|
On August 24 2015 16:50 Cyro wrote:while oracles can't effectively kill stalkers, i still feel it can be a pretty binary defense for protoss. Since Oracles are light, it takes over 10 real seconds (14 HOTS game seconds) for a stalker to kill one, assuming it's in range the entire time - so it takes 2-3 stalkers, sometimes even per mineral line to prevent significant damage. Being caught off guard usually involves losing a couple of workers, and then even a few more as your stalkers move into position before the fight even starts. Oracles as a whole feel pretty all-or-nothing since their combat ability is solely based on a low range, insane DPS attack which only really affects one armor type.
And cyclones kill them even slower and cost much more. (pre-upgrade)
Just include the full antiair damage into the unit from the get-go. Or make it like 200 at least, which is still very aweful dps for the cost, but at least an oracle would die after ~10seconds.
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
The main question to ask there: Do you want people who build only cyclones (without marines or a rushed turret or two) to be able to defend very effectively against stuff like proxy oracle?
The reason they were redesigned in the first place was that they were unreasonably good at defending whatever you threw at them without bias
|
SoCal8908 Posts
On August 24 2015 16:01 Ozmodeus wrote:
change zerg macro mechanics back to how they were.....as if zvz wasnt a complete mirror already... now its a skill less mirror. uninstalled
?
Have you played ravager roach vs lurker roach?
If not, go ahead and try it then come back and see if you feel the same way.
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
You could probably count the people in this thread with 20+ 1v1's in each of their races matchup since the patch on 1 hand
|
On August 24 2015 21:45 Cyro wrote:
The main question to ask there: Do you want people who build only cyclones (without marines or a rushed turret or two) to be able to defend very effectively against stuff like proxy oracle?
The reason they were redesigned in the first place was that they were unreasonably good at defending whatever you threw at them without bias
Yes. For cost and tech and build order reasons I gave already.
I'm not saying they should revert to the full antiair they had at the start of the beta. That was indeed stupid. But there is a middle ground between no antiair(last patch) and 42.85dps(early beta) and it is not 8.5dps(this patch). If it was like 14dps (200damage in 14seconds) it would still be less than 2stalkers of higher tech, but at least it would be better to have 5marines and a cyclone than to have 6marines as early antiair.
|
I've played a few games on the new patch so I'd like to give some thoughts. This is completely from a Terran perspective.
I'll start out by saying I was excited to get rid of the macro mechanics. I felt they didn't add any strategic depth to the game and people were annoyed and frustrated playing a RTS game where if you were mechanically superior you could completely throw the "strategy" aspect out the window. While it is fun competing against yourself and your own personal mechanics it isn't a necessarily engaging experience for the player. So while I understand the RTS purists not being happy about the removal of macro mechanics it felt like a logical step. LotV should focus on player vs player interaction, strategy and control. Not on who can remember to go back to base to drop MULE or inject larva. I wanted to preface my statements by showing I was initially biased pro-removal.
Now lets go into the actual games. The actual game is more boring than previously. Workers are now a precious resource. One that needs to be guarded. While that is a good thing it feels like you simply must open worker-harassment style. It also feels that now (as Terran) you can get a disproportionate amount of gas previously. So things like double reactor reaper felt "right." You are now mineral choked instead of gas choked liked before. So since the Reaper is naturally a gas heavy unit (1:1 ratio) it felt very natural to make these and in large quantities.
But this is where the game slows down. Once you are done reaper harassing I felt like I was sitting around for a large period of time building my infrastructure and getting a healthy worker supply. It was boring. Every game I dreaded entering this lull phase. Possibly I should have looked for other things to do with my time. Like maybe work on getting a medivac and tank out to harass. But I had to fear an actual army just running into my front door so I needed to get marines out which meant I was floating gas but was desperate for minerals. So it was very unnatural to try and build a standing army while also progressing through the tech tree. So again I just went for gas heavy investments like ebays and upgrades, marine upgrades while very slowly advancing through the tree. It felt off. I'm not sure what Blizzard could/should do to prevent it but right now the economy of Terran feels funny.
Like I said I enjoy the spirit of the change. I want them to try and tune the game with these artificial APM sinks taken away. I want my APM sinks to be things that are actively giving me the feeling of accomplishment. I want it to be harassment and skirmish not running back to base to macro. But right now the game feels weird.
|
SoCal8908 Posts
On August 24 2015 23:19 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2015 21:45 Cyro wrote:
The main question to ask there: Do you want people who build only cyclones (without marines or a rushed turret or two) to be able to defend very effectively against stuff like proxy oracle?
The reason they were redesigned in the first place was that they were unreasonably good at defending whatever you threw at them without bias Yes. For cost and tech and build order reasons I gave already. I'm not saying they should revert to the full antiair they had at the start of the beta. That was indeed stupid. But there is a middle ground between no antiair(last patch) and 42.85dps(early beta) and it is not 8.5dps(this patch). If it was like 14dps (200damage in 14seconds) it would still be less than 2stalkers of higher tech, but at least it would be better to have 5marines and a cyclone than to have 6marines as early antiair.
but like cyro and i have been saying..the oracle is built primarily to harass mineral lines against terran and the goal of the cyclone isn't primarily anti air. yes the oracle has other tools, but if you're not killing off workers, you're wasting time, tech, and supply. oracles have the same cost/supply but they're designed to kill workers whereas cyclones are designed to be anti-big unit with a touch of early anti air that, once you get in range, you either have to quickly escape, or face being kited without being able to fight back. in fact, cyclones are just a touch slower than oracles, i believe. so if the protoss player walks into a bunch of marines + a cyclone in your mineral field, you do stand a pretty good chance of snapping the oracle, if you stutter step, then continue to micro the cyclone. and even if you don't kill it, he's sure as hell not coming back which gives you ample time to set up turrets so you can leave your base.
|
Why Blizzard is not considering making the adept' shadow unable to pass through forcefields? I'm afraid that only changing the cost will not fix PvP.
