|
On September 20 2012 16:53 mage36 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 16:14 playa wrote:
I wouldn't expect many to be able to relate... Many of times, I would go something like 50-5 on a ladder and all of my losses would be to 2 gate zealot rush in t vs p. I watched a Nada replay on Korhal that blew my mind. He was killing zealots like it was nothing with vultures. So, what do I do... I practice trying to use attack move without the adv of lan. So much time wasted basically attempting the impossible, simply because I didn't know to use P instead of "A." There is absolutely no freaking skill involved in knowing micro gimmicks.
This game should come down to mastery, not perverted ideas of skill. I'm not a hypocrite. I want the better player to win. I don't want to know any tricks that he/she doesn't. If that makes me wrong/bad person, then I'm not ashamed.
BW was boring in that after a certain time, you just didn't see new players rise to the top. For a period of a few years, Koll was probably the only new face. All of these micro tricks remaining hidden from the majority of the player base is simply more obstacles in the way, which in part leads to the same faces at the highest level. If you already have a games adv, what more of an adv do you really need? More emphasis on "talent," less emphasis on when you started playing and how much of a tl.net addiction you have.
Personally, I'd rather spend more time playing than browsing tl.net. And especially not browsing for what new quirky micro trick bs do I need to learn now. It's my opinion, but I prefer a game that can be taken at face value. You don't have to always wonder what trick you're not privy to atm. That's a good thing. And if you have a problem with blizzard adding tutorials, if not simply links to videos from tl.net, then you're simply not a reasonable person. You should ask yourself why you're not a reasonable person.
It should be about talent AND the effort you put into the game. It could also be a way for Blizzard to indirectly reward people who have been playing their game for a long time. Since this thread is about carrier micro, I'll just focus on that for this post. It's not just you know about the Carrier Micro that you suddenly have the advantage. It's still pretty hard to do and takes a lot of time to master (you did say it should come down to mastery). Plus you're using APM instead of doing something else. You still have to balance it out with other things you have to do like creating more units or multiple engagements in the map. In fact, it wouldn't really matter if you knew about the Carrier Micro but can't put it to good use or I dare say you may even be worse off by attempting it but failing bad and also neglecting other stuff you have to do in-game. I'm sure all pros know about it, but they still have different levels of success because others know how to use it to full efficiency while others don't quite grasp it fully just yet for a variety of reasons. The point is, it's not an advantage because it's not just one click of a button and it does what you tell it to do. It's something that turns into an advantage because you have trained yourself to know how to do it and do it effectively. No one is saying Blizzard shouldn't add a tutorial. In fact it will probably be better if they do since they can tell people that this unit can do this neat micro but it's not a buff. You have to know how to use it or else it might even do more harm than good. The harder the micro is, the more chances of a player mis-micro-ing it like a greater risk but greater reward kind of thing. Do I just leave my carrier on a-move where I'm sure what it will do? Or do I micro it and have a chance of it not being as effective as just a-moving it if I don't do it properly but will increase its efficiency if I do micro it properly?
very well stated sir!
i really don't get why this idiot playa guy doesn't want these carrier micro "tricks" that add depth to your gaming experience. it's basically similar in theory to the marine stutter step. you could a-move your marines OR you could do MKP stutter step to optimize your marines. same goes with carriers. little micro features would add depth to the unit and could help people use it more efficiently. i doubt that lower level players can perfectly execute marine stutter step micro, but they aren't complaining. no one is. so why do you complain about carrier micro if there is also a comparable micro feature in stutter step?
|
On September 20 2012 17:15 AlmondCS wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 16:53 mage36 wrote:On September 20 2012 16:14 playa wrote:
I wouldn't expect many to be able to relate... Many of times, I would go something like 50-5 on a ladder and all of my losses would be to 2 gate zealot rush in t vs p. I watched a Nada replay on Korhal that blew my mind. He was killing zealots like it was nothing with vultures. So, what do I do... I practice trying to use attack move without the adv of lan. So much time wasted basically attempting the impossible, simply because I didn't know to use P instead of "A." There is absolutely no freaking skill involved in knowing micro gimmicks.
This game should come down to mastery, not perverted ideas of skill. I'm not a hypocrite. I want the better player to win. I don't want to know any tricks that he/she doesn't. If that makes me wrong/bad person, then I'm not ashamed.
