EPTstill drinking my first cup of coffee
Community Feedback Update - August 21 - Page 12
| Forum Index > Legacy of the Void |
BluemoonSC
SoCal8910 Posts
still drinking my first cup of coffee | ||
|
Quineotio
Australia128 Posts
| ||
|
jazzbassmatt
United States566 Posts
| ||
|
FueledUpAndReadyToGo
Netherlands30548 Posts
On August 23 2015 01:04 jazzbassmatt wrote: Imagine a mechanic where you have to press the 7 key every 20 seconds, or you lose 100 minerals. Press the 7 key and you keep the minerals, but get distracted or forget and you lose them. Is it really fair to call this a mechanic that has anything to do with skill? It doesn't add anything to the game interesting in terms of decision making or skill. There's nothing strategically or even mechanically impressive about being to press a key regularly. Real skill should be demonstrated in strategy, macro mechanics which involve meaningful decisions (such as whether to mine minerals or gas, how many workers to make, building placement), and micro, not by spamming keys regularly. Why do people always focus on 'spamming keys'. Macro players are not impressive because they can spam keys, it's because they have the mental fortitude to find time to macro more than others while still controlling everything else. It is most definitely impressive and calling it spamming is really dumb, as you should look at it as a total package. Besides, a lot of micro could also be classified as ' spamming keys'. It's just a really dumb way to look at things. It's about the results of the actions and how difficult it is to execute them, not button presses. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9419 Posts
On August 23 2015 00:19 bo1b wrote: While I haven't played all that much of lotv's most recent patch there was a ton of action happening early and mid game in broodwar. for example You haven't watched that much BW over the last couple of years have you? Otherwise you probably wouldn't list one of the best BW games ever (in my opinion - I watched that game 2-3 or times previouslyt) in order to make it appear as the "typical BW" game. With this type of logic you could also make the case that Swarm Host games are actionpacked as the outliar. But yes TvZ was the most actionpacked matchup in BW. It's the only matchup where the stable opener contain harassment play into frequent army trading (Muta harass and bio follow to pressure zerg bases). TvP = Very passive until late game. Occationally you see 1 base pressure like Reaver drops or Marine/tank pressure, but usally it goes late game with little army trading until then. PvZ = Pretty passive early game (i don't really consider corsairs killing overlords as "real" harassment). ZvZ = No defenders advantage so obviously this contains short and bad games. PvP = Okay'ish. TvT = Passive. LOTV on the other hand is designed around "overpowered harass" units which makes for frequent action. However, the game also suffers heavily from a lack of defenders advantage and is very snowbally with the current pace of the game. So often time the game will be decided after the early midgame, which is very much unlike BW. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9419 Posts
On August 23 2015 00:16 bo1b wrote: Starcraft 2 and starcraft broodwar, smash melee and smash 4, cs go and cs source are the only games I can think of which feature one sequel making dramatic changes to the mechanical skill in each. Sc2 is on life support from blizzards wallet, smash 4 I seriously, seriously doubt will last as long a melee, and cs go which reintroduced mechanics from cs 1.6 has had an enormous recovery after they did so. And obviously not every korean played 1v1, but enough had to to get as good as they did, and plenty of people played brood war in america/europe. A majority of sc2 pro's came from a brood war background even. Your comment demonstrate that you haven't yet properly understood what this discussion is about. It's not about whether a game has a specific mechanic or not, but whether the game allows you to focus on the player vs player interaction. Is that the case in CS:GO? Yes! You go out and shoot other people. You don't have to make a repetitive exercise every 20th second that prevents you from interacting with your opponent. That's why multiplayer games become succesful. Because you play vs the opponent. In singleplayer you play vs the computer. Larva inject = playing vs the computer. BW was 18 years ago a revolution in the multiplayer aspect. However today we can see that despite the innovations, alot of the stuff it contained is ancient today. It's like the first iPhone. It was brilliant back then, but let's be real, there are much better alternatives out there today. And obviously not every korean played 1v1, but enough had to to get as good as they did, and plenty of people played brood war in america/europe. A majority of sc2 pro's came from a brood war background even. Prett sure the amount of people who regularly play League of Legends in South Korea compared to the people who regularly play 1v1 BW is extremely much in favor of the former. | ||
|
bo1b
Australia12814 Posts
You're right I haven't seen all that much in the last couple of years, I've been watching the occasional sonic starleague match but nothing too heavy. That said I remember quite a lot of harras in tvp, depending on who was playing pvz and whether the zerg was hydra busting/ lurker containing there was a good amount of action in pvz, zvz was the worst matchup no disagreement from me, and tvt varied a lot imo, there were games like this which were pretty intensive. | ||
|
bo1b
Australia12814 Posts
