|
On July 08 2015 18:39 Superouman wrote:
Before : "There is not enough micro! Give us more things to micro!"
After : There are too many things to micro! Give us less things to micro!"
Sigh...
This is too unnuanced. People always wanted more "interesting" micro interactions. I think the amount of people who wanted more APM-spam-mechanics were always in the minority.
|
On July 08 2015 18:43 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2015 18:39 Superouman wrote:
Before : "There is not enough micro! Give us more things to micro!"
After : There are too many things to micro! Give us less things to micro!"
Sigh... This is too unnuanced. People always wanted more "interesting" micro interactions. I think the amount of people who wanted more APM-spam-mechanics were always in the minority.
i doubt canata meant that too much apm spam abilities is what makes the game harder for him.
|
On July 08 2015 18:39 Superouman wrote:
Before : "There is not enough micro! Give us more things to micro!"
After : There are too many things to micro! Give us less things to micro!"
Sigh...
That's sadly how blizzard understood it, when the reality was:
Community: "We would like this and this in the game, which would increase micro-capabilities. And we think the game could do with a little bit of this or this, so expanding players get more rewarded."
Blizzard: "We heard you. Extra buttons for all units and everyone gets choked from now on!"
You know, the fun story is that the community concepts all tried to spoonfeed blizzard their own designgoals.
Blizzard said (e.g. Dustin Browder) that they don't want to overload units with abilities and micro in starcraft should come from movement and interesting attacks. The community came with mentioned ideas. Blizzard does a 180degree turn and puts buttons on everything.
Blizzard said that they want consistent bases and they don't want to confuse people by scattering bases all around the map. The community delivers, invents a model that does not only allow players to play the way they are used to (with 3bases), but also does fit into blizzard's accelerated game start. Blizzard does a 180degree turn and suddenly mineral nodes are different from each other within a base and you are forced to scatter all across the map just to maintain your playstyle.
|
Ya I agree with all the comments here...
I have watched many LotV streams and the issues the pro players raised are all legit. I will not play LotV until it is in a state that at least resembles a good game...
The list of 'Blurps' (unbalances, glitches, stupidities etc...) is enormous.
That said:
I believe the game will be fixed....one way or another and I will play it. I have faith in this community. Blizz included to eventually create a Masterpiece of an RTS game.
|
On July 08 2015 18:51 acccky1 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2015 18:43 Hider wrote:On July 08 2015 18:39 Superouman wrote:
Before : "There is not enough micro! Give us more things to micro!"
After : There are too many things to micro! Give us less things to micro!"
Sigh... This is too unnuanced. People always wanted more "interesting" micro interactions. I think the amount of people who wanted more APM-spam-mechanics were always in the minority. i doubt canata meant that too much apm spam abilities is what makes the game harder for him.
Then I doubt Canata previously demanded more active abilities in the game. You can't have it both ways.
Community: "We would like this and this in the game, which would increase micro-capabilities. And I think the game could do with a little bit of this or this, so expanding players get more rewarded."
Blizzard: "We heard you. Extra buttons for all units and everyone gets choked from now on!"
Yes this so much. It's mostly blizzard that has a misconception of the type of micro the community actually wants.
|
I do think the game is slightly, very slightly, too fast now due to the changes to the amount of minerals at each amount.
Since the new mineral changes aren't actually changing the 3 base economy model, I wonder what the game would look like with a revert to the WOL/HOTS style mineral patches and just have everyone start with 2 extra workers to cut down the start time a bit.
Either way I still think LOTV is much more interesting and fun to play compared to HOTS. Everyone is just freaking out because we don't have the pros playing much, and nobody knows how to correctly play against a meta that doesn't exist. If Flash, Jaedong and Stork each streamed it for a month while they were learning the game and what build to do everyone would feel a lot better.
|
[QUOTE]On July 08 2015 19:00 Hider wrote:
[QUOTE]On July 08 2015 18:51 acccky1 wrote:
[QUOTE]On July 08 2015 18:43 Hider wrote:
[QUOTE]On July 08 2015 18:39 Superouman wrote:
Before : "There is not enough micro! Give us more things to micro!"