Another thing... I'm the only one concerned about how OP lurkers are?
|
But this is where the game slows down. Once you are done reaper harassing I felt like I was sitting around for a large period of time building my infrastructure and getting a healthy worker supply. It was boring. Every game I dreaded entering this lull phase. Possibly I should have looked for other things to do with my time
I assume you are talking about the low income rate and not about placing mules (because that really doesn't take up a whole lot of time unlike inject larva).
If so I do find the low income growth rate problematic. Mostly because it makes the game more snowbally when damage/AOE/harass-units are strong and army values are low, but also because - as you point out - the game becomes a bit more slow.
|
On August 24 2015 23:55 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +But this is where the game slows down. Once you are done reaper harassing I felt like I was sitting around for a large period of time building my infrastructure and getting a healthy worker supply. It was boring. Every game I dreaded entering this lull phase. Possibly I should have looked for other things to do with my time I assume you are talking about the low income rate and not about placing mules (because that really doesn't take up a whole lot of time unlike inject larva). If so I do find the low income growth rate problematic. Mostly because it makes the game more snowbally when damage/AOE/harass-units are strong and army values are low, but also because - as you point out - the game becomes a bit more slow.
Yes I was referring to the mineral intake seemed too slow to accomplish a whole lot. Previously a MULE could help me out and would bring in enough minerals to build up two barracks for this early-midgame time. It really helped with getting your mineral income going so you could spend it. Now it felt like I was just kind of sitting around watching my SCVs bring their minerals in and I was just waiting around so I could get enough money to build some barracks. But I was also forced into spending 100minerals per cycle on SCV as well. So everything just felt like the game was at a standstill at this point in time. Once you get the required SCVs (lets say 42 or so) the game felt like the same. But the time going from about 20 SCV to 40+ SCV felt very boring.
|
4713 Posts
On August 24 2015 23:43 Tenks wrote:
I've played a few games on the new patch so I'd like to give some thoughts. This is completely from a Terran perspective.
I'll start out by saying I was excited to get rid of the macro mechanics. I felt they didn't add any strategic depth to the game and people were annoyed and frustrated playing a RTS game where if you were mechanically superior you could completely throw the "strategy" aspect out the window. While it is fun competing against yourself and your own personal mechanics it isn't a necessarily engaging experience for the player. So while I understand the RTS purists not being happy about the removal of macro mechanics it felt like a logical step. LotV should focus on player vs player interaction, strategy and control. Not on who can remember to go back to base to drop MULE or inject larva. I wanted to preface my statements by showing I was initially biased pro-removal.
Now lets go into the actual games. The actual game is more boring than previously. Workers are now a precious resource. One that needs to be guarded. While that is a good thing it feels like you simply must open worker-harassment style. It also feels that now (as Terran) you can get a disproportionate amount of gas previously. So things like double reactor reaper felt "right." You are now mineral choked instead of gas choked liked before. So since the Reaper is naturally a gas heavy unit (1:1 ratio) it felt very natural to make these and in large quantities.
But this is where the game slows down. Once you are done reaper harassing I felt like I was sitting around for a large period of time building my infrastructure and getting a healthy worker supply. It was boring. Every game I dreaded entering this lull phase. Possibly I should have looked for other things to do with my time. Like maybe work on getting a medivac and tank out to harass. But I had to fear an actual army just running into my front door so I needed to get marines out which meant I was floating gas but was desperate for minerals. So it was very unnatural to try and build a standing army while also progressing through the tech tree. So again I just went for gas heavy investments like ebays and upgrades, marine upgrades while very slowly advancing through the tree. It felt off. I'm not sure what Blizzard could/should do to prevent it but right now the economy of Terran feels funny.
Like I said I enjoy the spirit of the change. I want them to try and tune the game with these artificial APM sinks taken away. I want my APM sinks to be things that are actively giving me the feeling of accomplishment. I want it to be harassment and skirmish not running back to base to macro. But right now the game feels weird.
That's such a dumb and shortsighted point of view. If I or any player out there is capable of training to the point where he is able to out produce anyone then he should be rewarded by defeating other players with pure macro.
Does that make for a bad game? Only in the context of macro being the strongest way of distributing your attention. If macro, micro, multi-tasking etc are all equal then it should in theory balance out while simultaneously richening the game by having a multitude of options in the game, the option to out-micro someone, the option to out-macro someone, the option to out-multitask someone and the option to out-think someone.
No matter how much you hated macro mechanics or believe they were detrimental to the game, the matter of fact is, the removal of them will probably make the game poorer by removing another way for players to express themselves.
|
On August 25 2015 01:34 Destructicon wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2015 23:43 Tenks wrote:
I've played a few games on the new patch so I'd like to give some thoughts. This is completely from a Terran perspective.