On August 23 2015 01:52 Hider wrote: BW was 18 years ago a revolution in the multiplayer aspect. However today we can see that despite the innovations, alot of the stuff it contained is ancient today. It's like the first iPhone. It was brilliant back then, but let's be real, there are much better alternatives out there today. Prett sure the amount of people who regularly play League of Legends in South Korea compared to the people who regularly play 1v1 BW is extremely much in favor of the former. Well yeh no shit more people play league now then broodwar lol. I seriously, seriously disagree with the previous statement. No rts has ever come close to being broodwars better. | ||
|
RaFox17
Finland4581 Posts
| ||
|
knyttym
United States5797 Posts
On August 23 2015 01:40 Hider wrote: You haven't watched that much BW over the last couple of years have you? Otherwise you probably wouldn't list one of the best BW games ever (in my opinion - I watched that game 2-3 or times previouslyt) in order to make it appear as the "typical BW" game. With this type of logic you could also make the case that Swarm Host games are actionpacked as the outliar. But yes TvZ was the most actionpacked matchup in BW. It's the only matchup where the stable opener contain harassment play into frequent army trading (Muta harass and bio follow to pressure zerg bases). TvP = Very passive until late game. Occationally you see 1 base pressure like Reaver drops or Marine/tank pressure, but usally it goes late game with little army trading until then. PvZ = Pretty passive early game (i don't really consider corsairs killing overlords as "real" harassment). ZvZ = No defenders advantage so obviously this contains short and bad games. PvP = Okay'ish. TvT = Passive. LOTV on the other hand is designed around "overpowered harass" units which makes for frequent action. However, the game also suffers heavily from a lack of defenders advantage and is very snowbally with the current pace of the game. So often time the game will be decided after the early midgame, which is very much unlike BW. On August 23 2015 01:52 Hider wrote: Your comment demonstrate that you haven't yet properly understood what this discussion is about. It's not about whether a game has a specific mechanic or not, but whether the game allows you to focus on the player vs player interaction. Is that the case in CS:GO? Yes! You go out and shoot other people. You don't have to make a repetitive exercise every 20th second that prevents you from interacting with your opponent. That's why multiplayer games become succesful. Because you play vs the opponent. In singleplayer you play vs the computer. Larva inject = playing vs the computer. BW was 18 years ago a revolution in the multiplayer aspect. However today we can see that despite the innovations, alot of the stuff it contained is ancient today. It's like the first iPhone. It was brilliant back then, but let's be real, there are much better alternatives out there today. Prett sure the amount of people who regularly play League of Legends in South Korea compared to the people who regularly play 1v1 BW is extremely much in favor of the former. Your two points here are connected. Firstly the LOTV design based around "overpowered harass" units and secondly the player vs computer and player vs player argument. Let's actually compare SC2:LOTV now and BW in the early 2000s. Brood War was more action based early game because of the strength of harass units and maps. We are talking about the era of Intotherain and Boxer here. Things like Legionnaire's 70 reaver kill game, Boxer's dropship tank micro, or Yellow's lurker drops. I can cite old VODs like these or Boxer highlight clips + Show Spoiler + These harass styles were very skillful though for their time because of one major thing. The player vs computer elements were a massively limiting factor for everyone. Microing a tank into a dropship was a major chore especially while trying to juggle even 1 or 2 base macro back at home. Currently microing a sieged tank medivac combo in LOTV is trivial for those 2 reasons. The player vs computer element of microing has been near removed via the engine improvements and because we aren't changing the engine at all, we should neglect issues in that area. Then we should therefore compensate and increase the player vs computer elements in macro by ramping up the difficulty there while not making it overly punishing as the HOTS macro mechanics were. I think the design ideas are closer to Brood War than we actually think. Perhaps I'm wrong and after 200+ more games in LOTV I'll see that but currently I think we may be close to something good. Also maps in LOTV suck so hard they definitely favor these harass styles. | ||
|
jazzbassmatt
United States566 Posts
On August 23 2015 01:20 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: Why do people always focus on 'spamming keys'. Macro players are not impressive because they can spam keys, it's because they have the mental fortitude to find time to macro more than others while still controlling everything else. It is most definitely impressive and calling it spamming is really dumb, as you should look at it as a total package. Besides, a lot of micro could also be classified as ' spamming keys'. It's just a really dumb way to look at things. It's about the results of the actions and how difficult it is to execute them, not button presses. Injecting larvae is literally spamming keys regularly. 5 shift +E Q mouse1 Q mouse1 Q mouse 1, and that's it. Finding more time to spam keys regularly because they're more efficient elsewhere is not really that impressive. Micro, unlike these "macro mechanics," actually involves positioning and responding to your opponent. Any micro that is simply "hit X" or you're punished (similar to lotv immortals) has the same problem and is just as uninteresting. Many of the game's core macro mechanics--expanding, worker creation, resource distribution, building placement, and so on--actually are really great and involve a lot of strategy, even if it's mechanical as well. Even chronoboost and mules occasionally have interesting and effective uses, although they can at times can at times be repetitive. Larvae inject, however, does not. | ||