BW was boring in that after a certain time, you just didn't see new players rise to the top. For a period of a few years, Koll was probably the only new face. All of these micro tricks remaining hidden from the majority of the player base is simply more obstacles in the way, which in part leads to the same faces at the highest level. If you already have a games adv, what more of an adv do you really need? More emphasis on "talent," less emphasis on when you started playing and how much of a tl.net addiction you have.
Personally, I'd rather spend more time playing than browsing tl.net. And especially not browsing for what new quirky micro trick bs do I need to learn now. It's my opinion, but I prefer a game that can be taken at face value. You don't have to always wonder what trick you're not privy to atm. That's a good thing. And if you have a problem with blizzard adding tutorials, if not simply links to videos from tl.net, then you're simply not a reasonable person. You should ask yourself why you're not a reasonable person.
It should be about talent AND the effort you put into the game. It could also be a way for Blizzard to indirectly reward people who have been playing their game for a long time. Since this thread is about carrier micro, I'll just focus on that for this post. It's not just you know about the Carrier Micro that you suddenly have the advantage. It's still pretty hard to do and takes a lot of time to master (you did say it should come down to mastery). Plus you're using APM instead of doing something else. You still have to balance it out with other things you have to do like creating more units or multiple engagements in the map. In fact, it wouldn't really matter if you knew about the Carrier Micro but can't put it to good use or I dare say you may even be worse off by attempting it but failing bad and also neglecting other stuff you have to do in-game. I'm sure all pros know about it, but they still have different levels of success because others know how to use it to full efficiency while others don't quite grasp it fully just yet for a variety of reasons. The point is, it's not an advantage because it's not just one click of a button and it does what you tell it to do. It's something that turns into an advantage because you have trained yourself to know how to do it and do it effectively. No one is saying Blizzard shouldn't add a tutorial. In fact it will probably be better if they do since they can tell people that this unit can do this neat micro but it's not a buff. You have to know how to use it or else it might even do more harm than good. The harder the micro is, the more chances of a player mis-micro-ing it like a greater risk but greater reward kind of thing. Do I just leave my carrier on a-move where I'm sure what it will do? Or do I micro it and have a chance of it not being as effective as just a-moving it if I don't do it properly but will increase its efficiency if I do micro it properly? very well stated sir! i really don't get why this idiot playa guy doesn't want these carrier micro "tricks" that add depth to your gaming experience. it's basically similar in theory to the marine stutter step. you could a-move your marines OR you could do MKP stutter step to optimize your marines. same goes with carriers. little micro features would add depth to the unit and could help people use it more efficiently. i doubt that lower level players can perfectly execute marine stutter step micro, but they aren't complaining. no one is. so why do you complain about carrier micro if there is also a comparable micro feature in stutter step?
An AlmondCS post. Could just as well leave it blank. Say something or don't say anything. It could add depth to BW too, for the 10 people that know its intricacies.
|
On September 20 2012 17:17 playa wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 17:15 AlmondCS wrote:On September 20 2012 16:53 mage36 wrote:On September 20 2012 16:14 playa wrote:
I wouldn't expect many to be able to relate... Many of times, I would go something like 50-5 on a ladder and all of my losses would be to 2 gate zealot rush in t vs p. I watched a Nada replay on Korhal that blew my mind. He was killing zealots like it was nothing with vultures. So, what do I do... I practice trying to use attack move without the adv of lan. So much time wasted basically attempting the impossible, simply because I didn't know to use P instead of "A." There is absolutely no freaking skill involved in knowing micro gimmicks.
This game should come down to mastery, not perverted ideas of skill. I'm not a hypocrite. I want the better player to win. I don't want to know any tricks that he/she doesn't. If that makes me wrong/bad person, then I'm not ashamed.
BW was boring in that after a certain time, you just didn't see new players rise to the top. For a period of a few years, Koll was probably the only new face. All of these micro tricks remaining hidden from the majority of the player base is simply more obstacles in the way, which in part leads to the same faces at the highest level. If you already have a games adv, what more of an adv do you really need? More emphasis on "talent," less emphasis on when you started playing and how much of a tl.net addiction you have.
