|
Hi there guys, Since the new blizzard feedback update there has been lots of discussion about changing the macro, and there´s been people who have been very vocal about keeping it the way it is, there's even a really in depth study on the front page about it!
The thing is, I don't think many players have actually played Starcraft 2 WITHOUT the macro "crutches".
I have done it a lot, so I thought it would be a good idea to share the differences I've encountered, share some new insights, and debunk some myths about it.
First things first, I have been playing SC2 for years and it´s been quite some time since I got my beta invite for LOTV, however, my experience with crutchless SC2 mostly focus with HOTS, so bear that in mind.
So,to get to the point, I was playing HOTS a lot, but it got stale after a while, so I turned to mods to spice it up a little, one such mod was one that removed macro crutches and left everything else untouched.
What do I mean by macro crutches? well, injects, chrono, and mules.
Everything else was exactly the same only the crutches were removed.
I found this mod rather amusing so I played it until I got my LOTV invite.
Without further ado, I will point out the differences and details I found about the macro mechanics of SC2 :
Differences :
-The pacing changes-
As is to be expected, with the removal of macro crutches the pacing changed, but not quite in the way you would expect.
Games didn't turn out slower, timings and build times were mostly unaffected, rather, engagements in the early game became scrappier and with less units. You could make a lot of things work with good control. Things like losing a worker or even a unit tended to hurt a lot, so you mostly tried to save both.
The Mid-game is where the game usually picked up into something that resembled the usual SC2 pacing.
The main difference was the abundance and diversity of higher tech units,accompanied by lower tech units and meat shields, but not as many as you would usually see.
Micro is still a big part of the fights, but your macro dictates the pace of the game since you have to expand more and get more production facilities, the managing of more expansions and buildings than usual starts getting in the way of your micro and your micro in the way of your macro, but up to this point it's not that much harder than the usual macro mechanics.
The Late Game is where the game gets completely insane.
I regret to say that I didn't manage to get many games that lasted this long so I don´t have that much to say except that that if you make it this far the game goes nuts and it gets pretty hard to manage everything.
You have so many bases, so many production facilities,so many different unit types spread just about everywhere, so many different places to defend and attack, both players are already fielding their best units and upgrades.
It gets pretty chaotic, especially with bases and buildings that are pretty far away from each other, and especially with all the fighting going on.
So it starts out Slower and it ends up Faster, why? well, logic would dictate that the current macro mechanics should give a faster game all game no? the reason for this isn't readily apparent until you understand...
-The reason for the current mechanics-
Some people believe the current mechanics are there to increase the skill level required, or as an APM sink, but the real reason is actually quite simple.
The reason for the current mechanics is easy to explain :
To make SC2 bigger and better!
You see, the reasoning for these mechanics was to make the things everyone loved about starcraft more prominent in the sequel, more action packed and exciting.
Having things like injects chrono and mules meant more money to spend earlier, more units to be produced faster and more tech to be delivered earlier in the game, this would have given us a bombastic action packed sequel :
The game starts earlier because you get resources faster!
More units means more fights!
Faster upgrades open a world of possibilities!
A faster game will give the more skilled players more chances to really shine!
This would have worked marvelously... if only we had played the game as blizzard intended us to.
-The current macro mechanics reward spamming and turtling-
This is one of the things you wouldn't normally notice, but once you start playing the game without the crutches become really obvious.
Have you ever wondered why marine marauder medivac is so prevalent? why mutabling works on every match up? why gateway units seem so weak? why a player on 3 bases can drag out the game so easily against an opponent with a lot more bases?
It's mostly because the current macro mechanics reward such play, and as soon as we, the players, found out we started abusing it as creatively as we could.
For the most part the current macro crutches reward the spamming of cheap fast units to be produced with little inconvenience, things like drones probes and mules to make more money, and things like zerglings roaches mutas, marines,marauders,medivacs, etc, to be mass produced and thrown at the enemy.
The combination of mules + reactors, and spawn larva+ the classic zerg macromechanics causes this fllood of cheap low tier units to be very easy to make while also making the fielding of higher tier units a lot harder.
The thing is this makes the game seem wonkier/more imbalanced than it actually is.
For example, gateway units aren't actually weak, but protoss has no proper mechanic to spam units(since chrono is more economic and tech driven),and their units aren't really cheap, so they are always overwhelmed by the amount of enemy units from the other two races.
This isn't to say protoss can't spam, but it is a lot harder for protoss and that puts gateway units at a disadvantage.
This isn't exclusive to protoss, any unit from any of the three races is at a disadvantage against more spammable units.