I'll start out by saying I was excited to get rid of the macro mechanics. I felt they didn't add any strategic depth to the game and people were annoyed and frustrated playing a RTS game where if you were mechanically superior you could completely throw the "strategy" aspect out the window. While it is fun competing against yourself and your own personal mechanics it isn't a necessarily engaging experience for the player. So while I understand the RTS purists not being happy about the removal of macro mechanics it felt like a logical step. LotV should focus on player vs player interaction, strategy and control. Not on who can remember to go back to base to drop MULE or inject larva. I wanted to preface my statements by showing I was initially biased pro-removal.
Now lets go into the actual games. The actual game is more boring than previously. Workers are now a precious resource. One that needs to be guarded. While that is a good thing it feels like you simply must open worker-harassment style. It also feels that now (as Terran) you can get a disproportionate amount of gas previously. So things like double reactor reaper felt "right." You are now mineral choked instead of gas choked liked before. So since the Reaper is naturally a gas heavy unit (1:1 ratio) it felt very natural to make these and in large quantities.
But this is where the game slows down. Once you are done reaper harassing I felt like I was sitting around for a large period of time building my infrastructure and getting a healthy worker supply. It was boring. Every game I dreaded entering this lull phase. Possibly I should have looked for other things to do with my time. Like maybe work on getting a medivac and tank out to harass. But I had to fear an actual army just running into my front door so I needed to get marines out which meant I was floating gas but was desperate for minerals. So it was very unnatural to try and build a standing army while also progressing through the tech tree. So again I just went for gas heavy investments like ebays and upgrades, marine upgrades while very slowly advancing through the tree. It felt off. I'm not sure what Blizzard could/should do to prevent it but right now the economy of Terran feels funny.
Like I said I enjoy the spirit of the change. I want them to try and tune the game with these artificial APM sinks taken away. I want my APM sinks to be things that are actively giving me the feeling of accomplishment. I want it to be harassment and skirmish not running back to base to macro. But right now the game feels weird. That's such a dumb and shortsighted point of view. If I or any player out there is capable of training to the point where he is able to out produce anyone then he should be rewarded by defeating other players with pure macro. Does that make for a bad game? Only in the context of macro being the strongest way of distributing your attention. If macro, micro, multi-tasking etc are all equal then it should in theory balance out while simultaneously richening the game by having a multitude of options in the game, the option to out-micro someone, the option to out-macro someone, the option to out-multitask someone and the option to out-think someone. No matter how much you hated macro mechanics or believe they were detrimental to the game, the matter of fact is, the removal of them will probably make the game poorer by removing another way for players to express themselves.
While you are welcome to your opinion you did not refute anything other than giving your opinion. How exactly is it short sighted to make the skill floor higher? I would argue it is good for the longevity of the game so the barrier of entry to even pretend like you're playing the game isn't 50+ matches to get any form of internal rhythm for macro mechanics. It makes things much cleaner to a new comer because it acts more in a manner of a traditional RTS. You make workers and they harvest. You make structure and they make units. You try and balance your fundamental resource (minerals) with the advanced resource (gas.) They don't need to try and understand why the macro mechanics even exist. Possibly they wouldn't have existed in the first place if everyone wasn't so up in arms about MBS and infinite select "dumbing down" the game from WoL pre-beta.
I never said I dislike macro mechanics but I feel for the direction they're taking the game with LotV they are unnecessary. They are attempting to add more engaging and fun APM sinks. Thats great. That can make for a fun and interesting experience. In HotS much of that APM sinking doesn't really exist. So the macro mechanics feel more natural there. I even consider myself far and away a mechanical player than a strategic player. I started off admiring Terrans like Jinro over MKP. So this point of view is even biased as someone who considers themselves a macro player. But I've come to realize I don't boot up SC2 to play HotS anymore (and I didn't previous to getting into LotV.) Why? It wasn't very fun. It felt sterile. It felt almost single player. LotV feels much more like a 2 player game than HotS. Possibly because things are sloppy and possibly because it isn't as fully figured out. I don't know. But I find it much more fun than HotS.
|
On August 25 2015 01:34 Destructicon wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2015 23:43 Tenks wrote:
I've played a few games on the new patch so I'd like to give some thoughts. This is completely from a Terran perspective.
I'll start out by saying I was excited to get rid of the macro mechanics. I felt they didn't add any strategic depth to the game and people were annoyed and frustrated playing a RTS game where if you were mechanically superior you could completely throw the "strategy" aspect out the window. While it is fun competing against yourself and your own personal mechanics it isn't a necessarily engaging experience for the player. So while I understand the RTS purists not being happy about the removal of macro mechanics it felt like a logical step. LotV should focus on player vs player interaction, strategy and control. Not on who can remember to go back to base to drop MULE or inject larva. I wanted to preface my statements by showing I was initially biased pro-removal.
Now lets go into the actual games. The actual game is more boring than previously. Workers are now a precious resource. One that needs to be guarded. While that is a good thing it feels like you simply must open worker-harassment style. It also feels that now (as Terran) you can get a disproportionate amount of gas previously. So things like double reactor reaper felt "right." You are now mineral choked instead of gas choked liked before. So since the Reaper is naturally a gas heavy unit (1:1 ratio) it felt very natural to make these and in large quantities.
