|
On September 06 2012 16:25 opisska wrote:
When WoL started, I discovered TL and quickly realized, how much feedback is there and wondered why Blizzard consistently refuses to hear it and was angry at Blizzard. Slowly I realized, that 99 % of the feedbackis at least as stupid as this thread and became very, very glad that Blizzard refuses to hear it (there are bright expections, such as better unit movement, fewer resources per base, etc., but they are very, very rare) .
Why is this stupid? Because it is bitching for the sake of bitching. Someone once convinced the TL userbase that it is good for a game to be "difficult". Most of the people have no idea what does it mean, but it they feel better if they deffend a "good thing". The big blob of text in the OP is just made up arguments in a desperate attempt to make it look "deep", but it does nto make it any better.
Automine at the beginning of the game does not change shit about the difficulty of the game. It has absolutely no effect on anything. It just removes one stupidly boring action that you had to do at the beginning of every game, no matter what. Most of the whiners probably have dead-end jobs that consist of nothing but boring, repeated tasks, so they are conditioned to accept them. But I hate boring, repeated tasks and I believe that anyone with a half of brain should do as well.
So If you really want to micro your workers, nobody prevents you from doing that. You can even try to fight the AI split, if you think you are better! But please, stop ruining good things for the others.
Wait, so what you're saying is you didn't read my post?
Bolded in the hopes that people who won't read my OP will read this.
I'm not advocating making them game more difficult. I have NO issue with automine itself. I recognized that it helps lag, and even can help lower players. I'm actually advocating making the game even EASIER for new players by implementing tooltips. HOW on earth is that "bitching for the sake of bitching? Please enlighten me. Further, how is it me feeling better if I defend a "good thing" like the difficulty of the game?
When did I complain about auto mine making the game too easy? When did I say that auto mine was a boring and repetitive task? And in fact I've detailed several times why I believe WC/B is the exact opposite, and I won't do so again. We have different opinions here and if you don't want to discuss mine we'll just agree to disagree.
I never said I want to remove automine really, I just said there is a problem in that the function it is trying to perform for newer players would be better served by something like ingame tooltips.
It's depressing when so many people blindly think that I'm bitching about how the game is too easy, when I'm asking for the exact opposite.
On September 06 2012 19:36 Evangelist wrote:
The whole premise of this thread is ridiculous. This is not fucking BW - the UI is not obtusive and annoying. It is meant to provide information that a player can easily access. I mean christ - you can click on an opponents unit and determine their upgrade value as well as their health and their composition. Why exactly have you suddenly promoted COUNTING to a skill that only gosu gamers have?
Last I checked, counting was something babies learned.
Why is it then, that people from bronze all the way up to grandmaster fail at the "fundamental" skill of counting workers and managing the workers per base? We can SEE that even progamers struggle with optimal saturation sometimes.
You don't increase the skill cap of a game by removing one active APM component (thinking and making decisions about worker saturation) so that they can use that APM elsewhere - that's keeping the skill cap the same. The skill cap is raised when somebody has the ability to do all that we previously thought was possible, AND micro their economy, AND do something new. That's when the skill cap is raised. (Sadly this is an opinion and most people (staboteur is an awesome dis-example) seem to fail at expressing their opinions when they conflict with mine. I'd love to be proven wrong though.)
@Railz (sorry if i mispelled)
This is your own opinion. As a master player and i'm pretty sure i don't speak for myself alone, this change is heartly welcomed. I can perfectly split all my workers up to 3 differents patches but it doesn't matter, because it's not gamebreaking at all. This new way means that there's no advantages / disadvantages for every player that fucked the split up or that got a lag. It's common sense to have them automine right away.
You realize I said the EXACT same thing right? Not once in those paragraphs that you quoted did I actually even SAY an opinion. Other than the fact that I am enjoying the beta, and I believe that blizzard put the function in to help newer players (AND I acknowledged the lag issue already). So I'm stating facts (unless you disagree that its helping new players, but you don't)
Once again, that's your own opinion. I used to play bw and i had no problem with it. This automine thing has been welcomed too because it allows you to focus your apm on something else.
