EPTYou'd have to work around that by forcing the player to "toggle" between building selection and unit selection. Which would just complicate things. Bad idea.
Voted for the real deal: "hotkey + unit to mass build"
[Poll] MBS implementation (or not) - Page 2
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Brutalisk
794 Posts
You'd have to work around that by forcing the player to "toggle" between building selection and unit selection. Which would just complicate things. Bad idea. Voted for the real deal: "hotkey + unit to mass build" | ||
|
EpiK
Korea (South)5757 Posts
| ||
|
YinYang69
United States255 Posts
| ||
|
sushiman
Sweden2691 Posts
| ||
|
ForAdun
Germany986 Posts
On October 09 2007 21:18 YinYang69 wrote: Ah yes the "real sc fans". Damn us noobs for wanting to give mbs a chance. Never change a running system. | ||
|
MyLostTemple
United States2921 Posts
keep starcraft elite | ||
|
Aphelion
United States2720 Posts
On October 10 2007 03:16 MyLostTemple wrote: fuck MBS keep starcraft elite | ||
|
NotSorry
United States6722 Posts
| ||
|
MyLostTemple
United States2921 Posts
| ||
|
SoleSteeler
Canada5472 Posts
| ||
|
Lukeeze[zR]
Switzerland6838 Posts
On October 09 2007 10:03 CharlieMurphy wrote: I'm so sick of these MBS threads. | ||
|
jtan
Sweden5891 Posts
| ||
|
Brutalisk
794 Posts
Saying that there is still a balance between macro and micro is just not true anymore. It was in 1998-2003 or so. Macro needs to take a step back. MBS will prevent stupid APM machines from becoming too good. Plus, it'll be easier for newbies, which means the scene gets bigger. | ||
|
brambolius
Netherlands448 Posts
Its basicly the best of both worlds so why not? It will probably compare to BGH/Fastest type maps. As people get more into the game they stop playing(using) bgh/fastest maps(MBS). And Blizzard is happy becouse they can implement this new function and hype about it  .So ppl of tl.net, change ur IP's and revote plz  | ||
|
NotSorry
United States6722 Posts
| ||
|
IdrA
United States11541 Posts
On October 10 2007 06:37 brambolius wrote: One question for all you "NO MBS" voters. Why not pick the "MBS OPTIONS" choice instead? Its basicly the best of both worlds so why not? It will probably compare to BGH/Fastest type maps. As people get more into the game they stop playing(using) bgh/fastest maps(MBS). And Blizzard is happy becouse they can implement this new function and hype about it .So ppl of tl.net, change ur IP's and revote plz eh, it can segment the community to do it like that. when you have a significant step between 'skill levels' like that, it discourages some people from making the transistion. like, some of the people who play money maps now could potentially become good low money players, they just never have any desire to switch. if there was no money/low money seperation there would be no big jump to make, they would just gradually progress up low money (assuming that was all there was to play) so keeping everything more continuous is better, if possible. | ||
|
XCetron
5226 Posts
On October 10 2007 06:48 IdrA wrote: eh, it can segment the community to do it like that. when you have a significant step between 'skill levels' like that, it discourages some people from making the transistion. like, some of the people who play money maps now could potentially become good low money players, they just never have any desire to switch. if there was no money/low money seperation there would be no big jump to make, they would just gradually progress up low money (assuming that was all there was to play) so keeping everything more continuous is better, if possible. gotta take into consideration how a large percentage of those money players would have switched to other games instead of going for low money. I mean you cant say that anyone that played money map would have played low money had that been the only choice for melee. There still plenty of UMS and such to play and they coulda just went on to WC3 | ||
|
Aphelion
United States2720 Posts
On October 10 2007 04:27 MyLostTemple wrote: i also think this poll should stay up, it's more logical than a petition If only we can make sure blizz forum posters aren't coming in here to rig the vote enmass. | ||
|
Aphelion
United States2720 Posts
On October 10 2007 06:20 Brutalisk wrote: SBS ultimately leads to the downfall of several great players like Boxer or Yellow who concentrate on the micro and strategy side. MBS will help them in a SC world that's increasingly defined by macro. Saying that there is still a balance between macro and micro is just not true anymore. It was in 1998-2003 or so. Macro needs to take a step back. MBS will prevent stupid APM machines from becoming too good. Plus, it'll be easier for newbies, which means the scene gets bigger. Eh, no. Micro just developed earlier, and I'd argue that its getting even more important just recently. Look at the next-gen protosses. Free, Stork, Bisu - their success and renaissiance is keyed to their incredible control and risky strategies built upon that. Thats why they succeeded where the old Toss Kings failed. Even Anytime, his two OSL final appearances are due to good micromanagement. And your last two sentences are retarded. I genuinely hope you don't mean that. | ||
|
Funchucks
Canada2113 Posts
| ||
| ||