Personally, I'd rather spend more time playing than browsing tl.net. And especially not browsing for what new quirky micro trick bs do I need to learn now. It's my opinion, but I prefer a game that can be taken at face value. You don't have to always wonder what trick you're not privy to atm. That's a good thing. And if you have a problem with blizzard adding tutorials, if not simply links to videos from tl.net, then you're simply not a reasonable person. You should ask yourself why you're not a reasonable person.
It should be about talent AND the effort you put into the game. It could also be a way for Blizzard to indirectly reward people who have been playing their game for a long time. Since this thread is about carrier micro, I'll just focus on that for this post. It's not just you know about the Carrier Micro that you suddenly have the advantage. It's still pretty hard to do and takes a lot of time to master (you did say it should come down to mastery). Plus you're using APM instead of doing something else. You still have to balance it out with other things you have to do like creating more units or multiple engagements in the map. In fact, it wouldn't really matter if you knew about the Carrier Micro but can't put it to good use or I dare say you may even be worse off by attempting it but failing bad and also neglecting other stuff you have to do in-game. I'm sure all pros know about it, but they still have different levels of success because others know how to use it to full efficiency while others don't quite grasp it fully just yet for a variety of reasons. The point is, it's not an advantage because it's not just one click of a button and it does what you tell it to do. It's something that turns into an advantage because you have trained yourself to know how to do it and do it effectively. No one is saying Blizzard shouldn't add a tutorial. In fact it will probably be better if they do since they can tell people that this unit can do this neat micro but it's not a buff. You have to know how to use it or else it might even do more harm than good. The harder the micro is, the more chances of a player mis-micro-ing it like a greater risk but greater reward kind of thing. Do I just leave my carrier on a-move where I'm sure what it will do? Or do I micro it and have a chance of it not being as effective as just a-moving it if I don't do it properly but will increase its efficiency if I do micro it properly? very well stated sir! i really don't get why this idiot playa guy doesn't want these carrier micro "tricks" that add depth to your gaming experience. it's basically similar in theory to the marine stutter step. you could a-move your marines OR you could do MKP stutter step to optimize your marines. same goes with carriers. little micro features would add depth to the unit and could help people use it more efficiently. i doubt that lower level players can perfectly execute marine stutter step micro, but they aren't complaining. no one is. so why do you complain about carrier micro if there is also a comparable micro feature in stutter step? An AlmondCS post. Could just as well leave it blank. Say something or don't say anything.
come on mr bigshot 50-5 WCG whatever. tell me, why are you so against giving carrier the micro features it deserves when the simplest marines have stutter step micro. your one-dimensional thinking is nearing its peak
|
On September 20 2012 17:17 playa wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 17:15 AlmondCS wrote:On September 20 2012 16:53 mage36 wrote:On September 20 2012 16:14 playa wrote:
I wouldn't expect many to be able to relate... Many of times, I would go something like 50-5 on a ladder and all of my losses would be to 2 gate zealot rush in t vs p. I watched a Nada replay on Korhal that blew my mind. He was killing zealots like it was nothing with vultures. So, what do I do... I practice trying to use attack move without the adv of lan. So much time wasted basically attempting the impossible, simply because I didn't know to use P instead of "A." There is absolutely no freaking skill involved in knowing micro gimmicks.
This game should come down to mastery, not perverted ideas of skill. I'm not a hypocrite. I want the better player to win. I don't want to know any tricks that he/she doesn't. If that makes me wrong/bad person, then I'm not ashamed.
BW was boring in that after a certain time, you just didn't see new players rise to the top. For a period of a few years, Koll was probably the only new face. All of these micro tricks remaining hidden from the majority of the player base is simply more obstacles in the way, which in part leads to the same faces at the highest level. If you already have a games adv, what more of an adv do you really need? More emphasis on "talent," less emphasis on when you started playing and how much of a tl.net addiction you have.
Personally, I'd rather spend more time playing than browsing tl.net. And especially not browsing for what new quirky micro trick bs do I need to learn now. It's my opinion, but I prefer a game that can be taken at face value. You don't have to always wonder what trick you're not privy to atm. That's a good thing. And if you have a problem with blizzard adding tutorials, if not simply links to videos from tl.net, then you're simply not a reasonable person. You should ask yourself why you're not a reasonable person.