I never debated automine. I like the WoL automine. I like the HOTS automine. You are still completely failing at understanding the point. automine in the sense of WoL perfectly performs the function it was intended to do - removing a mindless action that no matter what HAS to be performed so you can focus on something else. Again, we agree, but you don't see it.
Like i said, everything is explained in the campaign. After that it's common sense. And then it's all about getting it in the most efficient way which is exactly what you're doing as long as you're playing more and more games. This whole paragraph is just completely irrelevant. Seeing bronze players still doing the same errors is not because blizz did a poor job but because the players aren't putting enough efforts in understanding the game, or worse, they just don't care and simply want to have fun
Yes, everything is explained in the campaign. But seeing it once is not enough. We know this because bronze players fail at fundamentals that they should have learned and intuitively known throughout the campaign. If you were teaching somebody a normal sport, say baseball, basketball, or even swimming, would you walk them through it once, and then leave them to it, expecting to grasp all of the fundamentals? Or would you provide tips throughout their learning process, coaches to help them gain knowledge (tooltips), until they have it sufficiently memorized (gold ish)?
If somebody was learning piano, would you give them one lesson and expect them to know how to play a scale, what a chord was, and what tempo is (all fundamentals) or would you give them multiple lessons over and over until they were sufficiently capable of memorizing things?
Basically, if we accept that the campaign is the only place where these fundamentals are explained, a player who does not know them - but wants to ladder, and has already played the campaign once (but didn't grasp it completely), HAS to go replay the campaign to have it explained to them? That's what you're saying. I want it integrated into multiplayer. It's not common sense, otherwise EVERYONE would do it. Breathing is common sense. Attack move is not. Again, we know this because a good 10-20% of the player base doesn't grasp it!
Why is it so bad for tooltips to be put into multiplayer? That is what this is about, and that is what you're saying "fuck you" at me too. That's what I'm advocating, I've said it countless times but you continue to just get angry over me complaining about the game being too easy. I don't understand.
I'm not familiar with LoL, just with WoW, but even with the tooltips it was far better to experiment it yourself. But why not ? As long as i can disable it, just do what you please.
EXACTLY. But you can't experiment if you have NO idea what is happening. You can't experiment by dropping if you don't know how to attack move. That's what tooltips are FOR, for the most basic of players to learn the absolute basics when they are not capable of experimenting. You can't experiment to improve attack move - there is no real better way to move army units in an aggressive manner. That's why something so fundamental should be in a tooltip, and why we should have them - some players don't know this.
Or maybe not, for the players who aren't lagging it's roughly the same. Either way it's not gamebreaking at all, therefore not a big deal to have this option on or not.
This I didn't differentiate properly. There is no disadvantage to automine. There is a disadvantage in disabling WC/B as you now have to physically do something that the other player does not.
Like i said in the previous posts, i disagree. I want it on in game because it saves time to count workers. Having to drag the workers every minute to be sure you're efficiently mining is just stupid.
This is the only post that I feel you understood, and I am completely ok with you disagreeing. I never wrote it expecting everybody to agree with me. But I did at least hope they would -understand- what I was getting at (and some people have), but a lot have just really come into this thread with stupid angry ideas insulting me for wanting the game to be hard.
You shouldn't have stopped. If you had read the "TL;DR" you'd see that we're practically advocating the same things.
On September 06 2012 20:06 kmillz wrote:
So you agree it removes a skill, yet still argue that it is a necessary change to the game? Why is removing a skill necessary at all, when boxing and counting has never been an issue before?
Automine (not a skill) is necessary because it (at least until a better fix is out) alleviates lag for people coming into the game late. WC/B is not because it removes the skill in counting and distributing your economy the most effectively.
The crux of WC/B comes down to whether or not you believe that economy management (in the sense of saturation, NOT mindless automine on workers) should be part of a strategy game. I believe there is, because there is a tangible difference when you choose not to properly saturate your workers. Learning this skill provides a real benefit to players who excel at it. I Believe that economy management is important to a strategy game. Mindlessly telling workers to mine is not economy management, but knowing how to use your resources to maximize profit IS.
