|
I'm assuming that you are a rank lower than masters at least otherwise you would've responded with your rank, it's not a elitist attitude it just game knowledge. Would you rather be taught by a masters level player or a grandmaster? You want the grandmaster because he's attained a higher rank which is the indication of skill level/knowledge in this game. That's what opinions have to be weighted by, sure a gold league player could have a good opinion but often his knowledge is regurgitated or lacking.
You are comparing apples to oranges again. This isn't about being "coached" or skilled at the game, but about making a game that is fun to play.
The opinion of one single gold leaguer matters just as much as the opinion of a single master league player when it comes to whether they find something enjoyable or not. When it comes to strategy or balance analysis, this ofc differes.
I'm assuming that you are a rank lower than masters at least otherwise you would've responded with your rank,
If there was a valid reason to post my rank (if it actually mattered for the discussion) and you asked me to, I would. But in this context it doesn't.
Game design discsions should be available for anyone, and the validility should be based upon the quality of their arguments. Balance discussions and strategy analysis is a different matter.
|
TL : DR :
"The game is too difficult, make it easier to cheese / all in."
|
On July 20 2015 03:29 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +
I'm assuming that you are a rank lower than masters at least otherwise you would've responded with your rank, it's not a elitist attitude it just game knowledge. Would you rather be taught by a masters level player or a grandmaster? You want the grandmaster because he's attained a higher rank which is the indication of skill level/knowledge in this game. That's what opinions have to be weighted by, sure a gold league player could have a good opinion but often his knowledge is regurgitated or lacking.
You are comparing apples to oranges again. This isn't about being "coached" or skilled at the game, but about making a game that is fun to play. The opinion of one single gold leaguer matters just as much as the opinion of a single master league player when it comes to whether they find something enjoyable or not. When it comes to strategy or balance analysis, this ofc differes. Show nested quote +
I'm assuming that you are a rank lower than masters at least otherwise you would've responded with your rank,
If there was a valid reason to post my rank (if it actually mattered for the discussion) and you asked me to, I would. But om tjos context it doesn't. I think stating ranks to proof authority is just a slippery slope, and I won't do it out of principle. Game design discsions should be available for anyone, and the validility should be based upon the quality of their arguments. Balance discussions and strategy analysis is a different matter.
I'm not comparing apples to oranges, one player is clearly skilled more than the other you would want the one with the better knowledge to coach you why wouldn't you want the higher skilled players making choices for the game over the gold leaguers? But all this detracts from the original point, please respond with your concerns with reverting the change and clear reasons why you think 12 workers should stay and I will respond as best I can with why the 12 worker change is bad for the game.
On July 20 2015 03:34 GGzerG wrote:
TL : DR :
"The game is too difficult, make it easier to cheese / all in."
No it's the exact opposite, the cheeses/allins kept people honest currently the game hyper developes and just loses distinct phases of the game just merging it all into mid/lategame.
|
I'm not comparing apples to oranges, one player is clearly skilled more than the other you would want the one with the better knowledge to coach you why wouldn't you want the higher skilled players making choices for the game over the gold leaguers?
Because both people are going to pay to play the game. Both players are needed for the game to be succesful. The difference is that if you make a game only elite players enjoy, you won't get a lot of people playing the game.
If on the other hand you make a game that is fundamentally fun for more casual players + also fun to watch --> You will have more players playing the game + esports will also do well.
In coaching on the other hand, a gold league can't give good enough advice because he typically knows !@#$%^&* about the game. Game design is just about making the game fun to play (and watch). Here everyones opinion matter.
But all this detracts from the original point, please respond with your concerns with reverting the change and clear reasons why you think 12 workers should stay and I will respond as best I can with why the 12 worker change is bad for the game.
Already did that (I edited my posts so maybe you didn't read it), but here is TLDR:
- The early game decisions you make are typically boring.
- Gettting rid of early game --> You make more interesting decisions per minute.
- Areas where 12 worker start is having unintended consequences can likely be adressed by tweaks/adjustments (e.g. scouting with overlords)
- No mentioning of build orders gained in your OP (which indicates a bias because I find that extremely unlikely). And even if there is an issue with diversity, can't this be adressed with the 12 worker change?
- The time saved is more than just 40 seconds due to players having a stronger econ when Spawning pool finishes.
- Your arguments with mico and 12 worker-start makes no sense. The only "fundamental" impact of 12 worker start is that we fast-forward to the midgame.
|
12 worker start is much more enjoyable to play. No idea how it is to watch, I've never watched a lotv game.
I do feel the need to point out that things are quite as cookie cutter as your comparisons make it seem. For example, open 14/14 as zerg, and you'll notice you actually reach 100 gas long before your pool is done, which means 14/13 is the equivelent to 14/14 in hots.
