|
Easier macro means less exciting games. When your opponent is aware of your every move because he doesnt get distracted there wont be any possibility of a comeback:
You just lost an attack force? Well because the macro is so easy your opponent will always have an advantage over you because you lost some more units and you both are macroing perfectly.
Trying a drop? Too bad because most of the time your sneeky actions will be spotted right on because your opponent can focus on the action so much more.
I want players to miss things late game. I dont ever want to see a perfect game of Starcraft but instead players that try their hardest to come as close to perfection as possible.
After reading those impression Im wondering why Blizzard is trying to remove a whole play style archtype (macro focused play).
|
Easier macro means less exciting games. When your opponent is aware of your every move because he doesnt get distracted there wont be any possibility of a comeback:
You just lost an attack force? Well because the macro is so easy your opponent will always have an advantage over you because you lost some more units and you both are macroing perfectly.
Trying a drop? Too bad because most of the time your sneeky actions will be spotted right on because your opponent can focus on the action so much more.
I want players to miss things late game. I dont ever want to see a perfect game of Starcraft but instead players that try their hardest to come as close to perfection as possible.
After reading those impression Im wondering why Blizzard is trying to remove a whole play style archtype (macro focused play).
Because it wasn't intended in the first place..?
|
On March 27 2008 09:58 OakHill wrote:Show nested quote +Easier macro means less exciting games. When your opponent is aware of your every move because he doesnt get distracted there wont be any possibility of a comeback:
You just lost an attack force? Well because the macro is so easy your opponent will always have an advantage over you because you lost some more units and you both are macroing perfectly.
Trying a drop? Too bad because most of the time your sneeky actions will be spotted right on because your opponent can focus on the action so much more.
I want players to miss things late game. I dont ever want to see a perfect game of Starcraft but instead players that try their hardest to come as close to perfection as possible.
After reading those impression Im wondering why Blizzard is trying to remove a whole play style archtype (macro focused play). Because it wasn't intended in the first place..?
You´re right. But things like Mutalisks stacking, the Zerg extractor trick, wall ins, Lurker hold or mineral jumps are exciting to do and watch. And they make the game more interesting. So why remove them when they add to the fun?
Its those small details that I will miss the most in Starcraft 2.
|
The thing is that those small details will be replaced with starcraft 2's details, imo.
|
I've got to be honest: If they dont fix EVERY one of these greivances, to the letter [i.e back to their sc1 equivalent], I am not buying this game. It will be trash to me. Not only because sc1 is the only rts I ever thought was fun, but because it sc2 will just be a giant shit on everything sc1 stands for...
Edit: Oh, and unequivocally remove the Mothership.
Edit2: And for god sakes it wouldn't hurt to change the Terrans units a tad would it? I mean they're the Humans, not the transformers.
|
I think less actions required for macro is potentially a very positive thing (I agree with snowbird's earlier post) and I hope Blizzard doesn't remove MBS, building queuing (though I wouldn't mind if they made you pay for them all up front - that might be better for both newbs and pros anyway since you don't get your minerals spent for you at inconvenient times), etc.
If they find some other ways to "make macro harder", that's fine, but they better actually be useful things that make sense being harder, and not just some arbitrary excuse for more clicks.
|
United States13896 Posts
On March 27 2008 08:33 konstantin wrote:
So basically people are divided it two groups,
1 those who put a lot of effort into building their mad macro skillz + uber micro and they cant let go and accept that all newbs wont have to learn the macro the hard way in SC2.
dude, say what you want, but don't simplify it down to some sort of superiority complex thing, because thats simply not how it is.
if you actually listen to 99% of the people who worry about MBS, their grievances are stated because they're worried that the level of play at the highest levels might be dulled by the change, which in turn would harm the competitive aspect of the game that SC has harbored for going on 10 years now.
it has very very very little to do with anyone being pissed that the game will be easier and more accessible for noobs. most reasonable people here would love to make the game more accessible for noobs, as that was BW's one main flaw for many people, it's so difficult that it is hard to get into competitive games without a LOT of practice.
so please rectify your misconceptions, and go out there and actually read what people think before making such sweeping generalizations about something that is vastly more complicated than you make it out to be.
|
Some general thoughts about changes due in SC2 (regarding SCBW):
Do not forget Blizzard's primary concern is not to please good players, or e-sports, but to make money.
The reason why SCBW is still successful after so many years, is because it has so much depth and you need so much skill to get to the top. And this is also the reason why it is interesting for e-sports.
But this also means that only a few people - globally speaking - will take interest in such a game, after the initial hipe is over.
What are 2 million Koreans in terms of global marketing?
Blizzard earns money from 10 Million people, monthly (WoW).