Now, feel free to disagree with that statement, but don't flame it. No automine in BW was a mechanical disparity - players who lacked APM could not excel. Maximizing worker saturation takes at most 3 APM - it is not a mechanical disparity, it is a mental disparity. Lacking the ability to saturate your bases properly does not mean you don't have the APM for it, it means you don't have the focus to do so properly and keep track of how many workers you're building. (I struggle with this as well, but removing the need for it would immediately up my skill level in a way that I don't think should happen). Again, you have every right to disagree with me as much as I have a right to voice my opinion, so I don't see why anybody would need to be aggressive about it.
On September 06 2012 22:35 Butterednuts wrote:
This entire change is to help those that load into the game early. This is not reflective of "trying to remove extra actions". Some people load into the game a few seconds after the game actually starts and that sets them behind. Now with the actions being server-side and not reliant on the player's computer or network the game will start out more fairly.
Stop talking about how this will make it easier for noobies and how they're making the game easy because it isn't about that.
Why then does that function set your rally point to the mineral line - an action that has no effect on the game unless you make a worker. The only way this would make sense is if Blizzard automatically builds your first worker, but they don't. So why do a user function that can't have any effect in setting you behind until you build workers? (Which is NOT done with the function as it is)
Edit: Another thing I should say is the simplified command card in the bottom right for HOTS is an excellent idea. It is basically tooltips, just for specific unit commands, and THAT is the kind of thing that explains attack move.
|
*puts on flameproof suit*
I'm fine with the worker count per base thing.
http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=366475
Check out that blog if you want to see why I'm fine with it. Or just read my tl;dr, I don't care. You'll probably get more out of the blog, though.
Anyways, the tl;dr version of the point I'm wanting to make is that counting your workers per base is not necessarily a good kind of difficult. Landing good storms or making an awesome flank is a good kind of difficult. Not so much for spending an apm or two to check out your mineral lines. It was a minor thing when it comes to how hard the game is, and so removing it won't really make things that much easier.
Overall, if they add more of the fun kind of difficulty, the kind that both the players and spectators can get behind, then I'm fine with removing minor nuisances like this. I mean, seriously, how many competent players actually fuck up their worker spread? It's just an apm sink.
Judging by what Blizzard is trying to add to the game from the units in the beta right now, I can safely say that we are going to get our difficult game. New zerg spellcaster? Protoss harass? The game is getting a lot more micro shoved into it, and I like that as much as the next guy.
|
On September 07 2012 05:22 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:*puts on flameproof suit* I'm fine with the worker count per base thing. http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=366475Check out that blog if you want to see why I'm fine with it. Or just read my tl;dr, I don't care. You'll probably get more out of the blog, though. Anyways, the tl;dr version of the point I'm wanting to make is that counting your workers per base is not necessarily a good kind of difficult. Landing good storms or making an awesome flank is a good kind of difficult. Not so much for spending an apm or two to check out your mineral lines. It was a minor thing when it comes to how hard the game is, and so removing it won't really make things that much easier. Overall, if they add more of the fun kind of difficulty, the kind that both the players and spectators can get behind, then I'm fine with removing minor nuisances like this. I mean, seriously, how many competent players actually fuck up their worker spread? It's just an apm sink. Judging by what Blizzard is trying to add to the game from the units in the beta right now, I can safely say that we are going to get our difficult game. New zerg spellcaster? Protoss harass? The game is getting a lot more micro shoved into it, and I like that as much as the next guy.
This is a good point, and really the best kind of counterargument that I've seen for WC/B. I certainly don't mind more micro, and as long as we have something raising the skill cap (more spellcasters for example) then it could be ok. But we just have to make sure (or hope) that the units we get aren't gimmicky. (The warhound seems kind of gimmicky and boring, the battle hellion I like, warhound should be redesigned, not necessarily because it's op, but just because it seems like it clashes with other units.)
|
On September 06 2012 16:25 opisska wrote:
When WoL started, I discovered TL and quickly realized, how much feedback is there and wondered why Blizzard consistently refuses to hear it and was angry at Blizzard. Slowly I realized, that 99 % of the feedbackis at least as stupid as this thread and became very, very glad that Blizzard refuses to hear it (there are bright expections, such as better unit movement, fewer resources per base, etc., but they are very, very rare) .
Why is this stupid? Because it is bitching for the sake of bitching. Someone once convinced the TL userbase that it is good for a game to be "difficult". Most of the people have no idea what does it mean, but it they feel better if they deffend a "good thing". The big blob of text in the OP is just made up arguments in a desperate attempt to make it look "deep", but it does nto make it any better.