But this is where the game slows down. Once you are done reaper harassing I felt like I was sitting around for a large period of time building my infrastructure and getting a healthy worker supply. It was boring. Every game I dreaded entering this lull phase. Possibly I should have looked for other things to do with my time. Like maybe work on getting a medivac and tank out to harass. But I had to fear an actual army just running into my front door so I needed to get marines out which meant I was floating gas but was desperate for minerals. So it was very unnatural to try and build a standing army while also progressing through the tech tree. So again I just went for gas heavy investments like ebays and upgrades, marine upgrades while very slowly advancing through the tree. It felt off. I'm not sure what Blizzard could/should do to prevent it but right now the economy of Terran feels funny.
Like I said I enjoy the spirit of the change. I want them to try and tune the game with these artificial APM sinks taken away. I want my APM sinks to be things that are actively giving me the feeling of accomplishment. I want it to be harassment and skirmish not running back to base to macro. But right now the game feels weird. That's such a dumb and shortsighted point of view. If I or any player out there is capable of training to the point where he is able to out produce anyone then he should be rewarded by defeating other players with pure macro. Does that make for a bad game? Only in the context of macro being the strongest way of distributing your attention. If macro, micro, multi-tasking etc are all equal then it should in theory balance out while simultaneously richening the game by having a multitude of options in the game, the option to out-micro someone, the option to out-macro someone, the option to out-multitask someone and the option to out-think someone. No matter how much you hated macro mechanics or believe they were detrimental to the game, the matter of fact is, the removal of them will probably make the game poorer by removing another way for players to express themselves.
Except macro was way wayyyyy more important
|
4713 Posts
On August 25 2015 02:05 Tenks wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2015 01:34 Destructicon wrote:On August 24 2015 23:43 Tenks wrote:
I've played a few games on the new patch so I'd like to give some thoughts. This is completely from a Terran perspective.
I'll start out by saying I was excited to get rid of the macro mechanics. I felt they didn't add any strategic depth to the game and people were annoyed and frustrated playing a RTS game where if you were mechanically superior you could completely throw the "strategy" aspect out the window. While it is fun competing against yourself and your own personal mechanics it isn't a necessarily engaging experience for the player. So while I understand the RTS purists not being happy about the removal of macro mechanics it felt like a logical step. LotV should focus on player vs player interaction, strategy and control. Not on who can remember to go back to base to drop MULE or inject larva. I wanted to preface my statements by showing I was initially biased pro-removal.
Now lets go into the actual games. The actual game is more boring than previously. Workers are now a precious resource. One that needs to be guarded. While that is a good thing it feels like you simply must open worker-harassment style. It also feels that now (as Terran) you can get a disproportionate amount of gas previously. So things like double reactor reaper felt "right." You are now mineral choked instead of gas choked liked before. So since the Reaper is naturally a gas heavy unit (1:1 ratio) it felt very natural to make these and in large quantities.
But this is where the game slows down. Once you are done reaper harassing I felt like I was sitting around for a large period of time building my infrastructure and getting a healthy worker supply. It was boring. Every game I dreaded entering this lull phase. Possibly I should have looked for other things to do with my time. Like maybe work on getting a medivac and tank out to harass. But I had to fear an actual army just running into my front door so I needed to get marines out which meant I was floating gas but was desperate for minerals. So it was very unnatural to try and build a standing army while also progressing through the tech tree. So again I just went for gas heavy investments like ebays and upgrades, marine upgrades while very slowly advancing through the tree. It felt off. I'm not sure what Blizzard could/should do to prevent it but right now the economy of Terran feels funny.
Like I said I enjoy the spirit of the change. I want them to try and tune the game with these artificial APM sinks taken away. I want my APM sinks to be things that are actively giving me the feeling of accomplishment. I want it to be harassment and skirmish not running back to base to macro. But right now the game feels weird. That's such a dumb and shortsighted point of view. If I or any player out there is capable of training to the point where he is able to out produce anyone then he should be rewarded by defeating other players with pure macro. Does that make for a bad game? Only in the context of macro being the strongest way of distributing your attention. If macro, micro, multi-tasking etc are all equal then it should in theory balance out while simultaneously richening the game by having a multitude of options in the game, the option to out-micro someone, the option to out-macro someone, the option to out-multitask someone and the option to out-think someone. No matter how much you hated macro mechanics or believe they were detrimental to the game, the matter of fact is, the removal of them will probably make the game poorer by removing another way for players to express themselves. While you are welcome to your opinion you did not refute anything other than giving your opinion. How exactly is it short sighted to make the skill floor higher? I would argue it is good for the longevity of the game so the barrier of entry to even pretend like you're playing the game isn't 50+ matches to get any form of internal rhythm for macro mechanics. It makes things much cleaner to a new comer because it acts more in a manner of a traditional RTS. You make workers and they harvest. You make structure and they make units. You try and balance your fundamental resource (minerals) with the advanced resource (gas.) They don't need to try and understand why the macro mechanics even exist. Possibly they wouldn't have existed in the first place if everyone wasn't so up in arms about MBS and infinite select "dumbing down" the game from WoL pre-beta. I never said I dislike macro mechanics but I feel for the direction they're taking the game with LotV they are unnecessary. They are attempting to add more engaging and fun APM sinks. Thats great. That can make for a fun and interesting experience. In HotS much of that APM sinking doesn't really exist. So the macro mechanics feel more natural there. I even consider myself far and away a mechanical player than a strategic player. I started off admiring Terrans like Jinro over MKP. So this point of view is even biased as someone who considers themselves a macro player. But I've come to realize I don't boot up SC2 to play HotS anymore (and I didn't previous to getting into LotV.) Why? It wasn't very fun. It felt sterile. It felt almost single player. LotV feels much more like a 2 player game than HotS. Possibly because things are sloppy and possibly because it isn't as fully figured out. I don't know. But I find it much more fun than HotS.