So, how sell more copies over a longer time? Make the game more accessible to a broader audience, by making it easier. Therefore I do not expect that MBS, mass selection, queuing build commands etc. will go - to the contrary.
Now if Blizzard were given a share in the money being made broadcasting e-sports via TV, things might be different.
|
On March 26 2008 13:00 snowbird wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2008 04:36 Last Romantic wrote:
<font size=4>StarCraft II TeamLiquid Coverage</font>
<font size=3>Part III: Thoughts on Gameplay</font>
It's not just a question of apm, either, but also that of multitask. You don't need to watch your nexi anymore, you don't need to f2 back to your production buildings, so you can continually look at your army and nothing else. Sometimes once it reached mid/lategame I was just moving around with a group of units, sniping off random enemies, and occasionally doing my 3tj0s [five keystrokes! perfect macro!] and then I'd suddenly realize oh! 200/200! attack move! and I never once moved the screen away from my harass group. So I do think macro is in serious need of some serious fixing.
When I read this part I was thinking 'Man that's great!'. I see tremendous potential in what you call something that needs serious fixing. You said you were able to perfectly harrass while still macroing perfectly. With some practice and good apm, you will even be able to perfectly harrass with 2 groups at 2 different fronts while macroing perfectly. But it has a limit, and exactly that is the skill ceiling. In the SC2 I have in mind, a macro monster like let's say oov, could harrass with 3 groups while doing a micro intensive full-scale attack while macroing, building an expo and taking a dump in between. And that's what your average noob could never do, even with MBS. There's some stuff I don't want to see anymore in SC2, stuff that bothers me when watching SC1. In late game so many units get wasted because there is no time to properly micro them, there's not even time to click them. That's why defilers just die, scourges idle next to a vessel doing nothing, lurkers don't burrow and just get killed. All that happened in sAviOr's matches yesterday, and he is certainly not a noob. In SC2 with MBS there's the possibility of non-stop action because you actually have the time to use your units to the fullest. Late game could be a non stop slaughter at several fronts, but not just attack-move, I'm talking strategical micro intensive battles. I don't wanna see progamers clicking 10 rax making marines and building 5 supply depots, instead I want to see them click 10 HT's using storm and microing their zealots, and the next second changing to their harrass group and doing some micro there, without being disturbed by some brainless gateway clicking. And it is exactly the same amount of work! You say a sequence of commands in SC2 could look like this: 1a, 2tj,3bs+shift+bs+shift+bs+shift+bs+shift+bs while in SC1 it would look like this: 1a2a3aF2ttvvvvvv00s99s88s77sF3bsbs1a2a3aF2ttvvvvvv00s99s88s77sF3bsbs1a2a3aF2ttvvvvvv00s99s8 8s77sF3bsbs Now with the time you saved in SC2, you could actually do something worthwhile, why do people fail to see that? I can use that time to make a drop, unload my defilers, make 5 dark swarms, burrow my lurkers, plague the marines that come running, etc. etc etc. - while in SC1 you would have clicked some more factories, wow that's entertaining. Macro your micro, MBS makes it possible. Don't live in the past and see the possibilities! Well, that's my view.
Might aswell toss in some hero units then... :\
I think choice will be gone with the new gameplay mechanics. Everyone will play very similar. It SOUNDS like sc2 will be a pretty pure army watching game.
|
On March 27 2008 19:28 ocoini wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2008 13:00 snowbird wrote:On March 26 2008 04:36 Last Romantic wrote:
<font size=4>StarCraft II TeamLiquid Coverage</font>
<font size=3>Part III: Thoughts on Gameplay</font>
It's not just a question of apm, either, but also that of multitask. You don't need to watch your nexi anymore, you don't need to f2 back to your production buildings, so you can continually look at your army and nothing else. Sometimes once it reached mid/lategame I was just moving around with a group of units, sniping off random enemies, and occasionally doing my 3tj0s [five keystrokes! perfect macro!] and then I'd suddenly realize oh! 200/200! attack move! and I never once moved the screen away from my harass group. So I do think macro is in serious need of some serious fixing.
