|
On October 14 2007 21:52 ForAdun wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2007 21:11 Brutalisk wrote:
He has a point, though. Macro and speed in general is too important in SC. Micro and strategy is less important than it should be. The pro teams in Korea only look after very fast players, regardless of their initial skill or "game understanding", because this "can come later" (some team manager said that in an old interview).
That's why a shift in general gameplay is necessary. Micro needs to be more important. MBS will help. It would mean that a 500 APM monster would no longer have a speed advantage over a 400 APM monster (that's what the anti MBS posters don't like), but this is a necessary evil. Players need to concentrate more on micro and strategy instead of just "out-clicking" your opponent. I don't see this as a disadvantage or "dumbing down" of the game. It's quite the opposite in my book.
A pure macro player should never have an edge over a pure micro player, or at least equal chances... macro is a far too "dumb" skill. Micro is harder and different in each game situation, and therefore should be valued more.
But in SC today, it's like 40% micro 60% macro or at best 50/50. It should be 60/40, and the 40 are only there to keep the player busy during times where there is no fighting.
If there is fighting, what's so wrong with having more attention for your army?
Just imagine how many units you could use that aren't viable in SC1 because they're too difficult to use (ghosts, queens, dark archons, hallucination, disruption web vs. Terran...)
All the stuff no one does in SC1 because it's too hard to micro could suddenly become viable and this could change the game completely (for the better, hopefully) because there's more variety.
Macro is stupid and repetitious. If you like it, that's okay, but much more people don't like it, especially the casual gamers. So you have to adapt to it. Or stay with SC1. I can't even tell how much bull**** you're talking. I marked everything red that is wrong, wrong and wrong again by fact. And I was very careful with the marks! I will cover the rest of your post in the following: That unknown team manager saying speed is more important than strategy in an old interview that nobody ever read. WTF?? Could you please tell me the link to this fictionary interview? Or have you ever tried playing competitively on a ladder? Obviously not. If you don't know strategies you can't have a positive score. That's a fact, not an opinion. Then, you don't even tell why you want APM to be less important. Come on, say it! Can't you get above 150 APM or what? Do you feel small? Nobody can "out-click" anybody, perhaps you feel that way because you don't understand enough about sc:bw. Get a better understanding of this game and you can beat 500 APM monsters with crappy 150-200 APM. No kidding. How do you come to the conclusion that macro-players have an edge over micro-players? Micro and macro is about 50/50 in sc:bw and it differs a lot by matchup/strategy. One game is more micro-intensive, another one is more macro-intensive. I doubt that you ever used bwchart to analyse games. It's a very accurate tool to tell game statistics. Nothing's wrong about paying attention to the army if there's fighting, but here's the counter-question: what's wrong about not paying attention to the army if there's fighting? The answer is always: nothing. Only your animosity against macro-players, maybe. Too hard to micro, lol come on. It is supposed to be hard, but that doesn't make it too hard. Or - once again - only for you it may be too hard, but not for us! This is exactly what we want! It must be hard for everybody so that only a few can master it - those who invest time to train it. The others must realize that they can only use those units if they don't manage their bases at the same time. It is sure fun to talk to friends, play games, eat donuts and make love to some girl while driving a car, all at the same time - but it is not very clever. By the way just to let you know: hallucination and disruption web against terran is not used because it isn't cost-effective. Got nothing to do with our (in)ability to use it. To me this proves that you don't know competitive sc. For your statement about macro and stupidity I would like to murder you. Just kidding. Or maybe I am serious. I don't know.
Why aren't you banned yet??? Mods didn't tolerate such retarded flaming and complete ignorance back in the day.
JulyZerg had 1300 gamei when he was recruited, and the "unknown" team manager is the manager of the fucking SKT1, it's unknown to you only because you're an ignorant little fuck.
Also, 1300 was very low, I had to mention it, because you obviously couldn't know that.
|
On October 14 2007 23:13 mdb wrote:
The only solution for me is that SC2 has two modes. One mode, lets call it - "pro mode". Withouth MBS,automining etc.. This mode will be used for Korea,WCG,big cash tournaments. And "noob mode" with MBS and all the WC3 stuff. This will be used for battle.net, friendly games, etc...
As SC2 is expected to be super-big in pro-gaming I see this as the only way everyone to be happy.
On October 15 2007 04:08 NotSorry wrote:
Screw it, just put all the easy mode crap in, just have it all toggle and have it all turned off for ladder and league play. It will be the new generation of $$$BGH$$$ players who everyone just mocks and laughs at while playing competitive mode. So the random newbs are happy for the first 2-3 months till they move to the newest game with better graphics and fully automatic play.