I mainly responded to your claim that macro mechanics didn't add any strategic depth to SC2 and that people felt frustrated if someone could just beat them by raw mechanics.
RTS, by definition means Real Time Strategy. What that means is that all the action takes place in real time. By definition that makes time a resource. What that implies is that spending time and attention on macro IS a choice. I hate this ignorant point of view that, because macro is mostly a repetitive and relatively monotone activity, it must be less important and therefore "the real game" is about micro and engagements and everything in the dev's powers should be done to cut out macro. Macro in a void is boring, but so is micro in a void, its the balancing of macro and micro that makes SC2 what it is and its what made BW what it is.
With that said, I do believe SC2's macro mechanics did have their own flaws, mostly in being asymmetrical and leading to some really broken situations (SCV sacking, instant zerg remaxes, protoss down in upgrades overtaking his opponent in upgrades). But I'm not sure that warranted their removal, a revision sure.
|
On August 25 2015 02:29 Destructicon wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2015 02:05 Tenks wrote:On August 25 2015 01:34 Destructicon wrote:On August 24 2015 23:43 Tenks wrote:
I've played a few games on the new patch so I'd like to give some thoughts. This is completely from a Terran perspective.
I'll start out by saying I was excited to get rid of the macro mechanics. I felt they didn't add any strategic depth to the game and people were annoyed and frustrated playing a RTS game where if you were mechanically superior you could completely throw the "strategy" aspect out the window. While it is fun competing against yourself and your own personal mechanics it isn't a necessarily engaging experience for the player. So while I understand the RTS purists not being happy about the removal of macro mechanics it felt like a logical step. LotV should focus on player vs player interaction, strategy and control. Not on who can remember to go back to base to drop MULE or inject larva. I wanted to preface my statements by showing I was initially biased pro-removal.
Now lets go into the actual games. The actual game is more boring than previously. Workers are now a precious resource. One that needs to be guarded. While that is a good thing it feels like you simply must open worker-harassment style. It also feels that now (as Terran) you can get a disproportionate amount of gas previously. So things like double reactor reaper felt "right." You are now mineral choked instead of gas choked liked before. So since the Reaper is naturally a gas heavy unit (1:1 ratio) it felt very natural to make these and in large quantities.
But this is where the game slows down. Once you are done reaper harassing I felt like I was sitting around for a large period of time building my infrastructure and getting a healthy worker supply. It was boring. Every game I dreaded entering this lull phase. Possibly I should have looked for other things to do with my time. Like maybe work on getting a medivac and tank out to harass. But I had to fear an actual army just running into my front door so I needed to get marines out which meant I was floating gas but was desperate for minerals. So it was very unnatural to try and build a standing army while also progressing through the tech tree. So again I just went for gas heavy investments like ebays and upgrades, marine upgrades while very slowly advancing through the tree. It felt off. I'm not sure what Blizzard could/should do to prevent it but right now the economy of Terran feels funny.
Like I said I enjoy the spirit of the change. I want them to try and tune the game with these artificial APM sinks taken away. I want my APM sinks to be things that are actively giving me the feeling of accomplishment. I want it to be harassment and skirmish not running back to base to macro. But right now the game feels weird. That's such a dumb and shortsighted point of view. If I or any player out there is capable of training to the point where he is able to out produce anyone then he should be rewarded by defeating other players with pure macro. Does that make for a bad game? Only in the context of macro being the strongest way of distributing your attention. If macro, micro, multi-tasking etc are all equal then it should in theory balance out while simultaneously richening the game by having a multitude of options in the game, the option to out-micro someone, the option to out-macro someone, the option to out-multitask someone and the option to out-think someone. No matter how much you hated macro mechanics or believe they were detrimental to the game, the matter of fact is, the removal of them will probably make the game poorer by removing another way for players to express themselves. While you are welcome to your opinion you did not refute anything other than giving your opinion. How exactly is it short sighted to make the skill floor higher? I would argue it is good for the longevity of the game so the barrier of entry to even pretend like you're playing the game isn't 50+ matches to get any form of internal rhythm for macro mechanics. It makes things much cleaner to a new comer because it acts more in a manner of a traditional RTS. You make workers and they harvest. You make structure and they make units. You try and balance your fundamental resource (minerals) with the advanced resource (gas.) They don't need to try and understand why the macro mechanics even exist. Possibly they wouldn't have existed in the first place if everyone wasn't so up in arms about MBS and infinite select "dumbing down" the game from WoL pre-beta. I never said I dislike macro mechanics but I feel for the direction they're taking the game with LotV they are unnecessary. They are attempting to add more engaging and fun APM sinks. Thats great. That can make for a fun and interesting experience. In HotS much of that APM sinking doesn't really exist. So the macro mechanics feel more natural there. I even consider myself far and away a mechanical player than a strategic player. I started off admiring Terrans like Jinro over MKP. So this point of view is even biased as someone who considers themselves a macro player. But I've come to realize I don't boot up SC2 to play HotS anymore (and I didn't previous to getting into LotV.) Why? It wasn't very fun. It felt sterile. It felt almost single player. LotV feels much more like a 2 player game than HotS. Possibly because things are sloppy and possibly because it isn't as fully figured out. I don't know. But I find it much more fun than HotS. I mainly responded to your claim that macro mechanics didn't add any strategic depth to SC2 and that people felt frustrated if someone could just beat them by raw mechanics. RTS, by definition means Real Time Strategy. What that means is that all the action takes place in real time. By definition that makes time a resource. What that implies is that spending time and attention on macro IS a choice. I hate this ignorant point of view that, because macro is mostly a repetitive and relatively monotone activity, it must be less important and therefore "the real game" is about micro and engagements and everything in the dev's powers should be done to cut out macro. Macro in a void is boring, but so is micro in a void, its the balancing of macro and micro that makes SC2 what it is and its what made BW what it is. With that said, I do believe SC2's macro mechanics did have their own flaws, mostly in being asymmetrical and leading to some really broken situations (SCV sacking, instant zerg remaxes, protoss down in upgrades overtaking his opponent in upgrades). But I'm not sure that warranted their removal, a revision sure.