It should be about talent AND the effort you put into the game. It could also be a way for Blizzard to indirectly reward people who have been playing their game for a long time. Since this thread is about carrier micro, I'll just focus on that for this post. It's not just you know about the Carrier Micro that you suddenly have the advantage. It's still pretty hard to do and takes a lot of time to master (you did say it should come down to mastery). Plus you're using APM instead of doing something else. You still have to balance it out with other things you have to do like creating more units or multiple engagements in the map. In fact, it wouldn't really matter if you knew about the Carrier Micro but can't put it to good use or I dare say you may even be worse off by attempting it but failing bad and also neglecting other stuff you have to do in-game. I'm sure all pros know about it, but they still have different levels of success because others know how to use it to full efficiency while others don't quite grasp it fully just yet for a variety of reasons. The point is, it's not an advantage because it's not just one click of a button and it does what you tell it to do. It's something that turns into an advantage because you have trained yourself to know how to do it and do it effectively. No one is saying Blizzard shouldn't add a tutorial. In fact it will probably be better if they do since they can tell people that this unit can do this neat micro but it's not a buff. You have to know how to use it or else it might even do more harm than good. The harder the micro is, the more chances of a player mis-micro-ing it like a greater risk but greater reward kind of thing. Do I just leave my carrier on a-move where I'm sure what it will do? Or do I micro it and have a chance of it not being as effective as just a-moving it if I don't do it properly but will increase its efficiency if I do micro it properly? very well stated sir! i really don't get why this idiot playa guy doesn't want these carrier micro "tricks" that add depth to your gaming experience. it's basically similar in theory to the marine stutter step. you could a-move your marines OR you could do MKP stutter step to optimize your marines. same goes with carriers. little micro features would add depth to the unit and could help people use it more efficiently. i doubt that lower level players can perfectly execute marine stutter step micro, but they aren't complaining. no one is. so why do you complain about carrier micro if there is also a comparable micro feature in stutter step? An AlmondCS post. Could just as well leave it blank. Say something or don't say anything. It could add depth to BW to, for the 10 people that know its intricacies.
I don't see what your point is. You've derailed a perfectly good thread, it's obvious no one here shares your opinion, and from your posts it seems like we'll be seeing you in code s soon anyway! Best of luck!
On topic: I didn't know about the instant deployment in brood war (only began playing it 3 years ago) I would kill to be able to do this in sc2. Thanks tyler!
|
Italy12246 Posts
You are both being beyond unreasonable. AlmondCS, don't call people idiots in teamliquid, that's not how you post.
Playa, everyone in the Brood War community knows about Vulture micro, Dragoon micro, etc. It's not just 10 people. There are resources out there to study and learn, there are forums, vods, hell even just searching "vulture micro" on youtube and google will be enough to figure it out. It's a freaking multiplayer game, you aren't expected to figure out everything about it on your own.
|
On September 20 2012 17:26 Teoita wrote:
You are both being beyond unreasonable. AlmondCS, don't call people idiots in teamliquid, that's not how you post.
Playa, everyone in the Brood War community knows about Vulture micro, Dragoon micro, etc. It's not just 10 people. There are resources out there to study and learn, there are forums, vods, hell even just searching "vulture micro" on youtube and google will be enough to figure it out. It's a freaking multiplayer game, you aren't expected to figure out everything about it on your own.
i apologize for the inappropriate language
|
Can we just all agree that adding unique micro is a good thing? And as someone stated on the previous page of this thread, it's not going to slip into the cracks and only a few people will know. Blizzard can put it in the patch notes. The difference will be the people who are motivated enough to practice it to continuously get better giving them an advantage because they put the time and effort to understanding how to take advantage of it. it's supposed to be something we add to the game to add a bit of fun and add a bit of WOW factor when watching pros making our collective jaws drop asking how he is able to do that.
|
Why don't people just learn to use the tools they've got.... I can't believe 2 years on people are STILL trying to make SC2 like BW. The carrier itself isn't even a bad unit, the problem is you can't ever safely transition into them.
But let's put this into perspective... how do you balance a unit that takes intricate micro tricks to utilise to its greatest potential? How do you stop it being too powerful in one user's hands while being too weak in another's?