|
chipmonklord17
United States11944 Posts
On August 23 2015 03:41 jazzbassmatt wrote: Injecting larvae is literally spamming keys regularly. 5 shift +E Q mouse1 Q mouse1 Q mouse 1, and that's it. Finding more time to spam keys regularly because they're more efficient elsewhere is not really that impressive. Micro, unlike these "macro mechanics," actually involves positioning and responding to your opponent. Any micro that is simply "hit X" or you're punished (similar to lotv immortals) has the same problem and is just as uninteresting. Many of the game's core macro mechanics--expanding, worker creation, resource distribution, building placement, and so on--actually are really great and involve a lot of strategy, even if it's mechanical as well. Even chronoboost and mules occasionally have interesting and effective uses, although they can at times can at times be repetitive. Larvae inject, however, does not. There is no difference between worker creation and using spawn larva. Except worker creation can be stacked and is even less impressive. In fact they are literally the same thing except larva can create anything instead of a nexus/CC which just creates a worker. Expanding in lotv also doesn't seem as strategic. You HAVE to do it, at least in HotS you could make the decision to stay on two base longer and do more dedicated all ins, where as LotV heavily emphasizes constant expansion. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9419 Posts
Microing a tank into a dropship was a major chore especially while trying to juggle even 1 or 2 base macro back at home. A better approach - and the one that LOTV is close too imo - is making the skillcap of harass high enough by itself - so you can actually outplay your opponent. That's why macromechanics pehraps were a neccesity in WOL and HOTS as there simply weren't enough other things to do to make the mechanical skillcap high enough, but I think LOTV has added enough new micro, harass and multitaskopportunites for that to be enough to seperate player skill in itself. Currently microing a sieged tank medivac combo in LOTV is trivial for those 2 reasons. What? The skillcap of medivac + siege tank pickup is close to infinitive. Whenever I watch pro players I keep thinking that they are miles away from reaching the potential of abusing medivacs and tanks properly. Now add in Liberators into the picture which requires indiviudal micro and add in the need to dodge enemy skillshots/AOE-abilities and the skillcap is there. It was already there in HOTS for bio play. Mules barely took any mechanics to execute, but the opportunities for micro and constant multitasking was high enough in itself that the macro part could be relatively easy (at least you almost never had to go back to base). For zerg that obviously wasn't the case in HOTS, but it seems to be closer to that in LOTV. | ||
|
jpg06051992
United States580 Posts
On August 23 2015 04:17 Hider wrote: A better approach - and the one that LOTV is close too imo - is making the skillcap of harass high enough by itself - so you can actually outplay your opponent. That's why macromechanics pehraps were a neccesity in WOL and HOTS as there simply weren't enough other things to do to make the mechanical skillcap high enough, but I think LOTV has added enough new micro, harass and multitaskopportunites for that to be enough to seperate player skill in itself. What? The skillcap of medivac + siege tank pickup is close to infinitive. Whenever I watch pro players I keep thinking that they are miles away from reaching the potential of abusing medivacs and tanks properly. Now add in Liberators into the picture which requires indiviudal micro and add in the need to dodge enemy skillshots/AOE-abilities and the skillcap is there. It was already there in HOTS for bio play. Mules barely took any mechanics to execute, but the opportunities for micro and constant multitasking was high enough in itself that the macro part could be relatively easy (at least you almost never had to go back to base). For zerg that obviously wasn't the case in HOTS, but it seems to be closer to that in LOTV. I agree, harassment is awesome and is a gigantic part of what makes Starcraft awesome to watch and if the developers are going to really strengthen anything about the viewership potential of the game it should be allowing harassment to as you said allow you to straight up outplay your opponent. Still, it's not the ONLY thing that makes Starcraft awesome and those things can't be ignored, I still think Blizzard needs to adjust the starting worker count to 10 to allow a bit of scouting and opening build room breathability, Cyclones still need to be...I don't know, less terrible? And Ultralisks are still overpowered vs. bio and I'm sick of playing Zerg vs. Mech xD | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9419 Posts