And which should Blizzard balance the game for? SC was designed assuming SBS, and SC2 is being designed assuming MBS. It is effectively impossible to balance for both modes simultaneously, so Blizzard will have to commit to one or the other if they want SC2 to be well-balanced.
The best and most likely solution, imo, would be for Blizzard to release the game with MBS (assuming that it doesn't cripple competitive play) and have someone make a mod that implements SBS (or, alternatively, go the whole nine yards and recreate the SC interface or even SC in SC2), with the gameplay rebalanced accordingly. Even if MBS doesn't harm the gameplay at all, there will still be a considerable portion of SC players who feel that the new interface is too "different", and this will be a good alternative for them.
|
Well of course it should be balanced around competitive play, you think people that play BGH could even tell what balance is, seriously go join one of the games and all you hear is X is imba, Y is imba. You think they really care about balance? All they want is to have 15gate goons all coming out at once.
|
Then there's no point in including MBS in the first place, since the gameplay with MBS will be horribly broken if the game is designed with SBS in mind. It'd be the same result as if you just tacked MBS onto SC without any other changes.
|
So? If your not in competitive play, balance isn't a big deal anyways. Even in SC BW the balance is different at different skill levels. MBS players will be people looking for a casual, easy game on BGH. Its noob mode. Balance isn't important.
|
Huh? Balance is crucial for a fun gameplay experience, no matter what level you are. An RTS is much less fun for everyone if there's one dominant strategy that will always win over others. And the reason you hear BGHers say "x is imba, y is imba" is because in BGH, they are imbalanced. Blizzard didn't design the game with infinite resources in mind, and therefore units that are not used in low-money because they are cost-ineffective are used in BGH, and they end up imbalancing the game. Similar imbalances would happen with MBS in an SC2 designed around SBS.
|
On October 15 2007 05:11 Aphelion wrote:
Balance isn't important.
It sure is, saying that low level players dont care about balance is extremely ignorant. Sure it takes more imbalances for it to be noticeable at low level, but its still important to be there.
If for example toss>all at low level then all low level players would go toss and it would get extremely boring after a short while with only mirrors so they would quit quite soon then.
|
On October 15 2007 04:27 lololol wrote:
Why aren't you banned yet??? Mods didn't tolerate such retarded flaming and complete ignorance back in the day.
JulyZerg had 1300 gamei when he was recruited, and the "unknown" team manager is the manager of the fucking SKT1, it's unknown to you only because you're an ignorant little fuck.
Also, 1300 was very low, I had to mention it, because you obviously couldn't know that.
Well, I can't find any flames in my posts. Some may find me ignorant, like you for example, but that's just taste. I find it more ignorant to talk about the progaming scene not knowing too much about it.
I didn't know that it was the SKT T1 (yes, that's spelled correctly) manager who said that, but is that a crime? From my point of view no, it is not. Or do I have to explain to you what crime is?
I know that 1300 was low since I myself was only 1500. Poor me, I was better than July yet I'm not a pro.
PS: I see flames in your post.
|
Norway28689 Posts
you were very very ignorant and honestly, that's worse than flaming. (unless your ignorance is the kind of ignorance where you ask a question, instead of dismiss information you didn't have as unimportant, while it was important.)
i dont feel like banning tho
but you should really educate yourself more before formulating opinions on these boards.
|
This is not fair. I did not make a mistake, instead I was getting attacked verbally from this lololol guy. Your opinion please.
|
Then, you don't even tell why you want APM to be less important. Come on, say it! Can't you get above 150 APM or what? Do you feel small?
For your statement about macro and stupidity I would like to murder you. Just kidding. Or maybe I am serious. I don't know.
To answer your "fair" question, read the commandments. I swear, new posters don't even know what that is -_-;;
http://teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=17911
|
On October 15 2007 03:48 ForAdun wrote:
Progamers can manage their bases and their units simultaneously, yes even spellcasters! I don't know where you got your info from that progamers were not able to do that. They are! [...]
I see it differently. The longer the game lasts, the more progamers are struggling to keep up with all the tasks. It's really not difficult to see. They are very good, obviously, but still far from perfect. Which means that there is room for giving them a little bit of a "helping hand" for macro (with MBS), without making the game too easy or boring.
MBS is a good idea, that's true.
But it's also a bad idea and you sure know that.
The question is: which side of the fanbase do you want to disturb? The one that already exists and probably stays for a long while or the one that comes and goes by and never shows up again?
Or are you clever and choose not to disturb either side?