Automine at the beginning of the game does not change shit about the difficulty of the game. It has absolutely no effect on anything. It just removes one stupidly boring action that you had to do at the beginning of every game, no matter what. Most of the whiners probably have dead-end jobs that consist of nothing but boring, repeated tasks, so they are conditioned to accept them. But I hate boring, repeated tasks and I believe that anyone with a half of brain should do as well.
So If you really want to micro your workers, nobody prevents you from doing that. You can even try to fight the AI split, if you think you are better! But please, stop ruining good things for the others.
I totally agree. Four separate threads about the warhound and how it is bad, including how it will kill Esports. At least four threads about how the game is being made easier through surfacing information, such as how wide a scan is. One whole thread complaining about how they didn’t fix the clock. And let’s not forget the clock, which people complained about when it was added to the interface.
People are just complaining to complain. The fact that the game now starts the game by performing a two click action for me has no effect on anything that matters SC2. There are so many other important issues, like in game support for teams(like Dota), better tools for casters, a better league system and tools for new players to get into the game and understand how to play correctly.
But not on TL. On TL, we care about things like the game taking a single action for us. Or how pretty the warhound is and if it can be a-moved or not and if that is ok.
|
This is designed to help those who lag upon start, or those who have to wait for observers and wont know when the game will start. It doesn't really lower the skill rating of the game, because in all seriousness how many people didnt use their starting workers to mine.
It doesn't split them either so I dont see why it is bad in anyway. Not like its automaking workers or something....
|
On September 07 2012 05:50 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2012 16:25 opisska wrote:
When WoL started, I discovered TL and quickly realized, how much feedback is there and wondered why Blizzard consistently refuses to hear it and was angry at Blizzard. Slowly I realized, that 99 % of the feedbackis at least as stupid as this thread and became very, very glad that Blizzard refuses to hear it (there are bright expections, such as better unit movement, fewer resources per base, etc., but they are very, very rare) .
Why is this stupid? Because it is bitching for the sake of bitching. Someone once convinced the TL userbase that it is good for a game to be "difficult". Most of the people have no idea what does it mean, but it they feel better if they deffend a "good thing". The big blob of text in the OP is just made up arguments in a desperate attempt to make it look "deep", but it does nto make it any better.
Automine at the beginning of the game does not change shit about the difficulty of the game. It has absolutely no effect on anything. It just removes one stupidly boring action that you had to do at the beginning of every game, no matter what. Most of the whiners probably have dead-end jobs that consist of nothing but boring, repeated tasks, so they are conditioned to accept them. But I hate boring, repeated tasks and I believe that anyone with a half of brain should do as well.
So If you really want to micro your workers, nobody prevents you from doing that. You can even try to fight the AI split, if you think you are better! But please, stop ruining good things for the others. I totally agree. Four separate threads about the warhound and how it is bad, including how it will kill Esports. At least four threads about how the game is being made easier through surfacing information, such as how wide a scan is. One whole thread complaining about how they didn’t fix the clock. And let’s not forget the clock, which people complained about when it was added to the interface. People are just complaining to complain. The fact that the game now starts the game by performing a two click action for me has no effect on anything that matters SC2. There are so many other important issues, like in game support for teams(like Dota), better tools for casters, a better league system and tools for new players to get into the game and understand how to play correctly. But not on TL. On TL, we care about things like the game taking a single action for us. Or how pretty the warhound is and if it can be a-moved or not and if that is ok.
So basically, you think that what I'm advocating (a new tool to help new players get into the game and understand how to play correctly) is a good thing? Because that's what I'm saying... I'm not complaining (not exactly sure if you implied that I am, but you agreed with a post that certainly thought I was complaining, which is strange).
On September 07 2012 06:32 MaK UK wrote:
This is designed to help those who lag upon start, or those who have to wait for observers and wont know when the game will start. It doesn't really lower the skill rating of the game, because in all seriousness how many people didnt use their starting workers to mine.
It doesn't split them either so I dont see why it is bad in anyway. Not like its automaking workers or something....