Other things like 14 overlord, 15 hatch, 16 gas, 15 pool (A typical ZvT opening in HotS), actually speeds up your build considerably because a 6 supply hatchery allows you to skip the 17 overlord common in hots. You can get 2 queens, speed, and 2 sets of lings immediately on pool pop from the extra minerals. This compounds as you get the 4 additional larva from the natural faster.
Just my 2 cents. I play lotv a lot, and much prefer the 12 worker start.
|
On July 20 2015 03:11 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2015 03:09 FeyFey wrote:
dunno I found 9 was actually a good number. Well I found 6 to be the perfect number when they dared to increase the worker count from 4 to 6 xD. As crazy as it sounds, I find 30 workers and starting with a barrack/gateway/pool and two expansions to be a better change. This way you can start to make "actual" decisions from the get-go. E.g. do I want to start a 3rd now? Do I want to tech? Do I want to make an army? You have to make this choice within the first minute of the game.
I think that would be to overwhelming. You jump in and have to hit 20 buttons at once. Could be worked around if the production already has something running.
|
On July 20 2015 02:57 Ovid wrote:
Can I politely ask for your rank in Hots/Lotv and how often you've played Hots/Lotv in the past month?
if we're going down this road.. let's go all the way.
can i politely ask you how many RTS games you've been the head game designer for.
whether its C&C Gens, CoH1, RA2, BW, or WC3.. the top 5 best RTS games ever made (not including the 1 in question) were designed by really good game designers who were mediocre players at best.
|
On July 20 2015 04:02 FeyFey wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2015 03:11 Hider wrote:On July 20 2015 03:09 FeyFey wrote:
dunno I found 9 was actually a good number. Well I found 6 to be the perfect number when they dared to increase the worker count from 4 to 6 xD. As crazy as it sounds, I find 30 workers and starting with a barrack/gateway/pool and two expansions to be a better change. This way you can start to make "actual" decisions from the get-go. E.g. do I want to start a 3rd now? Do I want to tech? Do I want to make an army? You have to make this choice within the first minute of the game. I think that would be to overwhelming. You jump in and have to hit 20 buttons at once. Could be worked around if the production already has something running.
Maybe you would have a 10-second countdown after the game has loaded where you can set up control groups. The point is that if you are going to build that barracks at roughly the same time in 95% of your games, why not just let players start with it.
I prefer that we have more tough decisions where there is no standard/obvious solution.
|
On July 20 2015 04:07 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2015 04:02 FeyFey wrote:On July 20 2015 03:11 Hider wrote:On July 20 2015 03:09 FeyFey wrote:
dunno I found 9 was actually a good number. Well I found 6 to be the perfect number when they dared to increase the worker count from 4 to 6 xD. As crazy as it sounds, I find 30 workers and starting with a barrack/gateway/pool and two expansions to be a better change. This way you can start to make "actual" decisions from the get-go. E.g. do I want to start a 3rd now? Do I want to tech? Do I want to make an army? You have to make this choice within the first minute of the game. I think that would be to overwhelming. You jump in and have to hit 20 buttons at once. Could be worked around if the production already has something running. Maybe you would have a 10-second countdown after the game has loaded where you can set up control groups. The point is that if you are going to build that barracks at roughly the same time in 95% of your games, why not just let players start with it. I prefer that we have more tough decisions where there is no standard/obvious solution.
I think I should start with a spawning pool I mean, it's not like I'm not going to build one. Probably a queen too, at least 1 because that just goes with the hatchery. Especially if Terran is going to have a barracks.
|
On July 20 2015 03:58 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +I'm not comparing apples to oranges, one player is clearly skilled more than the other you would want the one with the better knowledge to coach you why wouldn't you want the higher skilled players making choices for the game over the gold leaguers? Because both people are going to pay to play the game. Both players are needed for the game to be succesful. The difference is that if you make a game only elite players enjoy, you won't get a lot of people playing the game. If on the other hand you make a game that is fundamentally fun for more casual players + also fun to watch --> You will have more players playing the game + esports will also do well. In coaching on the other hand, a gold league can't give good enough advice because he typically knows shit about the game. Game design is just about making the game fun to play (and watch). Here everyones opinion matter.
So you're saying that you didn't play/enjoy hots because of it having 6 workers?
The whole concept of a casual is flawed, people list casuals as time limited simple minded drones and say that games like LoL have a lot of casuals, a game where average gametime is much longer than SC2 and gameplay on a basic level is much less intuitive than the simple core concepts of playing SC2.
Imagine you are Mike Morhaime and you are hiring a game designer, one of them has extensive knowledge of how the game functions and how it plays out when executed correctly the other knows nothing about the game but thinks his changes would be fun. Who are you going to hire?