And it isn't something easy to see either, if you make 15 marines at a time you might think it's because your macro is pretty good, but if you see 10 zealots being warped at your third it seems gimmicky, and it makes it seem like protoss as a race is faulty.
Most of the units in the game on their interactions with other units and each other have some pretty solid math, it's the current macro mechanics that throw that math into dis-balance by always giving the cheaper faster more spammable units the advantage.
Just to drive the point home, "teching" was trying to out maneuver cheaper more numerous units with less of more advanced units,
for example going for a fast tank or in an extreme case opening with a tank(an un-sieged one at it because the upgrade was separate) and hold back zerglings/ dragoons with good control until you could get more.
This will get you killed every time in SC2 because the spammable units have the advantage, no matter how good the control, you will get overwhelmed.
The current crutches also promote turtling.
Mules let you have a lot of money very quickly without having to expand,inject and chrono boost also do this to a much lesser extent, and chrono has the added appeal of not having your tech fall behind because you're not expanding, you can always just boost out the upgrades and tech you would otherwise be missing out or getting late. Inject larva doesn't help turtling very much but instead makes saturating bases almost immediate.
And the reality is that there is no reason not to, there is no reason not to chrono or mule or inject, and since there is no reason not to, there is also no reason not to turtle and not to deathball.
Mix this up with defenders advantage and the aforementioned spamming, and turtle play just ends up coming naturally.
-Removing the crutches-
All in all removing the macro crutches seem to promote more unit variety, more engagements, and focus more on control and management.
It also helps with problems like death balls and turtling, while at the same time rewarding expansions and multiple actions around the map.
This were the things I noticed it when I was playing it, and I think the guys at blizzard came to the same conclusions while testing something similar internally.
That said, I think the idea of keeping the crutches but making them easier to use is a bad idea,the problem with these crutches is not that they are hard to use, is that they make the game itself tumble in confusion about its own rules.
-Mythbusting-
-"Without the current macro mechanics the game will be dumbed down, and will require less skill!"
False.
The game isn't really any easier without the crutches and the skill requirements remain unchanged, the main change of the game is in the pacing.
-"I want the game to be more like broodwar and changing the macro mechanics is a step backward!"
Neither broodwar nor starcraft had any macro crutches, play the game if you don't believe me.
-"Macro will now be too easy. This will affect the higher levels of play!"
Not true, macro didn't get easier, you will have to build a lot of production facilities and extra town halls very regularly to get more resources and units only instead of doing it with a spell you do it with your workers.
In average the APM used is just about the same in both instances, and in the later stages of the game it actually becomes harder.
-"Macro mechanics aren't the problem, the problem is that protoss is badly designed/zerg is OP/terran imba"
As stated before, the math on most of the units is pretty solid, its the crutches that thrust this math into disarray most of the time,I think settling the macro issues will settle a lot of balance issues.
-"Changing the pace of the game will make it more boring!"
It's only the beginning stages of the game that are somewhat slower, as the game goes on it actually gets faster. In LOTV this may very well be an intentional side effect.
-Conclusions/ TL;DR-
It's a wild idea, but blizz might be on the ball with this one.
The current macro mechanics are fun and we've grown to love them,and the ways they positively affect the game are easy to see, but the many ways they negatively affect the game aren't until you actually get rid of them.
As I see it, as far as macro crutches go, cutting them would be better than keeping them, and keeping them would be better than making them easier, for making it easier might actually emphasize the problems with them rather than alleviate them.
It may also make the game more accessible, not in the sense that it will be easier to play, but in the sense the logic will be more sound and less "thats just how it is". It makes sense the more numerous units have the advantage, And it does make sense the stronger units can get overwhelmed by the lesser units, it just doesn't make sense that they always get rolled over without much resistance.
It's up to the player to find the situations in which each of his units excels and how to make the most of their control"I could have made it work if...", rather than "i can't go that unit, I'll get rolled over, it's just the way it is" Little bits of thought trains like that, that will make the game more accessible since the logic behind the matches will always be more sound, therefore less confusing to players.
Overall, I recommend trying the game out without the macro crutches,it really spices thing up.
And I would like for blizz to try it out in LOTV if only for a while, just so other players can see just how much depth removing this one thing, it actually adds.
|
Bisutopia19229 Posts
Thanks for this well written post. I wanted to address something that may be misinterpreted by people who share my opinion.
"Without the current macro mechanics the game will be dumbed down, and will require less skill!"
