|
On August 03 2015 12:24 BisuDagger wrote:
Remove these and what macro is left? MBS eliminates any remaining macro skill beyond these abilities. SC2 would have no macro game at all.
Pretty much this. Although I'm keeping in mind these are just ideas for now, I think the direction to weaken the importance of macro while promoting micro is just plain wrong, as this shifts a classic RTS game like StarCraft more into the MOBA-corner instead of promoting it's core differences to potentially attract more players.
|
I have the opposite opinion as everyone else. I think there needs to be a casual ladder with options like this, but i also think the real ladder should not touch it at all. Really the game needs a casual ladder with things like this, but the game needs to have these items since they allow more flexibility for high level players.
|
Bisutopia19372 Posts
On August 03 2015 18:10 tokinho wrote:
I have the opposite opinion as everyone else. I think there needs to be a casual ladder with options like this, but i also think the real ladder should not touch it at all. Really the game needs a casual ladder with things like this, but the game needs to have these items since they allow more flexibility for high level players.
The arcade has plenty of casual versions of SC2.
|
How about something like this: give the option to use the macro mechanics automatically but leave the option to do it manually which always gives you a better economy compared to someone who leaves it on autocast. Maybe something like autocast only when a queen has built up 75 or 100 energy. Dunno how this would be implemented in the case of Protoss, but I think the correct direction in patching would be to make the game easier for noobs but leave the difficult parts for proplayers, who want to be better in the game in every aspect. Since there has also been talk about how macro mechanics are mostly invisible to viewer, would it be so hard to add a small counter to the stream screen which tells how many hatcheries are spawning injected larva, how many mules are on the field etc.?
|
Never though I would make this comparison, but take driving games. Most of these games give you the option to either automate or manually shift through gears. Auto-Shifting-Gears is great, as it allows you to get into the game and race, but when you go online you will always lose to the people using Manual Gears. Why, Manual Gears provide you with better options to be more optimal when shifting gears.
For most starting players the "Fun" part of an RTS game is moving your army around and attacking stuff, not spending several hours/days to master basic macro.
Give players the options to pick whether they want Manual or a more Automated Macro. Optimize automated Macro, but do make it perfect. Leave room for Manual players to Out-Macro their automated opponents and this could also be the incentive for players who want to develop their skill to kick of the training wheel and go full manual.
I think having automated macro could entice more people to play ladder. But I would turn-off the option for automated macro at Masters and GM. Also, tournaments should never have automated Macro.
|
I dont see why we have the macro mechanics in the game. Aside from Chronoboost none of them actually add any strategic depth to the game.
Imagine there was a button appearing in the top left corner of the screen every minuten and when you click it fast enough you get 250 minerals instantly. Thats the same idea as mules. Substitute minerals with larvae and you got inject.
|
I've always hated injects. a pavlovian mechanic that can be trained with a bell ringing every 32 seconds.
|
I say remove them. I'm glad more people are discussing this now because I've had this opinion for quite some time. They are just artificial ways to make the game more complicated. You could also make it so you have to click a button on the UI every 30 seconds to get some free minerals so that players who remember to press the button with perfect timing are rewarded vs players that forget. The only reason they were introduced is because SC2 is much easier to control than in BW so they added artificial tasks to keep players more busy. I think the game would be completely fine without these artificial macro mechanics.
|
I can get on the 2 tier bandwagon - 1 mode that automates it and the pro tier that is manual. I mean... Why not?? like for real I cant think of 1 thing bad about that. Or how about just make it so Casual has the option of auto/manual and then ladder is just manual. I dont get exactly how auto works for Terran and Protoss though. will it just randomly chrono a building? What about mules? "oh no it auto dumped all my energy on mules and now I have no scans"... So I suppose before I hop on that bandwagon I need to understand how these Auto mechanics will work.
|
On August 02 2015 22:24 swag_bro wrote:
Remove them totally. Brood War didn't have them and it was a successful game with tons of views
Let's make the pathing shit. BW had shit pathing and it was a successful game with tons of views.