I never said it is lowering the skill rating of the game (some people have though). And I acknowledged that it helps people who lag at the start. But that's not its only function, otherwise blizzard wouldn't rally your nexus to the starting minerals (an action that has no benefit at all for people who lag at the start, since they can't build workers to make use of the rally anyways). So if blizzard made this ONLY to help players who lag, then they did an awful lot of pointless code.
|
What bugs me the most is that again they choose to solve a problem in an overcomplicated way that causes new issues. All we asked for was a countdown after the loading screen to make sure everybody starts at the same time. Implementing exactly that would have solved that problem and not raised any new ones. This automining thing however kicked off a big discussion and makes people rage. Why do they always make decisions like that? I don't get it. Their life could be so much easier if they sometimes chose the obvious, simple solution.
|
As a few have pointed out before me these are very shallow "skills" toi have. Max saturation has by no means been intuitive before, with saturation counts the newbies will learn fast. If counting SCVs is made mechanically easier it also makes room for adding new and hopefully deeper skillsets. The automine is furthermore a very good solution to the laggy start problem. Tell me, what is the real issue here?
|
On September 07 2012 11:14 Blueblister wrote:
As a few have pointed out before me these are very shallow "skills" toi have. Max saturation has by no means been intuitive before, with saturation counts the newbies will learn fast. If counting SCVs is made mechanically easier it also makes room for adding new and hopefully deeper skillsets. The automine is furthermore a very good solution to the laggy start problem. Tell me, what is the real issue here?
The real issue is that people aren't really addressing my points. YES the worker saturation can be considered a shallow skill to have (i disagree, but its certainly a valid point).
I already acknowledged that automine helps with lag, but that's not my point.
|
splitting at the start is a pretty dumb thing to consider a skill cap. typical of nostalgic brood war fans to consider built in mechanical obstacles essential for "skill" in a strategy game.
i mean i don't care one way or the other if my drones go to mine automatically, there's nothing going on in that part of the game so i've got my routine down pretty well but i seriously doubt this will cause my wins-to-losses ratio to change.
|
Note: Nony was mocking this thread(and others like it) earlier today on his stream. I believe he said something like "people are getting worried about boxing a group of units and an automatic rally that you are going to change anyways."
|
On September 07 2012 11:25 Plansix wrote:
Note: Nony was mocking this thread(and others like it) earlier today on his stream. I believe he said something like "people are getting worried about boxing a group of units and an automatic rally that you are going to change anyways."
You realize that Nony (as much as I love him) completely missed the point of my thread as well? I'm not worried about boxing a group of units. Read my TL;DR PLEASE.
TL;DR
1) Auto mine is an acceptable (but poor) fix to the "entering a game late" scenario.
2) Auto mine serves two functions: fixing that bug and helping new players. Tooltips would be a MUCH more useful method of helping new players with the game, and they would be much more all encompassing than simple auto mine. It's a win-win for both new players and "elitists"
3) Worker count per base interrupts with the idea of "microing" your economy.
4) Completely subjectively: I don't like WC/B because it interrupts with the feeling of the game in my opinion. WC/B is much more subject to opinion than my ideas about automine, as I see it. (Need of a tooltip that is)
5) Ultimately I would be ok with both changes going through (particularly WC/B because I still do it badly at masters) but I still dislike the change.
When does that illustrate that I'm worried about auto mine? Do I not say that I like it for it's purpose of fixing lag? Where in the TL;DR or in my thread do I sound like I'm worried about boxing a group of units and an automatic rally that I'm going to change anyways? Because if it's anywhere in my OP it shouldn't be. Even a progamer's opinion is completely invalid (relative to the subject) if they have no idea what the subject is. :/
On September 07 2012 11:20 Doc Daneeka wrote:
splitting at the start is a pretty dumb thing to consider a skill cap. typical of nostalgic brood war fans to consider built in mechanical obstacles essential for "skill" in a strategy game.
i mean i don't care one way or the other if my drones go to mine automatically, there's nothing going on in that part of the game so i've got my routine down pretty well but i seriously doubt this will cause my wins-to-losses ratio to change.
For the millionth time, I'm not asking for a better skill cap, nor mechanical obstacles. I'm trying to make the game easier.
|
Northern Ireland25050 Posts
This is such a depressing read, people just are jumping on Alryk without actually reading his points for a start.
