|
On August 01 2015 06:28 ejozl wrote:
I've got it! I know why they are touching on the macro mechanics.
They've watched Archon Mode and think the games are much more fun. That must be because one player is dedicated to army movement and microing. Remove macro and every game will be like Archon mode. Ofc. this would suck for Archon Mode, but you know..
Lol. Sadly, I think you're spot on 
|
While it is good that they're looking into warp gate changes, the change they're proposing is not the best. I think the best change will be for PvP mirror where warp-gate timings will be nerfed and defender's advantage increased in blink vs blink fights, thereby encouraging more Stargate+Robo play as well as assisting FE builds.
In PvZ/PvT however, this will only lead to Warp Prism plays. Due to Warp Prism's strength and the economy's nerf of Warpgate timings, changes to offensive warp ins at pylons is not very relevant in LotV. The strongest Warpgate attacks come off the Warp Prism, which with a 2 second warp-in timing is just ridiculous. The Warp Prism should be 16 seconds, with maybe an upgrade at the Robotics Bay if anything to turn it into 2 seconds.
Also there's the problem of needing an extra 1:10 to build a Warpgate at a defensively positioned pylon to warp-in safely. Protoss is already having problems taking a third versus Zerg, this is only going to exacerbate problems of being able to set-up and defend a third because you have to warp in from your natural.
|
these macro changes seem horrible!! would take away a huge part of the races core. specially zerg...would be soooo easy to play if no injects are needed. and wasnt there a post a long time ago which explained the necessatiy of the mule in terran eco..? How would you make up for that?
|
Option 2 is best to save starcraft and make it more like BroodWar. Remove all macro mechanics.
|
I was going to wait to see if I some decent changes were coming to protoss before buying the game. But the fact that they are actually considering these kinds of changes to warp gate is really making me itch to just pre-order..
I think the warp gate idea is definitely on the right track.. If protoss need more offensive let it be through their units and not almost completely hinged on proxy pylons.
I would be happy controlling units more and macroing less but for decent players macro mechanics might just need an overhaul. I agree that it should be more interesting and more obvious.
|
On August 01 2015 07:05 GGzerG wrote:
Option 2 is best to save starcraft and make it more like BroodWar. Remove all macro mechanics.
I don't understand... isn't having to manually rally every worker the biggest macro mechanic ever?
|
Jesus christ no at the Macro mechanic removal. I'd be down for making chrono and mules as "critical" as queen usage is, perhaps by lowering max nexus and orbital energy to encourage using it on time.
Warp gate change of 16 seconds seems massive, what are they going to buff to compensate? Toss is getting rekked ATM other than all-ins. I dig killing off their retarded mass cheese amounts but they need a standard play buff to hang in there right now.
|
if anything. Archon mode shows how high the skill cap actually is. Stop crying about the game getting too easy. Lol...
|
Zerg changes to inject are kind of crazy. So the only macro that Zerg has to do is creep spread and occasional upgrades?? Terran macro will consist of planting MANY buildings, adding MANY add-ons, swapping buildings onto different add-ons, occasional upgrades and we have to have the most focus on our micro of any of the races. I call not fair.
Macro is an inherent part of the game - when you do it right it feels so satisfying. Don't make this Warhammer 40K please.
|
Wow this excites me a lot. I love the idea of removing the macro mechanics, needing offensive warp gates and just about everything they said in thus update. Thumbs up if they go through with these changes.
|
Canada5565 Posts
Reading the Macro Mechanics section brought a big smile to my face. Option 2, please. I've been waiting 5 years for this change.
|
Guys, I really don't know why you freak out immediately when you hear something about macro changes. What Blizzard says is mostly true and makes perfect sense in my opinion.
The fact that macro is a passive and relatively hidden factor in the game which is not very apparent to viewers is an objective truth.
I also think that it is also an aspect really frustrating to a lot of players, because it is just something you have to constantly be doing otherwise you lose. It's repetitive and is not fun on its own, in my opinion. I'm fairly certain that most of those who say they like macroing don't actually find macroing fun but rather being strong in macro and defeating the opponents thus. (If you are not this kind of player—sorry for accusing you .) Yes, macro is a way of differentiation, a way to be better than your opponent. It seems that Blizzard are attempting to put more emphasis on micro, so that the way you can win be being better at mostly micro rather than macro, since it is visually more apparent (and lest frustrating for some, I would imagine). I fully support this initiative.
However, I feel neither of the suggestions are very good. I'm OK with Chrono used less frequently. I'm not sure about MULEs, and automated Inject seems to be something that can really go wrong. Having automated Larva spawn would make the very challanging Zerg macro very, very much easier, while not other races' macro.
Zerg, with enough Hatcheries, could basically macro like Terran, with the huge advantage that missed production cycles would not result in lost production because Larva could be stockpiled. If you capped Larva per Hatchery at, say, 10, it could be solved more or less, but it would take away the Zerg production's identity.
So I don't think the two options are quite refined and viable, but I definitely like the general idea.
I also like the Warp Gate idea, even if 2 seconds seems to be too short.
|
1. Protoss Warp In Nerfs/Buff
16 seconds is.... forever lol That's a really gigantor nerf, I can't imagine anybody would actually want to leave their units warp-in in exposed like that for so long... maybe something like 10.