Ease of playing isn't a prerequisite for what makes a good spectator sport, what makes a good spectator sports is consistency and clear indicators of skill at different aspects of the game. Now transfer the word aspects to phases, a good esports game allows players to show skill at different phases of the game. For example in Dota 2 you might have a team that relies on very strong earlygame (ganking lanes) in order to snowball and win a game, or conversely you might have a team that can weather a earlygame barrage of ganks very well and get to the lategame where their skill shines through. You could make the same of CSGO, some teams are very good at holding positions and others are very good at breaking them, there's clear phases of the game that allow them to differentiate skill. A 12 worker change accelerates the phases to the lategame not allowing players to show skills at any other phase.
Now this may fulfill goals for some people (players might be able to more consistently sit at the top because surviving to lategame is much easier) but it's at the detriment of other styles.
|
People are always quick to point out the fact that builds like 10 pool are lost, but by the same token there's a host of new builds being created. You can literally tech to and drop a super fast baneling nest for example if looking for aggression. Point is we lose old builds, but we gain new ones. I do not see any problem.
|
On July 20 2015 04:05 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2015 02:57 Ovid wrote:
Can I politely ask for your rank in Hots/Lotv and how often you've played Hots/Lotv in the past month? if we're going down this road.. let's go all the way. can i politely ask you how many RTS games you've been the head game designer for. whether its C&C Gens, CoH1, RA2, BW, or WC3.. the top 5 best RTS games ever made (not including the 1 in question) were designed by really good game designers who were mediocre players at best.
You are silver league and sporadically play, I know you're all to eager to jump down my throat based on our previous discussions in this forum.
On July 20 2015 04:02 InfCereal wrote:
12 worker start is much more enjoyable to play. No idea how it is to watch, I've never watched a lotv game.
I do feel the need to point out that things are quite as cookie cutter as your comparisons make it seem. For example, open 14/14 as zerg, and you'll notice you actually reach 100 gas long before your pool is done, which means 14/13 is the equivelent to 14/14 in hots.
Other things like 14 overlord, 15 hatch, 16 gas, 15 pool (A typical ZvT opening in HotS), actually speeds up your build considerably because a 6 supply hatchery allows you to skip the 17 overlord common in hots. You can get 2 queens, speed, and 2 sets of lings immediately on pool pop from the extra minerals. This compounds as you get the 4 additional larva from the natural faster.
Just my 2 cents. I play lotv a lot, and much prefer the 12 worker start.
Did you even read my post? That's the exact problem I'm saying, everything is accelerated the earlygame no longer exists. For the 100th time of saying the builds I picked as the standard are the ones that are smooth builds (builds that keep constant worker production and putting down buildings as and when you can afford it)
On July 20 2015 04:21 ZombieFrog wrote:
People are always quick to point out the fact that builds like 10 pool are lost, but by the same token there's a host of new builds being created. You can literally tech to and drop a super fast baneling nest for example if looking for aggression. Point is we lose old builds, but we gain new ones. I do not see any problem.
As I said earlier assuming every number under the starting worker count is a different potential build that has been cut away it's a net loss for potential builds. The problem is with these builds is because you have 3/4 extra workers if going for a smooth build and you will have the same production, so because of this extra money you potentially and the same infrastructure all ins are much harder to deal with in Lotv since they hit with more things. The best example is ZvZ where if you cut a baneling nest you will die quite easily since you can't micro efficiently enough vs 6 banelings vs 0 not to mention because of how production works if you went for workers instead of units (you don't see fast enough to make the correct call) you will certainly have less.
|
Canada13406 Posts
On July 20 2015 01:54 Geiko wrote:
Problem with these polls is that a significant proportion of voters haven't played lotv abd don't know how good 12 woker start feels.
I like the idea i think its too extreme. I don't see why we cant experiment with 10 workers or even 9 to start with.
|
I was actually furious when they made it so that the rax required supply depot because of all the reaper cheeses, because that killed one of the identity terran had as a race since BW. But people were mostly cool with it because it was a legitimate threat to the game balance. This is just unnecessary tbh, they are trying to turn this into wc3 =\ (and I loved wc3!)
|
On July 20 2015 04:25 Ovid wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2015 04:05 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On July 20 2015 02:57 Ovid wrote:
Can I politely ask for your rank in Hots/Lotv and how often you've played Hots/Lotv in the past month? if we're going down this road.. let's go all the way. can i politely ask you how many RTS games you've been the head game designer for. whether its C&C Gens, CoH1, RA2, BW, or WC3.. the top 5 best RTS games ever made (not including the 1 in question) were designed by really good game designers who were mediocre players at best. You are silver league and sporadically play, I know you're all to eager to jump down my throat based on our previous discussions in this forum. Show nested quote +On July 20 2015 04:02 InfCereal wrote:
12 worker start is much more enjoyable to play. No idea how it is to watch, I've never watched a lotv game.
