|
On September 20 2012 17:25 MateShade wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 17:17 playa wrote: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!
You have an upgrade for that ><
|
Lots of korean players were disappointed about this sc2' useless carrer. Many high rank players tried to to find a way how to use them, found out that it' quite useful in vs factory units. But hard to meet who use only factory unit in protoss.. D:
|
On September 21 2012 14:39 moskonia wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 17:25 MateShade wrote:On September 20 2012 17:17 playa wrote: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! You have an upgrade for that ><
Not sure if you are being serious or not but the upgrade is only for the first 4 interceptors, and it only doubles the speed. I'd really like to see this in SC2, I think for the reasons stated by Tyler that it would definitely help make the Carrier more* viable.
*Key word being "more", whether they would actually be viable or not remains to be seen.
|
On September 21 2012 14:55 Myrddraal wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2012 14:39 moskonia wrote:On September 20 2012 17:25 MateShade wrote:On September 20 2012 17:17 playa wrote: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! You have an upgrade for that >< Not sure if you are being serious or not but the upgrade is only for the first 4 interceptors, and it only doubles the speed. I'd really like to see this in SC2, I think for the reasons stated by Tyler that it would definitely help make the Carrier more* viable. *Key word being "more", whether they would actually be viable or not remains to be seen.
Umm.. No... the upgrade is for all the interceptors, just tested it. Yes it is not instant but it is very fast. About being viable, the carrier is very viable lategame, it is a very supply efficient unit, problem is it takes 2 minutes to build 1.
|
The Carrier in SC2 has the same problem as mech has for Terrans: They cant be "burst-produced" and as long as any other part of your army can be burst-produced they will be much more attractive. That is a terrible concept in SC2 and so I would think that in addition to the microability this burst-production-potential needs to be adressed as well. Removing Warp Gate, Reactor, Larva Inject and Chronoboost would solve many problems IMO and one of them is the unattractiveness of air armies.
|
On September 21 2012 19:20 Rabiator wrote:
The Carrier in SC2 has the same problem as mech has for Terrans: They cant be "burst-produced" and as long as any other part of your army can be burst-produced they will be much more attractive. That is a terrible concept in SC2 and so I would think that in addition to the microability this burst-production-potential needs to be adressed as well. Removing Warp Gate, Reactor, Larva Inject and Chronoboost would solve many problems IMO and one of them is the unattractiveness of air armies.
That actually isnt as big a deal for the same reason that zergs will transition to BL/infestor. If you ever watch a BL infestor transition done well it is basically slowly swapping out those quick to build units for powerful units (this is also how a transition to sky terran can work). There is no need to go backwards in order to fix an issue that does not exist.
|
On September 21 2012 18:08 moskonia wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2012 14:55 Myrddraal wrote:On September 21 2012 14:39 moskonia wrote:On September 20 2012 17:25 MateShade wrote:On September 20 2012 17:17 playa wrote: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! You have an upgrade for that >< Not sure if you are being serious or not but the upgrade is only for the first 4 interceptors, and it only doubles the speed. I'd really like to see this in SC2, I think for the reasons stated by Tyler that it would definitely help make the Carrier more* viable. *Key word being "more", whether they would actually be viable or not remains to be seen. Umm.. No... the upgrade is for all the interceptors, just tested it. Yes it is not instant but it is very fast. About being viable, the carrier is very viable lategame, it is a very supply efficient unit, problem is it takes 2 minutes to build 1.
No, the problem is that it's a boring-as-all-hell unit that you have nothing to do with except a-move click. Whooo I am the commander of a carrier. How cool is that? It actually feels really, really boring. That's one of the main points of this fix. We need to make units more fun.
|
i cant believe every single person on this website isnt agreeing overwhlemingly with everything tyler said. This is why blizzard keeps failing us. Even here in the "hardcore" community people argue to keep the game noob friendly and less competitive?? sc2 is dooomed.
|
On September 21 2012 21:57 LeSioN wrote:
i cant believe every single person on this website isnt agreeing overwhlemingly with everything tyler said. This is why blizzard keeps failing us. Even here in the "hardcore" community people argue to keep the game noob friendly and less competitive?? sc2 is dooomed.
OMG not everyone has the same opinion!! lets protest so now everyone will have one mind and if you express your opinion you get banned for good!!
Seriously... "hardcore"? there are very good reasons why it should and should not be implanted, don't just mark the anti subject opinion as irrelevant.
|
The objection to mictro tricks because they are not 'obvious' is a weak argument.