The 2 second buff is HUGE though. This is a great addition, now maybe I can actually get a single unit out if I missed the drop before 3 marauders snipe my nexus 
2. Disruptor
Not much to comment on, we all know it sucks right now...
3. Macro Mechanics
ehhhh... Isn't the entire damn game balanced around Mules/Inject right now? Chrono is the least of them, but even a lot of viable timings depend on it (any early harrass/all-in basically). I'll be interested to see what their final view on it is, but ya, idk..... Maybe
* Cap Nexus and Orbital at 100, or even 75 energy
* Decrease efficiency of Chrono and Mule
* Inject only injects 3 larva now, but hatches auto build more larva normally over time now
So I guess closer to their option one. Still, I'm not really sure who's out there at the top level complaining that they lost a long game because they didn't inject properly.... it does always piss me off to see 10 MULEs rain down on a fresh base though, hence my suggestion on the cap lol
|
I don't understand them anymore, I really don't...
On one hand they want to oversimplify mechanics to a level that toddlers can play the game and on the other hand they add insanely stupid rules like the "16 second warp-in when the power grid of the Pylon is not touching a Warpgate, only 2 seconds when it does".
That has to be the most stupid band-aid fix I have ever seen in the history of this game. Who would come up with something like that?
Seriously, I am at a loss for words. Glad I didn't pre-order the game... Thanks TB for hammering that message into my head!
|
On August 01 2015 07:16 DeadByDawn wrote:
Zerg changes to inject are kind of crazy. So the only macro that Zerg has to do is creep spread and occasional upgrades?? Terran macro will consist of planting MANY buildings, adding MANY add-ons, swapping buildings onto different add-ons, occasional upgrades and we have to have the most focus on our micro of any of the races. I call not fair.
Macro is an inherent part of the game - when you do it right it feels so satisfying. Don't make this Warhammer 40K please.
Just when I thought someone would mention DoW2 haha
Anyway if they are going to change injects I would say maybe nerfing it would be a better direction.
So far the way injects work is that injects is a must do thing. If you don't inject, you die.
Personally I would like to see them at least try to nerf these mechanics a little bit.
Also my idea:
Maybe similar to the change the proposed on chrono, increasing the energy cost for injects and increase the larva produced to a lesser extend. This way maybe it would produce a early game strategy choice between saving energy for heal and creep for defensive propose or injects away for more worker/ units.
|
As far the offensive nerf goes, OK seems decent.
The defensive buff though - not sure. So I didn't scout, didn't position my army, or even make an army, and I get caught with my pants down. Don't worry - photon overcharge and insta-units and I am good - or maybe I just recall. Really? Protoss already feels like the race for noobs, don't dumb it down much more.
|
Not gonna buy LotV if these macro changes are going to make it in the final game.
|
regarding warp gate: it may need some tweaks but I think it will definitely be better than what we have now, is it too much? is it not enough? time will tell.
regarding macro mechanics: I know I'm in the minority but I actually like the approach blizz is suggesting, in particular (and I'm saying this as a zerg player) I think inject should definitely be nerfed in terms of larvae output. why? lets do the math:
hatcheries produce 1 larvae per 15 seconds and costs 300 minerals + a drone
queens produce (with optimal play) 4 larvae per 40 seconds (1 larvae per 10 seconds) and costs 150 minerals + 2 supply.
lets say the drone cost and the 2 supply cost even each other out so we just compare the mineral cost : larvae produced ratio.
the smallest common denominator for the larvae production is 30 seconds, in 30 seconds queens produce 3 larvae while hatcheries produce 2 larvae, lets divide these by the costs of the units to get
larvae produced / (minerals spent * 30 seconds)
hatchery = 2 / 300 = 1/150
queen = 3 / 150 = 1/50
i.e. queens are 3 times more efficient at producing larvae than hatcheries, even when ignoring the fact that queens have shorter build times.
these numbers comparatively help hatcheries when reducing the larvae production for queens:
3 larvae: 2.25 / 150 = 1/67
2 larvae: 1.5 / 150 = 1/100
so even at 2 larvae it is still beneficial to produce queens rather than macro-hatcheries, even when ignoring the added utility of queens.
as for whether it should be auto-cast, I can see that being a contested point, but I think it would be worth it to try it out, I know I'm not flawless on my injects and injecting just to not lose literally more than half of my larvae production (literally 60% of potential larvae production comes from queens, 100% of larvae production comes from queens when saving up larvae) has always been the most tedious part of the game in my opinion and it would be interesting to see how much more accessible the game would be if that was more lenient.
I have no opinion regarding MULE and CB.
tl.dr. I think the proposed macromechanic approach can be worth exploring and I think it will probably be significantly less detrimental to strategy/skill ceiling than one might initially think.
time will tell.
|
while watching redbull archon qualifiers it occurred to me that once zerg doesn't have to meddle with injects, they will be able to multitask more effectively when trying to crack a mech turtle terran...
hyyyyyyyyyyype!
|
On August 01 2015 07:42 StaN.de wrote:
Not gonna buy LotV if these macro changes are going to make it in the final game.
Already pre-ordered it to play the beta and I do not regret it. Regardless of the silliness of these changes SC2 is still the best RTS we have (OK, maybe BW - but it makes my eyes hurt).
And I gave CarBot $350 to bring StarCrafts to the game - so it can only get better 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