The campaign does not prepare the casual player for the multiplayer experience, at all. I have spent hours of my time trying to teach friends who are new to the game what they should be doing. Things like worker saturation and whatnot are not intuitive to the newbie, but when explained properly they genuinely can take it up. There should be more tutorials to address this kind of issue, not a 'oh I barely have to even manage my economy now' tooltip.
Lag getting into the game, and fixing it with automine is ridiculous. All players needed was a countdown to display when both had loaded, and they would be starting simultaneously surely? That said, I haven't been able to play on my setup since 1.5 so any kind of Blizzard solution to problems they themselves created is welcome.
Regarding the worker counter, I've lost games from bad saturation, my response is 'oh I've fucked up a key aspect of the game, better tweak that'. But nope, let's just take out another attention-to-detail thing that people apparently don't want to bother practicing.
Also all this 'oh it frees up action to promote strategy' bollocks also gets annoying. Plenty of other games cater to this kind of playstyle, only Starcraft that I know of puts an emphasis on mechanical competence. Why take away this key aspect of the game's identity?
Perhaps the changes themselves aren't major at all, but the underlying design mentality that they reveal is something I disagree with.
|
On September 07 2012 11:18 Alryk wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 11:14 Blueblister wrote:
As a few have pointed out before me these are very shallow "skills" toi have. Max saturation has by no means been intuitive before, with saturation counts the newbies will learn fast. If counting SCVs is made mechanically easier it also makes room for adding new and hopefully deeper skillsets. The automine is furthermore a very good solution to the laggy start problem. Tell me, what is the real issue here? The real issue is that people aren't really addressing my points. YES the worker saturation can be considered a shallow skill to have (i disagree, but its certainly a valid point). I already acknowledged that automine helps with lag, but that's not my point.
Maybe people doesn't address your points because they aren't easily distinguishable in the OP's coagulation of text. Maybe you should try to retell your points in a more comprehensive fashion instead of repeating "not my point, not my point" over and over again.
How exactly does your solution address the lag issue?
And no, saturation counts only obsoletes a brainless click-drag-count mechanical exercise. It doesn't interfere with the strategical aspects of base micromanagement but simply enhances the importance of them. Having a feel for which count between 16 and 24 SCVs is optimal for the specific situation actually starts to approach some sort of strategical depth. Those sensitive for the viable exceptions of under- and oversaturation also deserve some merit.
Points 4 (makes the game look worse) and 5 (it's okay, but I'll still dislike and make a thread about it) are valid but very subjective.
|
On September 07 2012 12:25 Blueblister wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 11:18 Alryk wrote:On September 07 2012 11:14 Blueblister wrote:
As a few have pointed out before me these are very shallow "skills" toi have. Max saturation has by no means been intuitive before, with saturation counts the newbies will learn fast. If counting SCVs is made mechanically easier it also makes room for adding new and hopefully deeper skillsets. The automine is furthermore a very good solution to the laggy start problem. Tell me, what is the real issue here? The real issue is that people aren't really addressing my points. YES the worker saturation can be considered a shallow skill to have (i disagree, but its certainly a valid point). I already acknowledged that automine helps with lag, but that's not my point. Maybe people doesn't address your points because they aren't easily distinguishable in the OP's coagulation of text. Maybe you should try yo retell your points in a more comprehensive fashion instead of repeating "not my point, not my point" over and over again. How exactly does your solution address the lag issue? And no, saturation counts only obsoletes a brainless click-drag-count mechanical exercise. It doesn't interfere with the strategical aspects of base micromanagement but simply enhances the importance of them. Having a feel for which count between 16 and 24 SCVs is optimal for the specific situation actually starts to approach some sort of strategical depth. Those sensitive for the viable exceptions of under- and oversaturation also deserve some merit. Points 4 (makes the game look worse) and 5 (it's okay, but I'll still dislike and make a thread about it) are valid but very subjective.
You realize I've been quoting my TL;DR like every single post? Also, there's a TL;DR, it's for people who can't be bothered to read the paragraphs - it outlines the major points so people can address them. People have no excuse for not reading or understanding my post because of the TL;DR AND the TL;DR being quoted probably at least once a page.