I state in my previous arguments and to use your speech that it would "dumb down and require less skill" to macro specifically. I do not believe removing the abilities reduces skill as a whole and skill attention would just shift to other things. The question I continue to pose: "What macro mechanics are left?"
Remove inject,chrono,mule and list remaining macro:
1. Queue workers (1ctrl grp + hotkey)
2. Queue Units(1ctrl grp per building type + hotkey)
3. Build buildings
4. Expand
5. Static Defense
6. Upgrades
This is a short list I'm sure or maybe it is just enough stuff to make macro a thing. I would love to see people add to this list above and point out what I'm over looking.
Micro List for fun: While the same number of main points, each point branches deeply.
1. Army Control
2. Hotkeys
3. Abilities
4. Scouting
5. Drops
6. Harass
|
Removing MULEs and injects is good for balance as well as overall game play, alot of things in the Zerg arsenal can't be properly tuned because the potential to make 80 of anything at the same time is OP in and of itself.
Just like MULEs being able to be spammed on a new expansion and Terran mineral income goes SWOOOOP through the roof.
Removing all of these would be excellent for the game and do tons to promote small engagements, Zerg should have to build more hatcheries or more aggressively expand for larvae and Terran should not be able to have massive boosts in economy from a spammable ability.
Chronoboost just sucks in general lol I think hardly anyone would care if it was removed
|
I tend to agree with this post more-so than the other post criticising the move. I do want to try this out to have a definite opinion on the matter.
If macro mechanics were indeed removed, queens would be a bit useless.
|
Sounds reasonable. Want to try that out. What is the name of the mod ?
|
On August 05 2015 04:30 ZeroCartin wrote:
I tend to agree with this post more-so than the other post criticising the move. I do want to try this out to have a definite opinion on the matter.
If macro mechanics were indeed removed, queens would be a bit useless.
I'm not entirely sure about that, the creep tumours and early-game defense would still be useful to have, no?
|
If Blizzard is going to test removing macro mechanics, then I would like them to be COMPLETELY removed. Please, please do not keep queens in the game with autocast. That is so against the spirit of StarCraft it makes me sick. Just increase the rate of larva spawning by a few seconds.
|
On August 05 2015 03:55 BisuDagger wrote:Thanks for this well written post. I wanted to address something that may be misinterpreted by people who share my opinion. Show nested quote +"Without the current macro mechanics the game will be dumbed down, and will require less skill!" I state in my previous arguments and to use your speech that it would "dumb down and require less skill" to macro specifically. I do not believe removing the abilities reduces skill as a whole and skill attention would just shift to other things. The question I continue to pose: "What macro mechanics are left?" Remove inject,chrono,mule and list remaining macro: 1. Queue workers (1ctrl grp + hotkey) 2. Queue Units(1ctrl grp per building type + hotkey) 3. Build buildings 4. Expand 5. Static Defense 6. Upgrades This is a short list I'm sure or maybe it is just enough stuff to make macro a thing. I would love to see people add to this list above and point out what I'm over looking. Micro List for fun: While the same number of main points, each point branches deeply. 1. Army Control 2. Hotkeys 3. Abilities 4. Scouting 5. Drops 6. Harass
I think you may have overlooked creep spread, which can be a very important thing and I'm not sure which category it should be put in. Maybe it is in "abilities" or "static defense" but idk
|
On August 05 2015 04:54 Qwyn wrote:
If Blizzard is going to test removing macro mechanics, then I would like them to be COMPLETELY removed. Please, please do not keep queens in the game with autocast. That is so against the spirit of StarCraft it makes me sick. Just increase the rate of larva spawning by a few seconds.
Yeah. Or have HotS campaign hatcheries with 5 larva instead of 3. Or have ugprades through lair/hive/other means to increase larva count/spawnrate without having injects.
The other issue is, if queens are no longer responsible for injects, should they be produced from larva as well?
How does the mod do it? Just flat out remove inject ability, chrono and MULEs?
|
On August 05 2015 04:43 IntoTheheart wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2015 04:30 ZeroCartin wrote:
I tend to agree with this post more-so than the other post criticising the move. I do want to try this out to have a definite opinion on the matter.
If macro mechanics were indeed removed, queens would be a bit useless. I'm not entirely sure about that, the creep tumours and early-game defense would still be useful to have, no?
Yea I think even if queens had no version of spawn larvae at all people would still build them for creep tumors and to help that extra bit with anti-air.
creep spread is just way too useful to not have and how would you spread it without queens? hatcheries literally everywhere?
that would be visually awesome but I don't think it would be cost-effective unless there was a cheaper creep-producing building.