If you're all for bringing back carrier micro... how about bringing back muta stacking too? It takes significant APM to keep them moving and to macro at the same time, as well as good timing to correctly utilise their attack range.
|
Carriers are the most awkward unit to transition. It was so impressive to see someone with good Carrier micro in BW. To all these people saying that it would make it too easy, and that it is a different game, you must not have had good carrier micro in BW. That's something that Nony said himself, it wasn't easy. Noobs would just A-click, sit at 8 range, and actually do fairly well (just like the carriers behave in SC2) but pros would not only manipulate leash range, but they would utilize terrain, anticipate target timing, STACKING via a trapped probe (hey, guys, corsairs, scouts, and carriers [bisu rep to prove this on HBR vs Fantasy] can stack in BW too!!).
In Heart of the Swarm, Blizzard needs to implement more things like this, to raise the skill ceiling, as opposed to gimmicky mothership core recall ability type things, which are overall a parlor trick. Protoss needs a way to deal with lategame Broodlord/Infestor without having to rely on the Mothership's vortex, which has been greatly changed considering the shift to the mothership core. Leash range "stop and go" attack movement would enable infestor targeting.
|
Italy12246 Posts
foxmeep: sounds like you are talking about..hmm...marines tvz? And yet, none complains that in bronze banelings are too strong or whatever.
Besides, even if something is imbalanced in lower leagues because people suck, the solution is as usual to get better at the game, not to fix something that isn't broken at the highest level.
|
On September 20 2012 19:25 foxmeep wrote:
Why don't people just learn to use the tools they've got.... I can't believe 2 years on people are STILL trying to make SC2 like BW. The carrier itself isn't even a bad unit, the problem is you can't ever safely transition into them.
But let's put this into perspective... how do you balance a unit that takes intricate micro tricks to utilise to its greatest potential? How do you stop it being too powerful in one user's hands while being too weak in another's?
If you're all for bringing back carrier micro... how about bringing back muta stacking too? It takes significant APM to keep them moving and to macro at the same time, as well as good timing to correctly utilise their attack range.
I think we do have to put it into perspective, because if you read the OP, this is how you deal with it:
I hope we can get it though because it takes so much attention and skill to use effectively. It is very strong but becomes incredibly difficult to do as soon as your opponent forces action in two places at once. So the players are countering each other by doing increasingly difficult strategies and that is AWESOME.
It's not like they put this in for the carrier, someone masters it and he's suddenly unbeatable. As Nony said, this takes a lot of skill and attention to use, which includes APM. Make your opponent spend his APM somewhere else. Counter attack, harass, have another engagement elsewhere in the map, make the carriers constantly run around the map. They're not that fast, you can do other things than have just one deathball engagement and whoever wins that wins the game. It creates potential for multiple engagements on the map, something fun and exciting. Something hard to deal with for both players. Just give one race this hard to micro unit that increases his efficiency, others will find a way to deal with this. It was like that when MKP started using marines so effectively that banelings couldn't even be cost effective against them. People will find ways. Perhaps even more than one effective one. This is where we can separate the good from the great!
If it proves to be too OP, then Blizzard can try little tweaks to it till they get it right. This is the Beta, for God's sake! This is the time to push Blizzard to get to try out stuff that the community wants because they feel it will help make the game more entertaining! There aren't any serious tournaments like GSL or MLG playing HOTS yet. Blizzard isn't even asking the Beta testers to pay any money for the expansion yet! No money is on the line if this units proves to be OP. So why should we not push them to try it instead of saying "No, that simply just won't work. Let's just leave it as it is. Unused and useless except for some team games where people are just having fun going for weird strats that won't work out in a serious, balanced game."
We aren't talking about muta stacking here. We're just starting with one at a time. Someone comes up with an idea, he presents it to people and hopes people think it's a good idea too then people start making noise and pitching it to Blizzard. Someone else can make a thread about muta micro and it's advantages and we can also try to convince Blizzard about that too! I'm all for that if it shows why it would be better for the game. But again, this is not what this thread is about.