After : There are too many things to micro! Give us less things to micro!"
Sigh...[/QUOTE]
This is too unnuanced. People always wanted more "interesting" micro interactions. I think the amount of people who wanted more APM-spam-mechanics were always in the minority.[/QUOTE]
i doubt canata meant that too much apm spam abilities is what makes the game harder for him. [/QUOTE]
Then I doubt Canata previously demanded more active abilities in the game. You can't have it both ways.
ur right
|
"Still it needs much improvement. The point is, compared with HotS, it becomes more harder to control your units due to additional active skills. This is quite retrograde, considering games like Hearthstone and Heroes of the Storm, which has recently risen for its 'easy to learn, hard to master' strategy.
LotV is, as I said, going against this current. For instance, entry barrier has been raised; every unit has its active skill and base resources deplete so quickly. Though I`m quite sure that Blizz has its own plan, I must say that a loved the game is the game that ordinary people can easily enjoy.
yeah about that part Im not so sure. Also impressive that BW was so popular considering that it was much harder than LotV...
Harsh but what he says there is bs imo.
|
I keep hearing this kind of complaint about LotV, and it really makes me want to try it.
It's reminiscent of the complaints about Brood War that existed before SC2 had been released.
|
On July 08 2015 18:53 Big J wrote:Community: "We would like this and this in the game, which would increase micro-capabilities. And we think the game could do with a little bit of this or this, so expanding players get more rewarded." Blizzard: "We heard you. Extra buttons for all units and everyone gets choked from now on!"
Nailed it
|
I agree, when you lose as a newer player. Often you're response would be, guess my strategy was wrong, maybe I should get THIS unit instead.
It's really only competitive players that think, if I micro better, I can learn to hold this.
For pro level I think LotV will be amazing, a hard to execute Immortal allin might be able to beat all with inferior micro than you. Even though their counter strategy might be spot on, which makes for consistency in who can be pro players and who cannot. But losing every game to an Immortal allin that you cannot defeat unless you micro better than the opponent is absolutely atrocious for newcomers to the game.
|
On July 08 2015 18:39 Superouman wrote:
Before : "There is not enough micro! Give us more things to micro!"
After : There are too many things to micro! Give us less things to micro!"
Sigh...
Blizzard addressed the community's desire for more micro, but not in the ways that the community suggested. In BW, most units did two things: move and shoot. Everybody can get something to move and shoot (easy to pick up). However, due to the limitations of the engine, getting units to move effectively was extremely hard (e.g. Dragoons, vultures, scouts, corsairs, mutas, unsieged tanks, even carriers). This resulted in the best possible situation for both casual and competitive players, and the audience. It's hard to understand all of these spells and abilities, but a group of units moving and attacking effectively can be understood and admired even by non-players. The 'depth of micro' article here on TL explained this better than I ever could.
We asked for more cool ways to control our units, like less clumping, decreased turning times on some units, moving shots, faster move speeds etc. What we got was a bunch of confusing spells/abilities that all have to be learned individually. Moving and shooting is intuitive, but can be made very hard to master given the right tweaks. Blizzard shouldn't be taking the same old units and slapping some abilities on them - they should be fundamentally changing the ways that those units are moved and controlled by the player.
|
I cant stand the pacing of lotv, imo the pacing of wol/hots is pretty spot on its just there's alot of other problems within that. ive played sc2 since the start and my impression of lotv beta was almost entirely negative. I really don't have much love for hots but its way better than where lotv seems to be going. If lotv stays the way it is I don't think I could bring myself to play it. its like an unnecessarily more complicated version of hots on speed. Also there's too many fucking units in it.
|
On July 08 2015 18:43 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2015 18:39 Superouman wrote:
Before : "There is not enough micro! Give us more things to micro!"