Hey I'm with you on the RTS portion. When I discussed what someone did wrong in a game I would always say SC2 by definition is 66% your macro. Because it makes up the RT of RTS. And macro still exists. You can still get supply blocked. You can still be pre-occupied with your harassment and army to forget to expand. You can have uneven worker distribution across bases. You can forget production cycles. You can forget to add production. You can forget upgrades. You can forget your armory until +1/+1 is already finished (a Tenks staple.) Its all there. The only thing gone is being forced to return to base every 30 seconds to perform a mandatory macro action.
|
On August 25 2015 02:33 Tenks wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2015 02:29 Destructicon wrote:On August 25 2015 02:05 Tenks wrote:On August 25 2015 01:34 Destructicon wrote:On August 24 2015 23:43 Tenks wrote:
I've played a few games on the new patch so I'd like to give some thoughts. This is completely from a Terran perspective.
I'll start out by saying I was excited to get rid of the macro mechanics. I felt they didn't add any strategic depth to the game and people were annoyed and frustrated playing a RTS game where if you were mechanically superior you could completely throw the "strategy" aspect out the window. While it is fun competing against yourself and your own personal mechanics it isn't a necessarily engaging experience for the player. So while I understand the RTS purists not being happy about the removal of macro mechanics it felt like a logical step. LotV should focus on player vs player interaction, strategy and control. Not on who can remember to go back to base to drop MULE or inject larva. I wanted to preface my statements by showing I was initially biased pro-removal.
Now lets go into the actual games. The actual game is more boring than previously. Workers are now a precious resource. One that needs to be guarded. While that is a good thing it feels like you simply must open worker-harassment style. It also feels that now (as Terran) you can get a disproportionate amount of gas previously. So things like double reactor reaper felt "right." You are now mineral choked instead of gas choked liked before. So since the Reaper is naturally a gas heavy unit (1:1 ratio) it felt very natural to make these and in large quantities.
But this is where the game slows down. Once you are done reaper harassing I felt like I was sitting around for a large period of time building my infrastructure and getting a healthy worker supply. It was boring. Every game I dreaded entering this lull phase. Possibly I should have looked for other things to do with my time. Like maybe work on getting a medivac and tank out to harass. But I had to fear an actual army just running into my front door so I needed to get marines out which meant I was floating gas but was desperate for minerals. So it was very unnatural to try and build a standing army while also progressing through the tech tree. So again I just went for gas heavy investments like ebays and upgrades, marine upgrades while very slowly advancing through the tree. It felt off. I'm not sure what Blizzard could/should do to prevent it but right now the economy of Terran feels funny.