The reason why we're not just learning the tools we have is because Blizzard is Beta testing for a reason. They want our feedback and we're just simply giving it to them. Honestly, I don't think changes have to be the same as the mechanics in Brood War. It's just that in this case it is. People can come up with mechanics that are interesting and we haven't seen in BW and may pitch that to Blizzard.
|
I certainly think being able to switch targets within leash range would be a good change. However i am not sure about having to keep the carriers moving so that the interceptors stay out, it seems that it accomplishes the same thing as the upgrade but requires a lot more apm. Now that may not be a bad thing, though with the new units there will already be a lot more micro intensive situations.
I am just speculating, though things like constantly using the oracles abilities. keeping entomb going, making a group of phoenix immune to fungal so that they can fly in do their damage and get away or likewise with blink stalkers.
With oracles, warp prisms and phoenix aswell as recall and energise. Protoss could be threatening with their main army, using entomb, warp prisms zealot/storm drop, raiding somewhere with spell immune units etc, then recall whichever group gets in trouble while strengthening an attack on the other side of the map. Protoss seem to be the race with the most options for being everywhere at once.
There are so many more interesting possibilities to utilise apm. Being able to target switch in leash range would be good but also having to try and keep carriers moving to have the same function as the current upgrade provides seems like an uninteresting way for a player to try and benefit from their skill.
|
Screw this whole arguing.
You won´t ever stop, will you?
All this taught me was that I would ban you all if I were a mod.
Repetition of the same crappy arguments over and over. "It´s unintuitive" "I don´t want to have to learn outside of the game" "random ad hominem comment" "It wouldn´t be the same" "It would add sooooo much depth I think it´s ok" "there could be tutorials"
This is making the thread unreadable to me.
The issue should be to make this technique visible to the audience and the enemy, not how to teach people to keep moving their carrier.
I´m out.
|
I just finished watching code S today where Seed played against Symbol. In this series Seed went several times for mass carriers and gosh that was painful to watch. You just wish to land a perfect vortex to be able to kill zerg broodlord+infestor+corruptor composition, otherwise you are pretty screwed. Carriers in this case was supposed to be effective only when you surprise your opponent. Thats nice but how you surprise your opponent when you need time to build like ten carriers? What i really dont like is that it took him so long to build all those carriers and it came only to one engagement where you are forced to hope for perfect vortex plus that the number of carriers might be enough. You basicly dont move your carriers at all. You just depent on the pure damage, no micro involved.
So what happened there...Seed landed his vortex on all Symbol's corruptors. Symbol fungaled Seed's carriers+spawned a lot of infested terrans. Seed sent archons into the toilet+stormed all corruptors after they poped out of vortex. It wasnt enough which resulted in Seed losing. So sad a lot of very late game pvz where vortex is mostly the only big factor (on toss side) wheather toss win/lose. We cannot depent on carriers unless Blizzard will do something about it. With better carriers micro we will not have to sent our carriers to the battle and just hope we win. Even after the match at the interview, Symbol showed like no fear against carriers. Yeah i guess people laugh at you when you go carrier gg.
|
i doubt that the old broodwar unit mechanism would be implemented into SC2, Sure the old carrier was awsome, watching the pros using their carriers made me want to do the same, with less success, but i understood that they had to be within a range in order to "deploy" fast again for attacking a new unit, tho i never had the theory behind it.
the thing is, i believe we are looking backwards too much, muta stacking, carrier leash? how about inventing a new method to micro the units. how? i dont know, but you guys might have an idea. (what i think DB wish to come)
I think the problem lies within DB's wish to make a perfect game, and that is the issue imo. for a "perfect" game, units and buildings alike will not behave in any other way, it took several years for pros to discover the "abusement" behind muta stacking, vulture kiting, carrier micro. worker/unit jumping
|
On September 20 2012 10:47 bistan wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 08:04 playa wrote:
In BW, on ladders, I used to use the shift click on geyser trick to scout my opponent's base. It was absolutely as unintuitive as anything could be. Most people, being everyone that didn't know about this trick, would simply assume I was hacking. If you want to blame someone for not knowing tricks like this, all I can do is shake my head. So much in life is arbitrary. For example, this trick I just mentioned was eventually not allowed. You would get fined points on ladders and you would auto lose a game if you tried in a tournament. Every race could use the trick, though. In SC 2, it's built into the game to be able to pass through units to scout a base. Who complains now, though?