I think that MBS must be tried out (and Blizzard is doing it), and tested thoroughly during beta. If it turns out to be seriously damaging to competitive play, and there's no way to work around it, then they should leave it out of course. I want the game to be competitive. I just hope that MBS works and that SC2 gameplay is different (different, not easier) from SC1: less macro intensive, more micro/harass/tactics intensive.
|
But why do progamers need to be perfect? Why is it neccessary to give them a "helping hand"? Isn't it more interesting to see different styles coming up like it happened and still happens in sc:bw? Do you really want progamers to achieve perfection? Perfection is so... just boring...
|
This is why I didn't want to bother reading all the pages of posts in the other MBS threads; they all go off topic and into bitching/flaming/spamming mode.
Like someone said, the game is already being developed with MBS in mind (warp-gates as an example); it's going to be too much trouble to go back and rebalance it for SBS, so unfortunately I'm pretty sure they are going to stick with MBS.
Either way, I don't really care. The only thing that kind of bothers me is the auto-mining, since that allows you to completely ignore your workers except for pressing the hotkey to build them every once in a while.
|
|
|
On October 15 2007 07:08 noobienoob wrote:
Either way, I don't really care. The only thing that kind of bothers me is the auto-mining, since that allows you to completely ignore your workers except for pressing the hotkey to build them every once in a while.
I dunno, there are plenty of other things you have to do with your workers: using them to build buildings (and remembering to send them back to mine, unless you shift-click the minerals), and moving them en masse, whether for maynarding, all-in defense or rush, or retreating from a drop if you have no defense. I wouldn't say you'd get away with ignoring them with automine, but you don't have to go back every time and hold their hand on the way to the resources.
Still, having a slight pause before the newly built worker goes to the minerals, like the pause units take in between shift-clicked actions in SC, might be a better solution. That's why we have betas. 
|
On October 15 2007 04:08 NotSorry wrote:
Screw it, just put all the easy mode crap in, just have it all toggle and have it all turned off for ladder and league play. It will be the new generation of $$$BGH$$$ players who everyone just mocks and laughs at while playing competitive mode. So the random newbs are happy for the first 2-3 months till they move to the newest game with better graphics and fully automatic play.
QFT
|
On October 15 2007 07:25 1esu wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2007 07:08 noobienoob wrote:
Either way, I don't really care. The only thing that kind of bothers me is the auto-mining, since that allows you to completely ignore your workers except for pressing the hotkey to build them every once in a while. I dunno, there are plenty of other things you have to do with your workers: using them to build buildings (and remembering to send them back to mine, unless you shift-click the minerals), and moving them en masse, whether for maynarding, all-in defense or rush, or retreating from a drop if you have no defense. I wouldn't say you'd get away with ignoring them with automine, but you don't have to go back every time and hold their hand on the way to the resources. Still, having a slight pause before the newly built worker goes to the minerals, like the pause units take in between shift-clicked actions in SC, might be a better solution. That's why we have betas. Well, that's obvious, but I meant the macroing part of workers.
Actually having to go through and constantly tell your workers to go and mine in each base/expansion every few seconds is a lot more work than just pressing the hotkey for each building and not worrying about telling it to go mine. A lot more work. The consequences of not keeping up with this are also very significant.
I honestly think that people are exaggerating how much of an advantage MBS actually gives. It really doesn't make things SO MUCH EASIER that they no longer have to worry about macro. You'll still have plenty to worry about macroing, there's just slightly less keys/clicks to press. From what I see only big advantage you get over SBS is the ability to change rally points much more easily, which I think is actually a nice thing.
Anyway, I'm done with this thread, obviously most people have already made up their mind on which side they are on, and they aren't going to change it, no matter what is said, so it's pointless on debating about it. On another note, I tried reading through some of the pages of those threads posted, but the retardedness of some of the posts in there were really just that bad. There's just too many essay-length pointless posts or arguments just going around in a circle, not really making any progress with what they're trying to argue, with the occasional 5-post noob jumping in and saying "FUKC U PRO-MBS=U NUB," to get through. Lol it's pretty funny though.  I do agree that they are making the game interface a lot easier, which is a bad thing as many people pointed out, but MBS isn't the sole reason for it.
|
|
|
On October 15 2007 17:21 noobienoob wrote:
I honestly think that people are exaggerating how much of an advantage MBS actually gives. It really doesn't make things SO MUCH EASIER that they no longer have to worry about macro. You'll still have plenty to worry about macroing, there's just slightly less keys/clicks to press. From what I see only big advantage you get over SBS is the ability to change rally points much more easily, which I think is actually a nice thing.
This is like saying you still have to worry about car crashes but you don't need a seatbelt anymore. Does that make sense?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