When I read this part I was thinking 'Man that's great!'. I see tremendous potential in what you call something that needs serious fixing. You said you were able to perfectly harrass while still macroing perfectly. With some practice and good apm, you will even be able to perfectly harrass with 2 groups at 2 different fronts while macroing perfectly. But it has a limit, and exactly that is the skill ceiling. In the SC2 I have in mind, a macro monster like let's say oov, could harrass with 3 groups while doing a micro intensive full-scale attack while macroing, building an expo and taking a dump in between. And that's what your average noob could never do, even with MBS. There's some stuff I don't want to see anymore in SC2, stuff that bothers me when watching SC1. In late game so many units get wasted because there is no time to properly micro them, there's not even time to click them. That's why defilers just die, scourges idle next to a vessel doing nothing, lurkers don't burrow and just get killed. All that happened in sAviOr's matches yesterday, and he is certainly not a noob. In SC2 with MBS there's the possibility of non-stop action because you actually have the time to use your units to the fullest. Late game could be a non stop slaughter at several fronts, but not just attack-move, I'm talking strategical micro intensive battles. I don't wanna see progamers clicking 10 rax making marines and building 5 supply depots, instead I want to see them click 10 HT's using storm and microing their zealots, and the next second changing to their harrass group and doing some micro there, without being disturbed by some brainless gateway clicking. And it is exactly the same amount of work! You say a sequence of commands in SC2 could look like this: 1a, 2tj,3bs+shift+bs+shift+bs+shift+bs+shift+bs while in SC1 it would look like this: 1a2a3aF2ttvvvvvv00s99s88s77sF3bsbs1a2a3aF2ttvvvvvv00s99s88s77sF3bsbs1a2a3aF2ttvvvvvv00s99s8 8s77sF3bsbs Now with the time you saved in SC2, you could actually do something worthwhile, why do people fail to see that? I can use that time to make a drop, unload my defilers, make 5 dark swarms, burrow my lurkers, plague the marines that come running, etc. etc etc. - while in SC1 you would have clicked some more factories, wow that's entertaining. Macro your micro, MBS makes it possible. Don't live in the past and see the possibilities! Well, that's my view. Might aswell toss in some hero units then... :\
Yes, clearly a salient point. Heroes have so much to do with what he wrote. Obviously.
|
On March 27 2008 19:33 Megrim wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2008 19:28 ocoini wrote:On March 26 2008 13:00 snowbird wrote:On March 26 2008 04:36 Last Romantic wrote:
<font size=4>StarCraft II TeamLiquid Coverage</font>
<font size=3>Part III: Thoughts on Gameplay</font>
It's not just a question of apm, either, but also that of multitask. You don't need to watch your nexi anymore, you don't need to f2 back to your production buildings, so you can continually look at your army and nothing else. Sometimes once it reached mid/lategame I was just moving around with a group of units, sniping off random enemies, and occasionally doing my 3tj0s [five keystrokes! perfect macro!] and then I'd suddenly realize oh! 200/200! attack move! and I never once moved the screen away from my harass group. So I do think macro is in serious need of some serious fixing.
When I read this part I was thinking 'Man that's great!'. I see tremendous potential in what you call something that needs serious fixing. You said you were able to perfectly harrass while still macroing perfectly. With some practice and good apm, you will even be able to perfectly harrass with 2 groups at 2 different fronts while macroing perfectly. But it has a limit, and exactly that is the skill ceiling. In the SC2 I have in mind, a macro monster like let's say oov, could harrass with 3 groups while doing a micro intensive full-scale attack while macroing, building an expo and taking a dump in between. And that's what your average noob could never do, even with MBS. There's some stuff I don't want to see anymore in SC2, stuff that bothers me when watching SC1. In late game so many units get wasted because there is no time to properly micro them, there's not even time to click them. That's why defilers just die, scourges idle next to a vessel doing nothing, lurkers don't burrow and just get killed. All that happened in sAviOr's matches yesterday, and he is certainly not a noob. In SC2 with MBS there's the possibility of non-stop action because you actually have the time to use your units to the fullest. Late game could be a non stop slaughter at several fronts, but not just attack-move, I'm talking strategical micro intensive battles. I don't wanna see progamers clicking 10 rax making marines and building 5 supply depots, instead I want to see them click 10 HT's using storm and microing their zealots, and the next second changing to their harrass group and doing some micro there, without being disturbed by some brainless gateway clicking. And it is exactly the same amount of work! You say a sequence of commands in SC2 could look like this: 1a, 2tj,3bs+shift+bs+shift+bs+shift+bs+shift+bs while in SC1 it would look like this: 1a2a3aF2ttvvvvvv00s99s88s77sF3bsbs1a2a3aF2ttvvvvvv00s99s88s77sF3bsbs1a2a3aF2ttvvvvvv00s99s8 8s77sF3bsbs Now with the time you saved in SC2, you could actually do something worthwhile, why do people fail to see that? I can use that time to make a drop, unload my defilers, make 5 dark swarms, burrow my lurkers, plague the marines that come running, etc. etc etc. - while in SC1 you would have clicked some more factories, wow that's entertaining. Macro your micro, MBS makes it possible. Don't live in the past and see the possibilities! Well, that's my view. Might aswell toss in some hero units then... :\ Yes, clearly a salient point. Heroes have so much to do with what he wrote. Obviously.
i clarified it abit 
|
Those who believe sc2 will be 2 huge armies walking around the map and blowing off expos will be sadly wrong.