I do feel the need to point out that things are quite as cookie cutter as your comparisons make it seem. For example, open 14/14 as zerg, and you'll notice you actually reach 100 gas long before your pool is done, which means 14/13 is the equivelent to 14/14 in hots.
Other things like 14 overlord, 15 hatch, 16 gas, 15 pool (A typical ZvT opening in HotS), actually speeds up your build considerably because a 6 supply hatchery allows you to skip the 17 overlord common in hots. You can get 2 queens, speed, and 2 sets of lings immediately on pool pop from the extra minerals. This compounds as you get the 4 additional larva from the natural faster.
Just my 2 cents. I play lotv a lot, and much prefer the 12 worker start. Did you even read my post? That's the exact problem I'm saying, everything is accelerated the earlygame no longer exists. For the 100th time of saying the builds I picked as the standard are the ones that are smooth builds (builds that keep constant worker production and putting down buildings as and when you can afford it)
No, the early game still exists. It's just with higher supply. I still get 12 pooled, or 14/14d, the early bane drops, or 1 base gateway, mass reaper, etc.
Early game's still there. I mean, it's starcraft. If you play the early game, you're going to see a lot more early game. If you play the late game, you're going to see a lot more lategame. Just because the supply is 6 more, doesn't make anything moot. Sure, you can't 6 pool, but you can 12 pool. There's not a bug difference, except I guess the 12 pooler doesn't immediately lose. (Which I would say is a good thing. This opens up more early game options that don't end the game whether it works or not).
Again, I haven't watched any lotv. This is only based on what I've played. And maybe I'm biased having only lost 2 games since beta was released so clearly I'm not playing people my skill level.
That said, I can say I've never played out a lategame scenario. Unless you count that one game nathanias massed thors on coda.
|
On July 20 2015 01:14 Ovid wrote:
I vaguely remember DK talking about he wanted more distinct phases to the game, where different races can take map control with particular units and different times. This isn't going to happen if everyone is on a fast track to 200/200.
There's no such thing as a "fast track to 200". All LotV does with regards to maxed timing is shift them slightly forward.
You're looking at infrastructure timings but the worker count timings are just as important. In terms of worker count, the down-time gained is closer to 1min20secs. This means that in LotV you have between 40 and 80 seconds faster timings than in HotS, there is no "exponential advantage" or "fast track to 200".
You're also making the argument that 12 worker start reduces the possibility for early aggression and forces the players down a boring fast expand macro route. This is false from a theoretical perspective as well as from a practical one.
If you've played any LotV, you'll know that there isn't less cheese and all-ins than in HotS or WoL. I know, I've been cheesing and all-ining most of my games with a >70% win rate since I have access to LotV (>250 games I believe).
The power of aggression is always more or less constant in every starcraft game, regardless of balance. All macro players will always play as greedily as possible and take anything they can get away with. That means that if cheese becomes less strong, people will start trying to get away with nexus first builds, making cheese naturally stronger.
Sure with 12 worker start you lose things like proxy 2 gate or 9 pool builds. Guess what, that means that players are more likely to start skipping that first zealot or marine, opening up the way for different aggressive builds. You'd be amazed the number of free wins I've gotten just rushing a MSC to a terran base who skipped making marines all together.
The main argument for 12 worker start is the gain in time imo. Games last on average about 7-8 real time minutes (estimate, feel free to correct me if you have concrete data), with the occasional 20 minute macro game. This means that 1-2 minutes less on down times allows you to play 10-20% more games. Seriously, it feels terrible going back to playing HotS economy after you've played enough LotV, like you're losing your time making workers.
Edit: I forgot to add I'm master league for credibility's sake (seems to be important around here). My point holds even truer for lower leagues to add to that conversation. Anyone can cheese and win with just about any builds in gold league. I've literally laddered up to master league before on an alt account using only classic 4 gate build and no keyboard hand. The argument that 12 worker start weakens aggressive play early game is really laughable for anything below master.
|
No good player is going to die to 1 base cheese in LoTV it should be totally non existent. You can easily afford to worker scout instantly because of the 12 worker start and you can react appropriately because of that. In high level games there is no early game, you might aswel give everyone 2 full saturated bases straight away.
|
On July 20 2015 04:54 Matt` wrote:
No good player is going to die to 1 base cheese in LoTV it should be totally non existent. You can easily afford to worker scout instantly because of the 12 worker start and you can react appropriately because of that. In high level games there is no early game, you might aswel give everyone 2 full saturated bases straight away.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/legacy-of-the-void/485461-g-d-abusing-adepts
Hum, I might be wrong but I think this guy beat a GSL champion runner-up with a one base built. Thoughts ?
|
I'm undecided so I didn't vote in the poll, cause there isn't an "undecided" option
|
also isn't a '> 12 workers OR some infrastructure already in place', option in the poll -.-
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