Like I said I enjoy the spirit of the change. I want them to try and tune the game with these artificial APM sinks taken away. I want my APM sinks to be things that are actively giving me the feeling of accomplishment. I want it to be harassment and skirmish not running back to base to macro. But right now the game feels weird. That's such a dumb and shortsighted point of view. If I or any player out there is capable of training to the point where he is able to out produce anyone then he should be rewarded by defeating other players with pure macro. Does that make for a bad game? Only in the context of macro being the strongest way of distributing your attention. If macro, micro, multi-tasking etc are all equal then it should in theory balance out while simultaneously richening the game by having a multitude of options in the game, the option to out-micro someone, the option to out-macro someone, the option to out-multitask someone and the option to out-think someone. No matter how much you hated macro mechanics or believe they were detrimental to the game, the matter of fact is, the removal of them will probably make the game poorer by removing another way for players to express themselves. While you are welcome to your opinion you did not refute anything other than giving your opinion. How exactly is it short sighted to make the skill floor higher? I would argue it is good for the longevity of the game so the barrier of entry to even pretend like you're playing the game isn't 50+ matches to get any form of internal rhythm for macro mechanics. It makes things much cleaner to a new comer because it acts more in a manner of a traditional RTS. You make workers and they harvest. You make structure and they make units. You try and balance your fundamental resource (minerals) with the advanced resource (gas.) They don't need to try and understand why the macro mechanics even exist. Possibly they wouldn't have existed in the first place if everyone wasn't so up in arms about MBS and infinite select "dumbing down" the game from WoL pre-beta. I never said I dislike macro mechanics but I feel for the direction they're taking the game with LotV they are unnecessary. They are attempting to add more engaging and fun APM sinks. Thats great. That can make for a fun and interesting experience. In HotS much of that APM sinking doesn't really exist. So the macro mechanics feel more natural there. I even consider myself far and away a mechanical player than a strategic player. I started off admiring Terrans like Jinro over MKP. So this point of view is even biased as someone who considers themselves a macro player. But I've come to realize I don't boot up SC2 to play HotS anymore (and I didn't previous to getting into LotV.) Why? It wasn't very fun. It felt sterile. It felt almost single player. LotV feels much more like a 2 player game than HotS. Possibly because things are sloppy and possibly because it isn't as fully figured out. I don't know. But I find it much more fun than HotS. I mainly responded to your claim that macro mechanics didn't add any strategic depth to SC2 and that people felt frustrated if someone could just beat them by raw mechanics. RTS, by definition means Real Time Strategy. What that means is that all the action takes place in real time. By definition that makes time a resource. What that implies is that spending time and attention on macro IS a choice. I hate this ignorant point of view that, because macro is mostly a repetitive and relatively monotone activity, it must be less important and therefore "the real game" is about micro and engagements and everything in the dev's powers should be done to cut out macro. Macro in a void is boring, but so is micro in a void, its the balancing of macro and micro that makes SC2 what it is and its what made BW what it is. With that said, I do believe SC2's macro mechanics did have their own flaws, mostly in being asymmetrical and leading to some really broken situations (SCV sacking, instant zerg remaxes, protoss down in upgrades overtaking his opponent in upgrades). But I'm not sure that warranted their removal, a revision sure. Hey I'm with you on the RTS portion. When I discussed what someone did wrong in a game I would always say SC2 by definition is 66% your macro. Because it makes up the RT of RTS. And macro still exists. You can still get supply blocked. You can still be pre-occupied with your harassment and army to forget to expand. You can have uneven worker distribution across bases. You can forget production cycles. You can forget to add production. You can forget upgrades. You can forget your armory until +1/+1 is already finished (a Tenks staple.) Its all there. The only thing gone is being forced to return to base every 30 seconds to perform a mandatory macro action.
Protoss and Terran still need depots every 20 seconds, so its not like we don't have to return to base 
|
On August 25 2015 02:57 Naracs_Duc wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2015 02:33 Tenks wrote:On August 25 2015 02:29 Destructicon wrote:On August 25 2015 02:05 Tenks wrote:On August 25 2015 01:34 Destructicon wrote:On August 24 2015 23:43 Tenks wrote:
I've played a few games on the new patch so I'd like to give some thoughts. This is completely from a Terran perspective.
I'll start out by saying I was excited to get rid of the macro mechanics. I felt they didn't add any strategic depth to the game and people were annoyed and frustrated playing a RTS game where if you were mechanically superior you could completely throw the "strategy" aspect out the window. While it is fun competing against yourself and your own personal mechanics it isn't a necessarily engaging experience for the player. So while I understand the RTS purists not being happy about the removal of macro mechanics it felt like a logical step. LotV should focus on player vs player interaction, strategy and control. Not on who can remember to go back to base to drop MULE or inject larva. I wanted to preface my statements by showing I was initially biased pro-removal.
Now lets go into the actual games. The actual game is more boring than previously. Workers are now a precious resource. One that needs to be guarded. While that is a good thing it feels like you simply must open worker-harassment style. It also feels that now (as Terran) you can get a disproportionate amount of gas previously. So things like double reactor reaper felt "right." You are now mineral choked instead of gas choked liked before. So since the Reaper is naturally a gas heavy unit (1:1 ratio) it felt very natural to make these and in large quantities.
But this is where the game slows down. Once you are done reaper harassing I felt like I was sitting around for a large period of time building my infrastructure and getting a healthy worker supply. It was boring. Every game I dreaded entering this lull phase. Possibly I should have looked for other things to do with my time. Like maybe work on getting a medivac and tank out to harass. But I had to fear an actual army just running into my front door so I needed to get marines out which meant I was floating gas but was desperate for minerals. So it was very unnatural to try and build a standing army while also progressing through the tech tree. So again I just went for gas heavy investments like ebays and upgrades, marine upgrades while very slowly advancing through the tree. It felt off. I'm not sure what Blizzard could/should do to prevent it but right now the economy of Terran feels funny.