Your logic is ridiculous. A lack of macro mechanics was why BW succeeded? BW had a bunch of other repetitive mechanical tasks that were replaced with MBS and auto-mine. Lowering the skill ceiling/mechanical demands of SC2 even further would make it even less like BW (though there is no guarantee of success either way).
|
Well, given that I'm really new to the game (started playing it only a couple of weeks ago) I feel I can stand in for the "casual" gamers. I'm also low-level, bronze, and have an average APM of 27. Time to (badly) review macro mechanics.
Let's go over MULEs first. To me, MULEs are perfectly fine. MULEs give you an income boost, and they provide a strategic choice in correlation with scan. You risk losing income by scaning, but you can be rewarded if you see what your opponent is doing. With MULE-ing, you risk not seeing what your opponent is doing, or risk DTs, but you are rewarded with a better economy. You can even save MULEs and then dump them on a fresh base. Risk/reward, that's good.
Next, Chronoboost. This one is also okay. But I feel it doesn't involve a very particular risk in it's use, while the reward is pretty high in the early to mid game, because you can "quickly" catch-up in upgrades, tech, or boost your production early on (workers or units) using it. And you can save it to use it on multiple buldings at once. I think this one could be toned down a bit. Maybe making it more expensive in terms of energy. But it doesn't have to be. It's fine as it is.
And now.larva-inject. From my low-APM perspective, this one just sucks. It's literally like a chore. You must do it. If you don't - you lose. There is no strategic choice in the matter here. If you want to spread creep - better get another queen then to not inject. Want to save for transfuse - again, better get another queen. There is no reason not to inject. You must always use it, otherwise, you won't win a game. You can't even save injects and dump them on a single hatchery.
What I would like is for Blizzard to implement the option to have automated injects in unranked play, and maybe in the ladder, but only up to gold league. From then on, put it back to manual. MULEs. and Chronoboost to be left as they are.
|
Either keep the mechanics as they are, or remove them and do a HUUGE redesign of macro in sc2 that would slow down the game, along with a better economy model.
|
Lowering the mechanical skill ceiling seems like a bad idea to me personally,
but it is all about intent here. If they want to take the game and make it more accessible for the consumer, it is probably a good step to take. If they want to make the game a skillful 1v1 game, this might not be the correct course of action.
Changing the game to still be mechanically demanding but more accessible to the average consumer seems like a hard thing to pull off!
|
You could always make the autocast less optimal. Have it cost 35 energy for a queen to autocast larva-inject and 25 if you do it manually. That way it's new user friendly (they can first focus on other stuff) while keeping the skill ceiling high for the advanced players.
|
Don't touch their mechanical difficulty, unless you plan to make them harder, in which case go ahead.
I'm all for nerfing macro mechanics though. Larva inject should yield a maximum of 2 larva. And a hatchery should be limited to a maximum of 5 larva.
|
On August 03 2015 18:10 tokinho wrote:
I have the opposite opinion as everyone else. I think there needs to be a casual ladder with options like this, but i also think the real ladder should not touch it at all. Really the game needs a casual ladder with things like this, but the game needs to have these items since they allow more flexibility for high level players.
Better yet. Leagues up to platinum have the 'easy mechanics' such as chronoboost, mule, etc, while platinum and higher don't. There is a possible balance problem but one may hope chronoboost, mule and queens negate each other.
|
lol there are 1000 things to better the game. Macroing isn't one of them...
did they hire world of warcraft dev or somethin?
|
The poll needs a fourth option: retouch the current mechanics, namely Zergs larva inject.
Macro mechanics are good, why? Because they only take 1 click, and they are a meaningful decisionmaking moment (and not solely a mechanical obligation!). Do you mule or save a scan? Chrono on the warpgates or the upgrades? But for Zerg there is no choice in the matter, injects are a necessity.
It's fine to automate the injects, but the Queen needs a compelling alternative energy dump next to creep. Also it needs to be spammable, so it's not too punishing if you let your Queens get high on energy.
|
I'm not really sure how "easier" the game will be. These mechanics are only challenging when it comes to the zerg larva inject but this is why zerg is zerg.
|
Make them less efficient when automated, but if players take the time to control them manually, give them additional rewards. Seeing that there won't be any other changes to the economy (automining will always be there), there needs to be a way to push macro differences beyond the failed community efforts to change how mining works.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