The game already requires basic mechanical understanding to play (e.g. drones per mineral patch, autocast burrowed banelings, etc). New players learn it in the single player missions or training exercises. Why can they not learn these tricks (patrol micro, carrier micro, etc) there as well?
|
as much as i would hate to say it, its most likely blizz wont bring in these mechanics. these mechanics in sc1 were bugs, it was very unlikely they were intentional designs by the devs, that been said it was mechanics like these that raised the skill ceiling and added depths to the game. blizz will most likely try to come up with their own way of non bug micro mechanics for the carrier, at this rate its nothing.
|
very cool and I totally agree with this, tyler. it would be seriously cool if the BW carrier was in SC2.. It would provide a legitimate late game strategy for P
|
On September 22 2012 00:05 reminisce12 wrote:
as much as i would hate to say it, its most likely blizz wont bring in these mechanics. these mechanics in sc1 were bugs, it was very unlikely they were intentional designs by the devs, that been said it was mechanics like these that raised the skill ceiling and added depths to the game. blizz will most likely try to come up with their own way of non bug micro mechanics for the carrier, at this rate its nothing.
The interceptors not returning was probably a bug, but who says it has to be? They can still put that in the game as something that is no longer a bug. An example of a bug they incorporated is the mineral walk for workers. I'm sure that BW developers didn't intend for that. We shouldn't be asking if they were bugs or not. We should be asking if they make the game more interesting. If it does, then why isn't it in the game?
|
On September 22 2012 01:00 mage36 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2012 00:05 reminisce12 wrote:
as much as i would hate to say it, its most likely blizz wont bring in these mechanics. these mechanics in sc1 were bugs, it was very unlikely they were intentional designs by the devs, that been said it was mechanics like these that raised the skill ceiling and added depths to the game. blizz will most likely try to come up with their own way of non bug micro mechanics for the carrier, at this rate its nothing. The interceptors not returning was probably a bug, but who says it has to be? They can still put that in the game as something that is no longer a bug. An example of a bug they incorporated is the mineral walk for workers. I'm sure that BW developers didn't intend for that. We shouldn't be asking if they were bugs or not. We should be asking if they make the game more interesting. If it does, then why isn't it in the game?
They're not bugs, to be clear. The carrier functions fine according to its requirement, but in SC1 a byproduct of a certain set of commands is this particular behavior where the interceptors don't return... again, that's not what a bug is. It's likely something the original devs saw or heard about and were like, that's kinda cool. They felt, as I and many other people do, that the mechanical trick DOES make the game more interesting since it rewards the studious player, so they didn't see a need to change the behavior.
In my opinion, things like this always make games more interesting, and it seems like games and devs of the past were willing to let behavior like this slide for whatever reason. Nowadays so much attention is paid to intended behavior (the "plan"), in addition to having the technology to spot it/change it on the spot, that things like this go away simply because they were unintended, despite not being legitimate bugs. Take sockfolding, for example. It made mining interesting instead of just something you click at. Take Double Dragon's glitch to level up your hearts on stage two when you scroll the Will at the other end of the fence, take MvC2 where a new character comes out mid-air and you can do an air attack to make them block, then since they only get one block per jump, you could attack again in certain cases before they landed to get a free chain of hits. That's certainly not intended, but you can't just mass update cabinet games can you? You can to PC games nowadays, and I think that devs and game designers are being to liberal with this capability that it's ruining game appeal in general, the "blandness" of the SC2 carrier being just one of the symptoms of the overall problem.
|
What do you guys expect from Dustin Browder ? He is the designer of C&C Red Alert , and we all know about these games : overpowered brute force ranged units with no micro whatsoever. The units that are "fun" to buy and bring to battle and look at the explosions they cause. That's all those casuals need, and they will jump to the next game anyways.
|
They felt, as I and many other people do, that the mechanical trick DOES make the game more interesting since it rewards the studious player
Agreed. And even if it was a bug that doesnt mean that they can't add it in as a legitimate function
|
On September 21 2012 14:23 Wonders wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 16:36 AlmondCS 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.
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.
it doesn't give a big advantage because a noob will be 100 percent focused on the trick while his macro is just absolute horrendous.
|
A great service to the community, hopefully blizzard will try this. There is honestly no reason not to, since HoTS is in beta it is the perfect time to test this out.
Infinite thanks.
Edit: I am glad this is the thread to recieve my century post. <3's
|
On September 22 2012 01:00 mage36 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2012 00:05 reminisce12 wrote:
as much as i would hate to say it, its most likely blizz wont bring in these mechanics. these mechanics in sc1 were bugs, it was very unlikely they were intentional designs by the devs, that been said it was mechanics like these that raised the skill ceiling and added depths to the game. blizz will most likely try to come up with their own way of non bug micro mechanics for the carrier, at this rate its nothing. The interceptors not returning was probably a bug, but who says it has to be? They can still put that in the game as something that is no longer a bug. An example of a bug they incorporated is the mineral walk for workers. I'm sure that BW developers didn't intend for that. We shouldn't be asking if they were bugs or not. We should be asking if they make the game more interesting. If it does, then why isn't it in the game?
well, the design philosophy of blizz these days has changed, they want to dictate how the game is played, wat players should and should not do, if players discover something interesting and op, they nerf it. they prolly think these mechanics from sc1 were gimmicky and bugs, if they wanted to put them into the game they wouldve done it 2 yrs ago with WOL.
|
give stacking mutas back too if you gonna fix carriers blizz kkthx and patrol command on helion to shoot while moving kkthx
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