Like I said I enjoy the spirit of the change. I want them to try and tune the game with these artificial APM sinks taken away. I want my APM sinks to be things that are actively giving me the feeling of accomplishment. I want it to be harassment and skirmish not running back to base to macro. But right now the game feels weird. That's such a dumb and shortsighted point of view. If I or any player out there is capable of training to the point where he is able to out produce anyone then he should be rewarded by defeating other players with pure macro. Does that make for a bad game? Only in the context of macro being the strongest way of distributing your attention. If macro, micro, multi-tasking etc are all equal then it should in theory balance out while simultaneously richening the game by having a multitude of options in the game, the option to out-micro someone, the option to out-macro someone, the option to out-multitask someone and the option to out-think someone. No matter how much you hated macro mechanics or believe they were detrimental to the game, the matter of fact is, the removal of them will probably make the game poorer by removing another way for players to express themselves. While you are welcome to your opinion you did not refute anything other than giving your opinion. How exactly is it short sighted to make the skill floor higher? I would argue it is good for the longevity of the game so the barrier of entry to even pretend like you're playing the game isn't 50+ matches to get any form of internal rhythm for macro mechanics. It makes things much cleaner to a new comer because it acts more in a manner of a traditional RTS. You make workers and they harvest. You make structure and they make units. You try and balance your fundamental resource (minerals) with the advanced resource (gas.) They don't need to try and understand why the macro mechanics even exist. Possibly they wouldn't have existed in the first place if everyone wasn't so up in arms about MBS and infinite select "dumbing down" the game from WoL pre-beta. I never said I dislike macro mechanics but I feel for the direction they're taking the game with LotV they are unnecessary. They are attempting to add more engaging and fun APM sinks. Thats great. That can make for a fun and interesting experience. In HotS much of that APM sinking doesn't really exist. So the macro mechanics feel more natural there. I even consider myself far and away a mechanical player than a strategic player. I started off admiring Terrans like Jinro over MKP. So this point of view is even biased as someone who considers themselves a macro player. But I've come to realize I don't boot up SC2 to play HotS anymore (and I didn't previous to getting into LotV.) Why? It wasn't very fun. It felt sterile. It felt almost single player. LotV feels much more like a 2 player game than HotS. Possibly because things are sloppy and possibly because it isn't as fully figured out. I don't know. But I find it much more fun than HotS. I mainly responded to your claim that macro mechanics didn't add any strategic depth to SC2 and that people felt frustrated if someone could just beat them by raw mechanics. RTS, by definition means Real Time Strategy. What that means is that all the action takes place in real time. By definition that makes time a resource. What that implies is that spending time and attention on macro IS a choice. I hate this ignorant point of view that, because macro is mostly a repetitive and relatively monotone activity, it must be less important and therefore "the real game" is about micro and engagements and everything in the dev's powers should be done to cut out macro. Macro in a void is boring, but so is micro in a void, its the balancing of macro and micro that makes SC2 what it is and its what made BW what it is. With that said, I do believe SC2's macro mechanics did have their own flaws, mostly in being asymmetrical and leading to some really broken situations (SCV sacking, instant zerg remaxes, protoss down in upgrades overtaking his opponent in upgrades). But I'm not sure that warranted their removal, a revision sure. Hey I'm with you on the RTS portion. When I discussed what someone did wrong in a game I would always say SC2 by definition is 66% your macro. Because it makes up the RT of RTS. And macro still exists. You can still get supply blocked. You can still be pre-occupied with your harassment and army to forget to expand. You can have uneven worker distribution across bases. You can forget production cycles. You can forget to add production. You can forget upgrades. You can forget your armory until +1/+1 is already finished (a Tenks staple.) Its all there. The only thing gone is being forced to return to base every 30 seconds to perform a mandatory macro action. Protoss and Terran still need depots every 20 seconds, so its not like we don't have to return to base
With how much supply CCs were giving me I had supply flowing out my ass in my few games. It was awkward because I wanted to make a depot wall but I was already like 20 supply under my cap (and I was broke.) So I just threw the ebays where I'd generally make my depot wall. Then as Terran if I really screwed up and I got hard locked I could just throw down supply without feeling bad about it. I certainly "felt" like I was going back to base less to make depots. Probably a combo of CCs giving so much supply, emphasis on quick 3 bases and the fact in LotV you trade supply a bunch.
|
On August 23 2015 10:46 Lunareste wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2015 09:56 parkufarku wrote: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 You only consider the Liberator broken because it's effective at doing the Siege Tank's job. Siege Tanks are just terrible in SC2 and there's no ifs about that.
First of all, not ALL units have to be great or even niche role decent for a race to be balanced. Look at BW Protoss, Scout was completely useless but that didn't prevent P from being decent as a whole (still somewhat underpowered at Pro levels but that's not this discussion)
And second, Tanks are great at niche roles, narrow chokepoint sieging, or behind the cliff harrass supported with Marines.
|
On August 24 2015 21:45 Cyro wrote:
The main question to ask there: Do you want people who build only cyclones (without marines or a rushed turret or two) to be able to defend very effectively against stuff like proxy oracle?
The reason they were redesigned in the first place was that they were unreasonably good at defending whatever you threw at them without bias
False. My experience was that it was only good against adept openings and zealots.
Against stalkers, siege tanks are required or far better.
|
SoCal8908 Posts
On August 25 2015 03:48 jinjin5000 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2015 21:45 Cyro wrote:
The main question to ask there: Do you want people who build only cyclones (without marines or a rushed turret or two) to be able to defend very effectively against stuff like proxy oracle?
The reason they were redesigned in the first place was that they were unreasonably good at defending whatever you threw at them without bias False. My experience was that it was only good against adept openings and zealots. Against stalkers, siege tanks are required or far better.
this was in reference to a conversation with BigJ talking about their effectiveness vs air (particularly, oracles, but i think air in general)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
