Hider, the micro is completely different. Some examples of the micro:
- Fix weird patterns to not take loses with Jet fighters and bombers to forego defenses. - To avoid units being killed, cycling them. That was incredible important with USA tanks and regen droids for example, you wanted to keep units alive due to experience. - Humvee drops to grenade withouth taking missile damage, or against tanks for laser guided missiles. - Target firing exactly the amount of shots required to kill the unit to be more cost efficient. IE : You required 2 Tomahawks to kill the most basic tank, if you had 6 Tomahawks you wanted them in 3 different groups, or you had to be very fast and be able to click on them (i wasn't, so i basically used every single control group for everything... so i manually built in that game instead of control groups).
The micro was different because of the game, it doesn't neccessarily mean it wasn't there. It wasn't twitch micro, but there was always to improve the odds, and that required micromanagement. I could take a whole army with a much bigger cost just by using jets, kiting with tanks with upgrade range and tomahawks.
The game itself lends to micro being way more important than macro because of the reason ahswtini said, macro was kind of straightforward, in the maps played you didn't have the ability to grow enough to really go crazy with it, and micro was the ultimately defining thing on the winner and the loser (aside game knowledge and build refining).
China was the "stuff together, throw them" kind of army, but that swarm kind of play could be taken apart fairly easilly in the game, but it was definitly the "macro harder" faction as you really wanted to build a lot of stuff, but it had also a lot of rush potential to gain the advantadges required. GLA had a lot of multitasking involved to play effectively, and it was really a pain to play against good players with all the funky stuff they could do with the tunnels and stealth units.
I did as well although I only played it in LAN vs friends and we didn't need to micro as much as you. Like I never microed tanks only target fired. But since GLA was my fav faction I liked to do stealth attacks and micro rocket buggies.
And I still thing Grey Goo looks to be about as much micro intensive as generals was. But only time will tell and better players. All the dev stream players were even beneath my micro in Generals.
On January 04 2015 23:20 -Archangel- wrote: I did as well although I only played it in LAN vs friends and we didn't need to micro as much as you. Like I never microed tanks only target fired. But since GLA was my fav faction I liked to do stealth attacks and micro rocket buggies.
And I still thing Grey Goo looks to be about as much micro intensive as generals was. But only time will tell and better players. All the dev stream players were even beneath my micro in Generals.
I think if you only played in LAN, that implies you didn't play that many games and it wasn't at a particularly high level. I played a lot of clanwars against some of the best and it all came down to micro. I think to say that it has less micro than starcraft would be a disservice.
Here's one of the best ever games played
Keep in mind that in most of these games, players are playing without the minimap
On January 04 2015 20:57 Godwrath wrote: Being super fast or not, it was micro nonetheless, and you could be very cost efficient with it, atleast in my experience (i had a 90% winrate, doesn't mean much, no matchmaking, but i was fairly above average nonetheless), while playing USA on vanilla. I stopped playing the game because people would just disconnect against me after seeing the stats =/
I agree. Slower speed does not mean there is less micro. BW for example is slower than SC2, still it has more micro involved in most situations.
No it's not. BW units have pretty fast movement speed.
I played BW for nearly 10 years and i played SC2 and while some units in BW are faster/or same speed as SC2 units the overall gamespeed is slower in BW (it appears to be faster because you have to do so much stuff though). So what exactly are you trying to tell me?
On January 04 2015 23:20 -Archangel- wrote: I did as well although I only played it in LAN vs friends and we didn't need to micro as much as you. Like I never microed tanks only target fired. But since GLA was my fav faction I liked to do stealth attacks and micro rocket buggies.
And I still thing Grey Goo looks to be about as much micro intensive as generals was. But only time will tell and better players. All the dev stream players were even beneath my micro in Generals.
I think if you only played in LAN, that implies you didn't play that many games and it wasn't at a particularly high level. I played a lot of clanwars against some of the best and it all came down to micro. I think to say that it has less micro than starcraft would be a disservice.
credibility of Petroglyph/greybox declines with each passing day where there is no price revealed. 19 days before the game comes out and there is no official word on the price.
its either a troll or the CM is a moron. CM's trolling is not a wise decision and even more so when it comes to money issues.
no micro in C&C Generals?
The_pwnerer/Jeremy used to go ape-shit describing his incredible C&C Generals micro skills to FPS Doug in Pure Pwnage. "i'll kill u with 1 technical cause like... i just like.. got teh micro".
On January 06 2015 20:08 JimmyJRaynor wrote: The_pwnerer/Jeremy used to go ape-shit describing his incredible C&C Generals micro skills to FPS Doug in Pure Pwnage. "i'll kill u with 1 technical cause like... i just like.. got teh micro".
techrpg the bane of dozers/supply trucks everywhere
On January 04 2015 20:57 Godwrath wrote: Being super fast or not, it was micro nonetheless, and you could be very cost efficient with it, atleast in my experience (i had a 90% winrate, doesn't mean much, no matchmaking, but i was fairly above average nonetheless), while playing USA on vanilla. I stopped playing the game because people would just disconnect against me after seeing the stats =/
I agree. Slower speed does not mean there is less micro. BW for example is slower than SC2, still it has more micro involved in most situations.
No it's not. BW units have pretty fast movement speed.
I played BW for nearly 10 years and i played SC2 and while some units in BW are faster/or same speed as SC2 units the overall gamespeed is slower in BW (it appears to be faster because you have to do so much stuff though). So what exactly are you trying to tell me?
Go look up the movement speed value for Sc2bw that has translated it into Sc2-model values. If you do that, you will then most likely come to the conclusion that using BW as an example that speed isn't relevant for the micro doesn't make sense.
The "pace" difference your talking about is not related to movement speed, but more likely related to the unit pathing and design of specific units.
On January 04 2015 20:57 Godwrath wrote: Being super fast or not, it was micro nonetheless, and you could be very cost efficient with it, atleast in my experience (i had a 90% winrate, doesn't mean much, no matchmaking, but i was fairly above average nonetheless), while playing USA on vanilla. I stopped playing the game because people would just disconnect against me after seeing the stats =/
I agree. Slower speed does not mean there is less micro. BW for example is slower than SC2, still it has more micro involved in most situations.
No it's not. BW units have pretty fast movement speed.
I played BW for nearly 10 years and i played SC2 and while some units in BW are faster/or same speed as SC2 units the overall gamespeed is slower in BW (it appears to be faster because you have to do so much stuff though). So what exactly are you trying to tell me?
Go look up the movement speed value for Sc2bw that has translated it into Sc2-model values. If you do that, you will then most likely come to the conclusion that using BW as an example that speed isn't relevant for the micro doesn't make sense.
The "pace" difference your talking about is not related to movement speed, but more likely related to the unit pathing and design of specific units.
Possible, i never checked the game variables used by sc2bw. Are they accurate? I heard from other top bw players that sc2bw sucks in comparison to real bw (or at least is not the same). BTW i never said that BW is slow. BW is fast paced but still slower paced then most C&C games and SC2. PS: Warcraft 3 was super slow and still had more micro than sc2. So how do you explain that?
EDIT: have to add something else. Movement speed is not everything. Micro is also dependend on other aspects like rate of fire, reaction time of units,animation backswing and attack point.
Trailer was kinda beast. We have evolved. I'll try this out if I can get a good sale price on it. Always good to support other RTS rather than just complaining about the genre dying.
On January 16 2015 15:26 Yoav wrote: I'll try this out if I can get a good sale price on it. Always good to support other RTS rather than just complaining about the genre dying.
one problem though. the official word on the grey goo forums is.. they don't have a price set for the game. the game comes out in a week. LOL
EPT