Still, it's not the ONLY thing that makes Starcraft awesome and those things can't be ignored, I Another thing I enjoy about Starcraft is the "experimentation"-proces. Working on new builds, trying out different compositions. For instance i enjoyed playing terran yesterday as I was trying to figure out when to get Orbital commands and how to make new builds. However, generally Blizzard are just awfull at rewarding this type of strategic diversity. Instead build orders are too often about "use a build that makes it possible for you to survive against stupid shit". I want builds to be less related to "I am gonna kill my opponent with this build" and more about "I am gonna gain a small advantage with this build". | ||
|
BluemoonSC
SoCal8910 Posts
On August 23 2015 04:17 Hider wrote: A better approach - and the one that LOTV is close too imo - is making the skillcap of harass high enough by itself - so you can actually outplay your opponent. That's why macromechanics pehraps were a neccesity in WOL and HOTS as there simply weren't enough other things to do to make the mechanical skillcap high enough, but I think LOTV has added enough new micro, harass and multitaskopportunites for that to be enough to seperate player skill in itself. What? The skillcap of medivac + siege tank pickup is close to infinitive. Whenever I watch pro players I keep thinking that they are miles away from reaching the potential of abusing medivacs and tanks properly. Now add in Liberators into the picture which requires indiviudal micro and add in the need to dodge enemy skillshots/AOE-abilities and the skillcap is there. It was already there in HOTS for bio play. Mules barely took any mechanics to execute, but the opportunities for micro and constant multitasking was high enough in itself that the macro part could be relatively easy (at least you almost never had to go back to base). For zerg that obviously wasn't the case in HOTS, but it seems to be closer to that in LOTV. This post pretty much sums up my feelings on the difference between hots and lotv and why removing inject/chrono/mules were necessary. With all of the harassment and engagements using the new abilities as well as the need to constantly expand and deny expansions, there is more going on and they're no longer a necessity to manage that on top of it all. I truthfully think that anyone complaining about their removal is looking at the change in a vacuum and purely theory crafting bc the patch has barely been out 2 whole days. Personally my zvz's have been filled with a lot more micro (roach ravager vs roach lurker) and a lot of fun! Zvt and zvp have been brutal though bc I've always been a macro zerg and very reactionary but I currently can't play that way bc I have much less larva  | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
| ||
|
knyttym
United States5797 Posts
On August 23 2015 04:17 Hider wrote: A better approach - and the one that LOTV is close too imo - is making the skillcap of harass high enough by itself - so you can actually outplay your opponent. That's why macromechanics pehraps were a neccesity in WOL and HOTS as there simply weren't enough other things to do to make the mechanical skillcap high enough, but I think LOTV has added enough new micro, harass and multitaskopportunites for that to be enough to seperate player skill in itself. What? The skillcap of medivac + siege tank pickup is close to infinitive. Whenever I watch pro players I keep thinking that they are miles away from reaching the potential of abusing medivacs and tanks properly. Now add in Liberators into the picture which requires indiviudal micro and add in the need to dodge enemy skillshots/AOE-abilities and the skillcap is there. It was already there in HOTS for bio play. Mules barely took any mechanics to execute, but the opportunities for micro and constant multitasking was high enough in itself that the macro part could be relatively easy (at least you almost never had to go back to base). For zerg that obviously wasn't the case in HOTS, but it seems to be closer to that in LOTV. Increasing the skill cap for harass might be okay but I don't really see the evidence for that promoting interesting gameplay in the Starcraft 2 engine. I understand what you mean though. To make a Brood War comparison, you are suggesting we push everything towards a 2 hatch mutalisk style where macro takes the back seat compared to the highly intensive mutalisk aggression. That's fine but I've yet to see anything in SC2 that mimics that interesting interaction. Tank medivac is akin to a 2 hatch mutalisk style except the mutalisks always turn and fire at the perfect timing and you don't have to master the deceleration/turn speed aspect at all. To make this more clear I would split up the word execution into 2 components. The first would be attention and the second would be mastery over a unit. Yeah the skill cap is infinite because you can always be watching your mutalisks and attack moving stuff more but the mastery over the unit is trivial. edit: Did you consider Thor Drops in the WOL beta non-trivial as well? | ||
|
ejozl
Denmark3463 Posts
I do however think there's decision making in the process and think there are better ways to make macro easier for Zerg. Say if you can stack multiple Injects on top of each other and they just wait in queue. Maybe a decrease in Overlord build time? | ||
|
parkufarku
882 Posts
On August 22 2015 03:32 DeadByDawn wrote: Time to ditch Terran and pick up P or (especially) Z. Does Kimbo not realise that T cannot proactively tech switch to counter Zerg compositions because it takes a fucking long time to do build a new composition and they will likely have no upgrades. Siege tanks have received nothing but nerf after nerf since the WoL Beta. Boohoo. Let's abandon the strongest race just because 1 unit isn't as broken as the Liberator | ||
| ||
