EPTWUT ?
Even GM cant inject perfectly, even Life had this thing in most of his replays where he forgets queens.
Your out of your mind to think Injects are easy.
Community Feedback Update - July 31st - Page 2
| Forum Index > Legacy of the Void |
|
ZergLingShepherd1
404 Posts
WUT ? Even GM cant inject perfectly, even Life had this thing in most of his replays where he forgets queens. Your out of your mind to think Injects are easy. | ||
|
purakushi
United States3307 Posts
On August 01 2015 04:50 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote: WUT ? Even GM cant inject perfectly, even Life had this thing in most of his replays where he forgets queens. Your out of you mind to think Injects are easy. By the time Life starts slipping a little bit in injects, it does not matter, because he will have already built up a larvae bank. He either does not have enough minerals to use all of his larvae or he is waiting for tech. | ||
|
PinheadXXXXXX
United States897 Posts
On August 01 2015 04:44 pure.Wasted wrote: Macro is not apparent to viewers. It took soO making it to two consecutive GSL finals for people to start realizing that his success wasn't based off of flukes, but flawless macro. How often do you remember Tastosis saying "wow look at his macro, no other Zerg would have macroed this well!" Brilliant macro only becomes evident to professional casters after they rewatch and study the games they cast. What hope do casuals have of noticing it? I really don't think this should be the focus though. This would be an enormous change to the esports side of Starcraft which I don't like. I like to be able to abuse my opponent's attention in TvZ to mess with their injects, I like the added complexity of chronoboost when facing Protoss, I like that with MULES I can choose to play like Bomber and max out more quickly or choose to play like Taeja and scan everywhere and play a very map-control focused style. I especially have a problem with removing injects because those, to me, feel like 80% of zerg macro whereas mules and chronoboost are less essential. | ||
|
pure.Wasted
Canada4701 Posts
On August 01 2015 04:47 purakushi wrote: Removing things to do in the hopes that players will do something else (that is actually not really related) is not effective. Players do not attack because macro is too difficult. Players do not attack because they want to build up a bigger army, or they do not feel like an attack will be effective, or that they are down on supply/tech. I should have been clearer - I don't disagree with that part of your post at all. Only the notion that macro is always readily apparent, when in truth even casters struggle to correctly identify it as the source of players' successes and failures. My thoughts related to this topic: 1. I don't like MULE/Chrono/Inject. 2. I like tech lab/reactor/creep tumors. 3. I wouldn't mind more "flashy" macro like the above in the game, e.g. WarpGate/GateWay transformations. 4. Cutting the macro mechanics that exist without replacing them will not increase the amount of action in pro games, but it will lower the skill ceiling. I thought Blizzard was aiming for the opposite with LOTV. | ||
|
TT1
Canada10104 Posts
On August 01 2015 04:50 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote: WUT ? Even GM cant inject perfectly, even Life had this thing in most of his replays where he forgets queens. Your out of your mind to think Injects are easy. by that time zerg has 5-6 hatches, you dont need perfect larva injects to stay maxed (alot of zergs even add their queens to their army in that stage of the game).. if you dont know what you're talking pls dont spread misinformation. | ||
|
pure.Wasted
Canada4701 Posts
On August 01 2015 04:49 weikor wrote: Whos to say that "skilled plays" shouldnt be found elsewhere in the game. Clever decision making, positioning and factors like that should decide the outcome of a game more. That's great and all, but these aren't things players can just make up out of thin air. Blizzard has to provide us with units and abilities that can take advantage of clever decision making and positioning, and Disruptors and Ravagers are only one step toward fixing that problem. The beta's far from over though and if they still have new mechanics coming to Zerg and Protoss, I'm all for it. But right now the balance is out of whack, and removing macro abilities will make the game especially easier for Zerg, so they gotta get to experimenting with the counterweight. God I wish they'd just hire Nathanias. | ||
|
ZergLingShepherd1
404 Posts