I am for testing the game without macro-mechanics, I don't think it will be the end of the game as we know it but I think we should keep an open mind and be very critical to find every pro and con there is to it. when we have the data then we can know better.
|
Thanks for the post.
Good to see something that is actually based on playtesting and not just based on opinion or belief.
I don't like autocast injects and hope Blizzard can instead make inject queen the same efficiency as a hatchery, with possible change to max larva with and without injects to make it more optional.
But reading this post make me wonder if it is better to just remove it completely and try to rebalance zerg.
LotV feels just way too fast for me to enjoy it. If remove macro mechanics can slow it down a little early game to ease the pain I for one are willing to at least give it a try.
|
Queens are the basic defensive AA, they should stay in the game. Also creep spread is my opinion the zergyest mechanic there is.
I do agree with you on this. I would really like see where the game goes when the economy crutches are removed.
-Inject is a mandatory apm sink at the moment. Not fun, and gives rise to OP things that are very difficult to balance in the late game.
-Drop mule is unfair because it it does not have a cooldown and does not punish the terran for taking his expo later. Scan and drop supply are already very handy.
-Chronoboost is also somewhat weak and boring. It also does not have a cooldown and does not punish players for forgetting it, unlike inject.
I feel by making autoinject happen and removing the rest the game will be more easy to balance and more micro focused. Also not expanding on time will be very bad both for zerg and terran that cannot saturate instantly anymore.
I totally agree that this will solve the gateway unit problem too. I also agree that deathballs will be lessen since skirmished will be actually rewarding.
Losing workers will be pretty bad and difficult to come back from. But this is true in the current state as well.
|
so what we are saying is to get rid of zergs ability to create 40 units at once. So pound for pound the zerg army comp is weaker, the other races can still produce 40 at a time, lets not forget those 50mineral marines now, shielded blinkable units.. yep gg zerg, basically the race would have to allin or time attacks because its already hard late game to keep up with the macro of the other 2. the only reason z hold on at all is the ability to macro out more units.
sounds daft to me, just give us a model, lets try it. lotv to me is becoming a game of gimmicks so far, not seeing much going on it seems to be just make shit, send it in, if u hold u win if not ur dead
|
Sounds reasonable, but the game is balanced around those very mechanics now, and a lot of tweaks would be needed.
Like how would zerg deal with forcefields without injects?
Would reactors still be in?
Would warp-in anywhere still be in?
|
Killing the 3 based machro mechanics, chrono, mule/scan/depo and inject would be the last death note in a long list of things I dont like at LotV. But I must say I see HotS as balanced as never before, producing some of the best games ever while having decent amount of variation in pros winning and losing.
Starcraft II was allways all about dat macro, if I wanted to see insane micro, i watched Warcraft III (what I still due up to this day). Seeing players like Bomber beiing 20 supplys ahead against his Terran opponent at the same minute mark just because of his macro mechanics, was allways pleasent to watch. Removing any of the macro mechanics without giving a new one, will feel wrong. It is not only about apm demanding stuff and mechanical skill, that is important, having a very strong macro and being able to outproduce your enemy just because you do it better, looks fantastic for me. And when your enemy then still can keep up because of his better fights, GG 5 Stars.
As Starcraft II has infinite control groups, the whole section of army control has left the skill arena. Okay, still people think hat high templars should autostay behind better units, but hey, silver plays cant use 2 seperate controlgroups. And with this designchoice there had to be another field, where players could use exelent mechanical skill to take an advandage. Every RTS from Blizzard had different areas where you could get advantages: Hero advantage, upgrade advantage, item advantage, economy advantage, composition advantage but also mechanical advantage due to the need of micro as also the limited controlgroups. And hey position advantage and so on are also there.
Brood War had other advantage: Micro advantage, Macro advantage, controll advantage, eco advantage, composition advantage, upgrade advantage and more.
And SC II? There is not much, but still some micro advantage, there is the large field of macro advantage and then upgrades (which are pretty much in macro in all 3 games?), composition advantage and fighting advantage. If you cut the macro advantage, you can gain with strong mechanics out of the game or reduce it, there arent so much fields left.
But RTS are allways not about only 2-3 fighting grounds, you fight for advantage in every stage everywhere. Cutting one out of the game will lead to a game where the individual games will be one like the other, with a clear way to victory. But RTS has no clear way to victory like CS (win 16 rounds) and thus reducing one of the ways that might lead to victory, will seriously hurt the game.
