoons. After all no one will be able to use the stalkers blink anyway because they will be sop busy clicking their buildings.
I don't really see how new units are at all comparable to MBS (an interface feature)?
Besides, I'm 100% sure I could handle blinking without MBS, it's no harder than microing a reaver+shuttle or a bunch of dragoons vs zerglings or whatever.
On October 02 2007 09:16 CharlieMurphy wrote:
Ravager, you would be wise to ignore this thread. Its like being black and walking into a KKK meeting in the south.
Anyways someone should use that petition website and post a 'PRO MBS' petition as well as a 'ANTI MBS' one.
Lol, as fitting as that analogy is, it does kind of bring up the point that it's probably better to be civil, lest we end up really looking like the KKK/other extremist group.
|
the majority of the people who want MBS are Fastest Map Possible players/BGHers/other money mappers/low-post ppl/Newbies~ -_-
i remember when i use to play ZC and FMP and wished for MBS lol.....
ffs no MBS for SC2 =P
http://www.petitiononline.com/petition.html <----
|
why change the basics of a great game which makes the game great?
|
spiritofthetuna signed
EDIT: oh right, reason
cause i don't want SC2 to be a snoozefest in mechanics
|
On October 02 2007 09:14 AA-RaVaGeR wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2007 09:11 useless wrote:
We could also go the safe route and keep all the old units. We know what works already, so why fix what aint broken, mirite?
agreed. Who wants retarded crypt fiend stalkers and immortals when we can have good ol dragoons. After all no one will be able to use the stalkers blink anyway because they will be sop busy clicking their buildings.
I'm sure if your using stalkers to harass, its not that "intensive" to build while you do a few blinks with a stalker.. Isn't that the same difficulty as that hot key trainer UMS where you have to constantly run your SCV from a zealot while building your base from scratch?
If your talking about large battles... I'm pretty sure theres better things to do than microing your group of stalkers back and forth...
|
On October 02 2007 08:51 AA-RaVaGeR wrote:
I honestly cant tell why anyone who plays non-money and semi competitively would want MBS added... other than for those who are too lazy to improve and instead want wins over a decent player with little effort.
How the fuck does that even make sense? Why wouldn't the "decent" player still win (assuming he's the better player). The better player will always still win, with or without MBS
Anyways, I don't really care about MBS, it won't affect my decision on whether or not I'm going to buy the game.
|
hold the signatures and stuff until he puts up the petition on one of the sites, or just remember you have to sign there too when its up
but feel free to contribute anything you think should be in the petition itself.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On October 02 2007 09:26 SoleSteeler wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2007 08:51 AA-RaVaGeR wrote:
I honestly cant tell why anyone who plays non-money and semi competitively would want MBS added... other than for those who are too lazy to improve and instead want wins over a decent player with little effort.
How the fuck does that even make sense? Why wouldn't the "decent" player still win (assuming he's the better player). The better player will always still win, with or without MBS Anyways, I don't really care about MBS, it won't affect my decision on whether or not I'm going to buy the game.
It may not be enough to make a significantly worse player beat a better one, but it will reduce that players edge, thus introducing more 'variance' in results. IE luck.
I'm against anything that reduces the edge a better player has, but I'm pretty sure it would be a mistake to not even try it in the beta, I don't know much about programming but I'm assuming it's not something that's hard to change..
|
I don't think that Ravager understands that the MBS is totally different in a low unit cap game and a high unit cap game.
Maybe this will make sense to him; What if we changed war 3 to have 2-3 gold mines at every expansion trippled a trees chop-hp and change the unit cap to 200 (more than double the 90) and remove the upkeep. Doesn't that sound like shit?
|
On October 02 2007 09:21 [Clean]Soap wrote:the majority of the people who want MBS are Fastest Map Possible players/BGHers/other money mappers/low-post ppl/Newbies~ -_- i remember when i use to play ZC and FMP and wished for MBS lol..... ffs no MBS for SC2 =P http://www.petitiononline.com/petition.html <----
I'd imagine Fastest and BGH players to be THE MOST adverse to MBS
|
Korea (South)11598 Posts
|
you're going to need something alot better than a petition to change their minds.
i'd suggest: bribes, kidnapping, extortion, letters (full of logic), or whatever other handle you can grab on a blizzard employee.
The petition (if there was one) for pro-MBS would be 100 times longer than anti-MBS. If, in the off-chance that i am wrong, your petition won't convince blizzard otherwise.
edit - i'm not trying to discourage the fight for SBS, but actually encouraging those of you that want to fight for SBS to actually to take action that can go somewhere!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