After : There are too many things to micro! Give us less things to micro!"
Sigh... This is too unnuanced. People always wanted more "interesting" micro interactions. I think the amount of people who wanted more APM-spam-mechanics were always in the minority.
I think that the problem is that Blizz is again using community as an excuse to do what they like into the game.
The problems of the game are quite clear:
- Some rigged unit interactions, no way to decide battles with real micro/army positioning. (Mass FF ZvP, PvT-MMM, some stages of ZvT Mech).
- And units whose control has low impact/ lack of micro opportunities or not very responsive. Design of some units, and attack codification values - Movement codification, damage point.
- Forced design of some matchups (lack of flexibility).
- Lack of strong defensive mechanisms/ units.
- Improvable economy model (But I think that the problem is not really on econ itself but strong macroboosting)
- Early-midgame is asimmetrical and explosive, leading to easy, very destructive rushes (specially vs P because it's the race with the weaker macrobooster and Gateways produce too slow - MSC band-aid). Harass options are also very, very very strong most of the times. (Cloak banshee / oracle)
- Game overall moves too fast, specially on lower levels. Everything volatilizes in seconds and there is a ton of stuff to do, specially with the new macro, something that, paired with the low defensive factor, the asimmetric macro strength and the power of harass (Banshee, Oracles, Mutas with regen) makes the game not exactly funny
- Almost 0 introduction to game mechanics / noob friendly environment.
So far, we've been told by Blizz that some of the core aspects of micro, and better defensive units have been given, but in fact, we have very few solutions to the core problems of the game yet. We have a ton of new abilities for sure and some new units, but we haven't solved many things.
We have 3 unit concepts (Ravager Bile, Lurker, Disruptor) that improve some aspects of the game and work relatively well, since they are offensively and defensively strong, and force micro/ positioning from both parts with heavy impact on the outcome of fights, even if units themselves aren't very refined yet. The siege-tank medivac thing is also quite interesting since it works well in low-scale fights and empowers defensive strats involving tanks, but is hard to balance, for sure. Specially since Tanks are already quite strong in TvZ and TvP.
But almost every other issue remains untouched.
We have heard wonderful words about future ideas, but they aren't there just yet.
|
I want more vanilla icecream. Then i get more icecream but its chocolate.
No, i would not be happy. And ITS not what I asked for.
|
On July 08 2015 18:39 Superouman wrote:
Before : "There is not enough micro! Give us more things to micro!"
After : There are too many things to micro! Give us less things to micro!"
Sigh...
It's how micro and active abilities have been implemented more than anything, and how broken unit design is (i.e. Ravagers, Lurkers)
|
I have to agree that there are too many active abilities at this point  . I can't play LotV so I can't really tell if it's unhandleable, but it would be nice to have more basic units that just "work" out of the box and do not require pressing a hotkey every 10 seconds.
I'm alright with the economy though.
|
I hope this point gets adressed in the next community update. The ability frenzy and the overwhelming lack of elegance/simplicity is something that has been brought up like a million times since beta launch and there is no sign Blizzard is ready to call their approach (more micro = more buttons, which is woefully wrong) in question.
|
On July 08 2015 22:18 ZenithM wrote:I have to agree that there are too many active abilities at this point . I can't play LotV so I can't really tell if it's unhandleable, but it would be nice to have more basic units that just "work" out of the box and do not require pressing a hotkey every 10 seconds. I'm alright with the economy though.
exactly. Like lurker or ravager(so called micro-forcing units), Blizz can make it without putting new hotkeys.
|
I see this is a good reason to implement a method where you are required to maintain 5 bases for optimal income. Fewer active abilities, more focus on the macro aspect so it becomes necessary to keep an eye on 5 bases, which also adds to the skill level but doesn't force you into making purely tactical calls after you made some units.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