All this "reduce mechanical demanding macro" leads to a gimmick Starcraft, where victory or lose will depend on the use of gimmick abilitys at the right time at the right place. And seriously I dont want to see a gimmick RTS, where every unit becomes a glas cannon dota hero just to entertain with "INSANE MICRO" which is literaly pushing 1 button and one right click for a ability that takes the win.
I am sick of this "game to hard, macro to demanding, usless skill gap in APM". But I can stick with hots, I am fine. Even Starbow has macro mechanics that are mechanical demanding and they work fine there. So when nobody plays HotS anymore and the players got their Gimmick of the Void, I can swap over to Starbow.
|
On August 05 2015 05:50 StatixEx wrote:
so what we are saying is to get rid of zergs ability to create 40 units at once. So pound for pound the zerg army comp is weaker, the other races can still produce 40 at a time, lets not forget those 50mineral marines now, shielded blinkable units.. yep gg zerg, basically the race would have to allin or time attacks because its already hard late game to keep up with the macro of the other 2. the only reason z hold on at all is the ability to macro out more units.
sounds daft to me, just give us a model, lets try it. lotv to me is becoming a game of gimmicks so far, not seeing much going on it seems to be just make shit, send it in, if u hold u win if not ur dead
You do it the same way as in BW, with macro hatches! (or potential future larva upgrades)
Terran can't pull the boys because what's he going to mine with
Protoss can't all-in as fast because his upgrades take longer
|
On August 05 2015 06:26 Clonester wrote:
Killing the 3 based machro mechanics, chrono, mule/scan/depo and inject would be the last death note in a long list of things I dont like at LotV. But I must say I see HotS as balanced as never before, producing some of the best games ever while having decent amount of variation in pros winning and losing.
Starcraft II was allways all about dat macro, if I wanted to see insane micro, i watched Warcraft III (what I still due up to this day). Seeing players like Bomber beiing 20 supplys ahead against his Terran opponent at the same minute mark just because of his macro mechanics, was allways pleasent to watch. Removing any of the macro mechanics without giving a new one, will feel wrong. It is not only about apm demanding stuff and mechanical skill, that is important, having a very strong macro and being able to outproduce your enemy just because you do it better, looks fantastic for me. And when your enemy then still can keep up because of his better fights, GG 5 Stars.
As Starcraft II has infinite control groups, the whole section of army control has left the skill arena. Okay, still people think hat high templars should autostay behind better units, but hey, silver plays cant use 2 seperate controlgroups. And with this designchoice there had to be another field, where players could use exelent mechanical skill to take an advandage. Every RTS from Blizzard had different areas where you could get advantages: Hero advantage, upgrade advantage, item advantage, economy advantage, composition advantage but also mechanical advantage due to the need of micro as also the limited controlgroups. And hey position advantage and so on are also there.
Brood War had other advantage: Micro advantage, Macro advantage, controll advantage, eco advantage, composition advantage, upgrade advantage and more.
And SC II? There is not much, but still some micro advantage, there is the large field of macro advantage and then upgrades (which are pretty much in macro in all 3 games?), composition advantage and fighting advantage. If you cut the macro advantage, you can gain with strong mechanics out of the game or reduce it, there arent so much fields left.
But RTS are allways not about only 2-3 fighting grounds, you fight for advantage in every stage everywhere. Cutting one out of the game will lead to a game where the individual games will be one like the other, with a clear way to victory. But RTS has no clear way to victory like CS (win 16 rounds) and thus reducing one of the ways that might lead to victory, will seriously hurt the game.
All this "reduce mechanical demanding macro" leads to a gimmick Starcraft, where victory or lose will depend on the use of gimmick abilitys at the right time at the right place. And seriously I dont want to see a gimmick RTS, where every unit becomes a glas cannon dota hero just to entertain with "INSANE MICRO" which is literaly pushing 1 button and one right click for a ability that takes the win.
I am sick of this "game to hard, macro to demanding, usless skill gap in APM". But I can stick with hots, I am fine. Even Starbow has macro mechanics that are mechanical demanding and they work fine there. So when nobody plays HotS anymore and the players got their Gimmick of the Void, I can swap over to Starbow.
You realize you still have to macro without mules/injects/chrono?
|
Its a bit confusing to be honest.
The causes don't seen to fit with the consequences and yet it comes from experience.
Now i want to play this mod.
|
|
|
On August 05 2015 04:54 Qwyn wrote:
If Blizzard is going to test removing macro mechanics, then I would like them to be COMPLETELY removed. Please, please do not keep queens in the game with autocast. That is so against the spirit of StarCraft it makes me sick. Just increase the rate of larva spawning by a few seconds.
Agree, but then that would change defense as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