My solution is not about the lag issue. I never tried to solve that. MY issue has to do with new players. But I can easily solve that problem - put a counter on in game so that people are loaded but can't "do anything" until the counter expires. But that's not the point. Don't go into a discussion about the warhound and ask how their solution addresses the Tempest. I never tried to make the lag issue a major point of my post, I merely acknowledged that the automine helps with lag.
See, we disagree here. That's not a fact, that's an opinion. I think that the ability to know how to optimize workers is a skill that needs to be learned. Your opinion is not more valid than my opinion. My opinion is not more valid than your opinion. There is already a strategical depth involved, but some people just don't want to believe that it's there (and they have every right to think this) just as I have every right to flat out disagree with you.
Points 4 & 5 I stated as subjective, I just figured I'd voice them anyways. I should rephrase 5 though, as it's not really accurate. I dislike the change for the specific intention that it has - I think that something like additional tooltips would serve it better. I already stated the change is ok for lag, but not ideal (just add a countdown, or fix the code). WC/B is an entirely subjective matter. And newer players WOULD be better served with more all encompassing tooltips than they would with a simple automine.
|
I feel functions like automine and worker saturation are incredibly minor additions to solve a greater problem. SC2's playerbase is dwindling and these additions make the game more accesible towards players who can't put the time in to become high-skill.
These additions don't hurt the cerebral element of the game at all while lowering the twitchiness.
What i do think is bad would be automatic base management where the cpu automatically saturates gas when minerals are oversaturated. Worse, if you were harassed that the cpu automatically sends a worker to a 2/3 geyser.
|
Skill can not be reduced if other actions can replace the actions not needed.
If a pro or any player has to spend less actions on a task it isn't like he stops and waits and then leaves off when he would of finished the task.
These changes don't take away skill they add opportunity to the game.
All it is is a change in the game, not a change in the amount of skill needed to win.
|
Do people really consider boxing a group of SCVs, and clicking on a mineral field - a skill?
I don't - it's just a laborious thing that always needs to be done. No decision making, no strategic element - just a totally 'required' thing.
If it's gone, I can't see it making any difference to the outcome of games - it doesn't detract from strategy - it just means players with a bit of start up lag don't face the frustration of not having constant worker production. Anyone silver or above should be fairly efficiently send their initial workers anyway.
Meh, out of all the things I do while playing SC2, I don't consider the worker split to be an impressive demonstration of my skill.
|
|
|
On September 07 2012 23:23 Barrin wrote:
Why don't these people just play the single-player? How stupid do you have to be to not realize that if you're completely new then you probably have little chance of giving any remotely established player a decent challenge? Multiplayer when single-player exists is not for newbs, this was always intuitive to me (donno bout you guys). If you can't figure out how mining works after a few missions, then perhaps there are better games out there for you.
Don't be fooled, these changes are not targeted at helping entry-level noobs. They are targetted at lowering the skill CAP, which of course also concerns noobs.
BTW I'm a top advocate of increasing skill cap of SC2 (mechanics being one of three major areas), but really the auto worker split is fine IMO. Worker display on the other hand?? I give up.
Well I certainly agree that playing single player would solve the problem, I feel like many players wouldn't want to just play single player over and over to get the basics. I know a lot of friends who jumped into ladder quickly because they didn't want to go through campaign. While I should be less extreme and admit that mining is pretty simple, other things like what building does what aren't necessarily so, especially since there is no zerg/protoss component to the campaign, so aspiring protoss/zerg players would probably be confused as to each building.
Especially since not every level of the campaign is a tutorial, and you have to play through it sequentially to get information on certain units, the information is so spread out that I personally don't think it's a very good way of "learning" moreso than introducing. And when the information/tooltips (such as what a barracks is etc.) is already present in the campaign (via adjutant talking) I think that it would be a fairly simple job (not really but some of the code can surely be reused) to port all of those tips into the multiplayer aspect - this way, instead of playing one mission to learn about the thor, another the viking, (and the factory and starport in two separate missions), upon building each respective building, the adjutant can pop in and say "this is X... use it to Y..." in a relatively short "mini tutorial" so to speak.
Since I am certainly not versed in computer coding relating to video games, I don't know how difficult this could be. It's possible that something like this is limited purely because of a time/investment sort of ratio.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