On August 01 2015 04:54 TT1 wrote: by that time zerg has 5-6 hatches, you dont need perfect larva injects to stay maxed (alot of zergs even add their queens to their army in that stage of the game).. if you dont know what you're talking pls dont spread misinformation. yes you need for tech switches... and yes on 4-5 hatches you still need good injects.... remaxing is a thing you know... They add queens when they have to much of them vs void rays or going with ultralisk i know what im talking about,,, you only speak theory and what you see not what i play as zerg. On August 01 2015 04:52 purakushi wrote: By the time Life starts slipping a little bit in injects, it does not matter, because he will have already built up a larvae bank. He either does not have enough minerals to use all of his larvae or he is waiting for tech. you missed the point not everyone is life and when you plan on more tech switches and remaxes its very important. its like me saying you dont need MULES in late game cuz you have enough money. but you still use it to get even more rich or steal minerals from the enemy bases. | ||
|
ejozl
Denmark3561 Posts
If it takes everyone longer to get to their wished amount of income, it'll drag the game out a lot more and introduce more situations where it's not strategically trivial to say, now I need more army, or now I need more workers. Just please don't automate the process, since the choice between when to Creep Spread and when to Inject is one that brings more depth to the game. Mule/Scan+What to Chrono. | ||
|
purakushi
United States3307 Posts
On August 01 2015 04:52 pure.Wasted wrote: I should have been clearer - I don't disagree with that part of your post at all. Only the notion that macro is always readily apparent, when in truth even casters struggle to correctly identify it as the source of players' successes and failures. My thoughts related to this topic: 1. I don't like MULE/Chrono/Inject. 2. I like tech lab/reactor/creep tumors. 3. I wouldn't mind more "flashy" macro like the above in the game, e.g. WarpGate/GateWay transformations. 4. Cutting the macro mechanics that exist without replacing them will not increase the amount of action in pro games, but it will lower the skill ceiling. I thought Blizzard was aiming for the opposite with LOTV. Alright, I think we are more in line now  though I do not fully agree with all of your points.Macromechanics (MULE/chrono/inject) are important to SC2. Players need reasons to go back (view) to their bases more than just to put down 1-2 buildings every minute or so. Personally, a chrono type macrobooster for all races would be fine to enforce this. Creep tumours are fine as long as the incentive is there (which it is). I do not like reactors, as it is just a passive macrobooster. Wish they removed them and rebalanced everything around the slower Terran macro. I realise that it is much less common to max in LotV, but I have always had complaints of how fast 200/200 comes in SC2 due to macroboosters and increased supply costs (compared to BW -- Zerg has no 1 supply army unit >_>). | ||
|
pure.Wasted
Canada4701 Posts
On August 01 2015 05:02 purakushi wrote: Alright, I think we are more in line now though I do not fully agree with all of your points.Macromechanics (MULE/chrono/inject) are important to SC2. Players need reasons to go back (view) to their bases more than just to put down 1-2 buildings every minute or so. Personally, a chrono type macrobooster for all races would be fine to enforce this. Creep tumours are fine as long as the incentive is there (which it is). Yeah. To be even clearer than before - I like what the macro mechanics accomplish. I just don't like the particular ones we're stuck with. I would not like to see macro mechanics cut with no replacements. I do not like reactors, as it is just a passive macrobooster. Wish they removed them and rebalanced everything around the slower Terran macro. I realise that it is much less common to max in LotV, but I have always had complaints of how fast 200/200 comes in SC2 due to macroboosters and increased supply costs (compared to BW -- Zerg has no 1 supply army unit >_>). I meant reactor more in the sense of the add-on in general. I like that Terrans have to pick one or the other, and then have the option to switch them out by temporarily disabling their production facilities and floating them around. It's a very natural way to add macro to the race, it's part of a complex system that enhances the race's themes As opposed to just "here have a spell that you can cast every 30 seconds." | ||
Teoita
Italy12248 Posts
Plus, without inject i can be right when i say that zerg is the race for scrubs that can only amove without having any skill whatsoever >.> | ||
|
weikor
Austria580 Posts
If I had to play a game of tetris at my nexus, sure the skillcap would increase - but it doesnt make starcraft better. Have you ever watched a progame and heard people scream at the chronoboost usage? Its bland and boring. Another argument id like to bring up is where macro mechanics originated from. In the Wol beta players were complaining about the game beeing too easy in comparison to Broodwar. Yeah... The level of play wasnt very high back then. Maybe im wrong, I just hope they test it. | ||
|
eviltomahawk
United States11135 Posts
Warpgate changes sound good, but offensive warp-ins sound too long. Could do with a tweak. | ||
|
FueledUpAndReadyToGo
Netherlands30548 Posts