You guys are really biased. You're hardcore people that have prob been playing from day 1 and don't miss anything that takes place on tl.net When newer players come around, think in 5 years, they're going to have no clue wtf this carrier micro is and etc. They won't be able to just watch a game and realize someone is doing some weird trick that they need to search on tl.net to learn. And, if they do become pretty good, they're probably kinda logical. It probably won't occur to them to try some random combination of random to micro properly. They will be practicing micro in a manner that makes sense. Not in some weird way/glitch way.
Nony was one of the best players and def mechanics were a big part of that. I wouldn't blame him if he wanted the highest degree of mechanics needed for everything. If I were to start playing in 5 years though, I would simply hope that I could find Nony's video on carrier micro, without needing some act of serendipity to end up practicing how I'm supposed to. Of course you'll be able to find the video. I play the drums; how fucking boring would the drums be if all the little techniques you could do were just completely intuitive and you could just sit at the kit and practice single rolls for a few years and be the best drummer in the world? If the mechanics for throwing a perfect fastball were completely intuitive, what would that be like? How does one learn SC2? How does one learn anything? How obvious is it to a new chess player that the knight moves in an L shape, and pawns can't move backwards? So much in life is arbitrary right? Who the fuck would care if the pawns could move forwards and backwards? Or if a baseball mound was only 20 feet from home plate? An incredibly complex subject like say, math has so many thousands of pages written about all the things you need to learn. No one even bats an eye; you just understand that you need to read up to learn math. Why is it so bad that a video game requires you to learn it a little bit? We're talking about Starcraft here. It needs to be the most competitive game it can possibly be. I feel like it can't be that if you just make everything completely obvious in the game. If it's important enough micro that in order to improve you need to learn it, it'll be in a sticky, maybe even in a fucking book someday. The good thing is that the level of skill to do everything else AND micro the carriers would put you at a level where you should be reading micro guides or learning from pro's coaches ANYWAYS.
On September 18 2012 10:35 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2012 10:15 playa wrote:On September 18 2012 10:12 GolemMadness wrote:On September 18 2012 10:04 playa wrote:
I never knew how to micro carriers. There was way too much in BW that was esoteric. Important stuff that made a big difference, but it was next to impossible to know everything you needed to. Def not something a casual player would ever know. Unless blizzard wants to make tutorial videos like how to use patrol micro versus zealots and lings (BW), then I'm really against adding quirky things so a select few can get a big adv off by simply knowing how to manipulate units in weird ways. Yeah, screw the game having some depth to it. Incidentally, if you're a casual player, then it doesn't matter anyways. You'll be playing against other casual players who'll presumably have around the same level of knowledge as you, so it won't make a difference. If you want to keep adding depth, you'll end up like BW. I had already qualified for WCG US before I even learned about patrol micro for vultures, which is freaking huge to know. Only the most hardcore people that have been around for ever will even have a chance to know all this random stuff. If you want to add "depth," make sure it's accessible. You shouldn't have to scour every thread on tl.net to learn "magic tricks." You do realize we're living in age where information is distributed really, really fast. These sort of things would not be these carefully guarded secrets. I joined BW very late and I'm aware of most of the BW micro tricks. I'm rubbish at pretty much all of them, but I'm well aware of them. Show nested quote +On September 18 2012 10:29 playa wrote:
Everyone is considered a pro in SC 2, despite being no better than they were in BW or putting in any more effort. There's always going to be a lot of people that simply have no clue, no matter what level of a player they are. I'm just saying, if you're not prepared to make tricks accessible to everyone, then it shouldn't happen.
Depth... If you can make better decisions than your opponent, then I don't have a problem with you winning. I'm not even saying I'm against adding things like this... so not sure how reasonable you are. That said, why not petition for the macro mechanics to go back to how they were in BW. It makes good macro all the more impressive... What's the difference. But it is accessible to everyone. It's just a matter of learning. Do you take out backwards skating out of hockey because some people don't want to learn? It's there if you want to, but if you just want to play casual, pond hockey you can be perfectly happy skating forwards and never backwards. These will not be deep, dark secrets. They'll be widely available to everyone... just like Marine splitting. But not everyone is MKP. Do we get rid of the marine split because not everyone can hack it? It's always there waiting, something to aspire to.
Thank you so much for these posts.