The thing i ask my self the most is, why isnt any MBS hater able to even imagine the intensity that the new mechanics would bring to two players at the skill ceilling, i mean, we got a review from a guy that owned other site n00b players and hasant lost a single game in an alpha.
Until theres some experienced pros creating and inventing on the game theres no way you can make any assumption, SC plays nothing today than people expected it to play 11 years ago.
|
I think that all of your worries, about macro being phase out and associated game boringness because of it, will result vane. Because SC2 is not SC1, it has so many new units and units that can jump/walk/blink over the ledge.
With this new mechanics the surprise factor will always be present. The opponent is too focused on the battlefield? then sneaking/dropping units in his main/expo will pass his attention.
No longer a cliff or wall-in will be too hard to bypass, just use another side of the map to sneak units in from.
As D10 pointed out game play and strategies are evolving every day and sure with SC2 there will be more possibilities and new tactics will be developed.
It would be wise that you leave your SC1 baggage out before SC2 comes out, because if you put high expectations on SC2 being just like SC1 then mental block will kick in and you wont be able to enjoy the game and most likely you will find yourself in forums whining and bitching about "this" not being like in SC1 and "that" sucks and the psy storm sucks...etc. etc., whatever.
SC2 is new game, with new mechanics, in 3D and Blizzard is putting a lot of effort into it to be a fun, dynamic and balanced game and most likely Blizzard will continue to support the game with patches for a long time.
|
@konstantin: Where is the proof that Blizzard is putting a lot of effort "into it to be a fun, dynamic and balanced game"?
Just asking. I do not want to bitch about SC2, but fun means diferent things to different people. I know folks that thought WC3 fun, while I thought it a real set-back in terms of strategic gaming compared to WC2 (note: I only know WC3 before the expansion); on the other hand it was probably a lot of fun for all the Diablo players out there.
So criticizing a bit at this point MAY HELP get Blizzard's attention to make sure the hardcore gamers, as us, being on this site, get their fun, too :-)
|
Why has no one brought the zergs disadvantage up? They will be hurt by MBS because they will have a harder time when even noobs become macro beasts. They will also not benefit from it as much as Terran and Protoss because they can't que units. They have to pay for every egg they make from a larva! The zerg in SC 1 often had to harass terran or protoss to hold enemy armies back. Now it will be much easier to stop zerg harass when you don't have to worry about macro. If you can hold of the harass with ease then you can basically atack with a large army sooner. Do you agree or disagree?
|
On March 26 2008 22:57 GoSuPlAyEr wrote:
you realize critical mass is 2 words right...
to be honest...i can't even remember posting that...
|
On March 28 2008 21:11 CharlieC wrote:
Why has no one brought the zergs disadvantage up? They will be hurt by MBS because they will have a harder time when even noobs become macro beasts. They will also not benefit from it as much as Terran and Protoss because they can't que units. They have to pay for every egg they make from a larva! The zerg in SC 1 often had to harass terran or protoss to hold enemy armies back. Now it will be much easier to stop zerg harass when you don't have to worry about macro. If you can hold of the harass with ease then you can basically atack with a large army sooner. Do you agree or disagree?
I agree.
Zerg will have the worse macro compared to Terran & Protoss. Zerg has to pay attention more to the larvae. Hopefully larvae production is speed up to compensate.
|
nice write up! good opinion! Long live Protoss! :D HAD to say it :D
|
You know it seems to me the issue with the reduced macro in Starcraft 2 comes from the ability to just queue all your work and ignore your base completely. If all they did was make you pay the resources as you queued it would take alot more base attention. You'd have the advantage of ease of use for new players while leaving a large advantage for cerebral and attentive players. It would force better resource management and would still grant the advantage to players with greater APM because you would need to go back and queue as your resources come to you. I'm not sure if that's the perfect solution but it seems to me to be an important step forward in overall macro. It keeps most of the subtle function of macro while removing alot of the rediculous steps that really distract from the overall game.
|
And seriously, managing a full base in Warcraft 3 was still a pain in the ass even with tabbing through buildings. (Although admittedly easier than Starcraft thank god) Starcraft is on a much larger scale (2 to 3 times at least) and with multiple expansions and more buildings and upgrade options you'd still need exceptional APM to harass/attack and manage your bases/expansions. I don't care how good you are, you are still losing great gameplay opportunities with a wall of text that looks like this 1a2a3aF2ttvvvvvv00s99s88s77sF3bsbs1a2a3aF2ttvvvvvv00s99s88s77sF3bsbs1a2a3aF2ttvvvvvv00s99s8
8s77sF3bsbs just to make some tanks, jackals and supply depots, with a couple of attack moves thrown in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