Option 2 is just terrible. Zerg can't survive with just 2 larva from injects... You need like 30-40% more hatcheries for production then.... That means all-ins will be way slower and defending all-ins way harder because you need a much bigger investment in buildings, while drone production is slowed as well....Removing mule will make any cloak play vs terran trivial as they will have 100% scan availability. Option 1 is harder to decide, but I really think Zerg will be boring to play without a macro mechanic. At least in the HotS campaign it felt wrong not having any macroing to do. Terran and Protoss at least have to build structures. With autocast Zerg just plants a hatch, rally point and done is your macro. I guess it's a pretty big buff to creep spread as that will get a lot more focus then. | ||
|
KrazyTrumpet
United States2520 Posts
The macro stuff though...idk man. Inject/Creep spread is what separates the men from the boys, and is frankly the "best" macro mechanic as far as usefulness to skill ratio. Mules and chronoboost are much less skill based, imo, so if they want to rework those feel free. I don't think we should be looking to make macro mechanics easier because the game overall is faster paced and "harder". We should be providing as many opportunities as reasonably makes sense for players to distinguish themselves through mechanics. And let's face it, people aren't winning and losing in lower leagues because they miss injects/mules/chrono, so why do we need to make that "easier", it's part of learning the game. | ||
|
nottapro
202 Posts
The game needs to be fun to play, it can't always be tailored towards making it as hard as possible for the sake of it. When you always design it for people who play as a full time job, then the game takes on the same qualities as a full time job, the same level of stress, frustration and feelings of being overworked. It's not fun. That is not to say the game should be dumbed down, but what they are suggesting; change the focus of the difficulty from areas which are hard for the sake of it, into areas that are still just as hard but also engaging and fun. | ||
|
ZergLingShepherd1
404 Posts
On August 01 2015 05:18 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: What the fuck Option 2 is just terrible. Zerg can't survive with just 2 larva from injects... You need like 30-40% more hatcheries for production then.... That means all-ins will be way slower and defending all-ins way harder because you need a much bigger investment in buildings, while drone production is slowed as well....Removing mule will make any cloak play vs terran trivial as they will have 100% scan availability. Option 1 is harder to decide, but I really think Zerg will be boring to play without a macro mechanic. At least in the HotS campaign it felt wrong not having any macroing to do. Terran and Protoss at least have to build structures. With autocast Zerg just plants a hatch, rally point and done is your macro. I guess it's a pretty big buff to creep spread as that will get a lot more focus then. Macro hatches and Terran won have the OP MULES comeback... Protoss less chessy. I think both options are good for the game. | ||
|
KrazyTrumpet
United States2520 Posts
On August 01 2015 05:22 nottapro wrote: These changes are really cool direction for the game, they are addressing warp-gates and they are recognizing that the game should be less of a chore. The game needs to be fun to play, it can't always be tailored towards making it as hard as possible for the sake of it. When you always design it for people who play as a full time job, then the game takes on the same qualities as a full time job, the same level of stress, frustration and feelings of being overworked. It's not fun. That is not to say the game should be dumbed down, but what they are suggesting; change the focus of the difficulty from areas which are hard for the sake of it, into areas that are still just as hard but also engaging and fun. Except that something like inject is a really great way that a player can distinguish themselves on a macro level. It's one of the actual "busy work" mechanics that truly makes a difference, imo. | ||
|
SetGuitarsToKill
Canada28396 Posts
But removing macro mechanics is just not cool. Don't do it. Dont' make this game super casual. Mules takes like 2 seconds to call in and are part of the strategy of Terran. Chronoboost takes like 1 second to do. Something to make injects less make-or-break would be nice, but if we're just removing them so you can focus on your army for 2 seconds more, then we shouldn't touch them. Lots of players have made their careers on having sick macro. It's a inherent part of Starcraft and if we remove it, youre removing a large part of the game. If you want to rework mechanics, that's cool. Chronoboost is boring. Mules are kind of boring. Larva inject could afford to be less necessary for zergs to win, but dont' remove these mechanics entirely. | ||
|
Dodgin
Canada39254 Posts
| ||
| ||