People like playa and dustin browder are what's wrong with sc2.
I myself have been playing bw maybe for 2-3 months (watching maybe around 6-8 months) and I basically know 'every trick' that's still allowed today. (for zerg atleast)
The real world is all about discovery as well, a lot of important scientific discoveries were based on lucky discoveries (but discoveries nonetheless).
|
This thread isn't really about whether micro tricks are a "good thing" or not. The point is that SOMETHING needs to happen with the SC2 Carrier to make it a viable unit in competitive play.
Look at the "Competitive Usage" section for carriers on Liquipedia: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Carrier
According to Liquipedia, Carriers aren't too useful in PvP versus a normal Stalker/Sentry army comp. And Vikings coming out of one or two starports with reactors are going to hard-counter a carrier strategy.
The only place where it looks like carriers might work is in PvZ, but the first idea they have about how to use them is as a hidden all-in build. Essentially, if the Zerg has enough Corruptors and Hydras, it's probably not going to work (except lategame in a deathball. But there are a LOT of Protoss units that are good lategame in a deathball).
NonY isn't even saying that Blizzard should make this change to the game blind. I think he makes a good argument that putting BW's Carrier mechanics back into SC2 would make Carriers viable units again. But all he's recommending is that Blizzard put the mechanics back into the HotS beta to see how they work.
Isn't that the point of a beta? To see if something works before you unleash it on the world?
|
Very interesting. I think starcraft is moving in a totally different direction than brood war. I am sad to say I believe they will take away these types of micro oriented units rather than add them. But great video and hopefully blizzard takes notes from the professionals.
|
|
|
On September 20 2012 16:36 AlmondCS wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 16:14 playa wrote:
I wouldn't expect many to be able to relate... Many of times, I would go something like 50-5 on a ladder and all of my losses would be to 2 gate zealot rush in t vs p. I watched a Nada replay on Korhal that blew my mind. He was killing zealots like it was nothing with vultures. So, what do I do... I practice trying to use attack move without the adv of lan. So much time wasted basically attempting the impossible, simply because I didn't know to use P instead of "A." There is absolutely no freaking skill involved in knowing micro gimmicks.
This game should come down to mastery, not perverted ideas of skill. I'm not a hypocrite. I want the better player to win. I don't want to know any tricks that he/she doesn't. If that makes me wrong/bad person, then I'm not ashamed.
BW was boring in that after a certain time, you just didn't see new players rise to the top. For a period of a few years, Koll was probably the only new face. All of these micro tricks remaining hidden from the majority of the player base is simply more obstacles in the way, which in part leads to the same faces at the highest level. If you already have a games adv, what more of an adv do you really need? More emphasis on "talent," less emphasis on when you started playing and how much of a tl.net addiction you have.
Personally, I'd rather spend more time playing than browsing tl.net. And especially not browsing for what new quirky micro trick bs do I need to learn now. It's my opinion, but I prefer a game that can be taken at face value. You don't have to always wonder what trick you're not privy to atm. That's a good thing. And if you have a problem with blizzard adding tutorials, if not simply links to videos from tl.net, then you're simply not a reasonable person. You should ask yourself why you're not a reasonable person.
wow you must be THAT good! wow! you should be a progamer! lol at no skill comment. a-move=no skill. patrol micro requires skill. if u dont wanna micro then a-move. no one's forcing u to use the micro. or maybe you're just a sore loser who doesn't wanna try anything else except a-move. if u want a game that's simple enough to play with no quirky micro tricks u can learn, then go play red alert... the game suits your one-dimensional way of thinking and no one ever said that we didn't want tutorials.
The thing with vulture patrol micro is that knowing the trick already puts you 80% of the way there. Pretty much anyone can kill 10 slowlings with a vulture if they know the trick. In this case I'd say that just the knowledge by itself gives you too much of an advantage, and that's what I think playa is getting at. Not saying that vulture micro is easy of course, just this aspect of it. The hard part is emulating this trick while choosing your targets.
On the other hand, and as many have said, I can tell you all the muta tricks or the carrier tricks like Nony did, and after a bit of practice your muta/carrier micro is still going to be waaay lacking. So in this case it is skill that’s making most of the difference, not the knowledge, and that's where we want to be with micro tricks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
