EPT
Carrier Micro - Page 6
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 HotS |
|
Quotidian
Norway1937 Posts
| ||
|
Duka08
3391 Posts
So glad the carrier has returned. Hopefully it sees a bit of help as well. | ||
|
Paramo
Mexico138 Posts
On September 17 2012 08:04 itsjuspeter wrote: I know it isn't much but I created a thread on the bnet forums as well to hopefully catch blizzard's eye to what tyler made. Support is appreciated, http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/6607331039 Let us all work together to make sc2 a better game. More people need to post on that thread to give nony's points more visibility. | ||
|
paddyz
Ireland628 Posts
| ||
|
SarcasmMonster
3136 Posts
On September 17 2012 08:04 itsjuspeter wrote: I know it isn't much but I created a thread on the bnet forums as well to hopefully catch blizzard's eye to what tyler made. Support is appreciated, http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/6607331039 Let us all work together to make sc2 a better game. This thread has more momentum http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/6606291001 | ||
|
Rad
United States935 Posts
| ||
|
MahE
Canada275 Posts
I agree, but.. I can't help but wonder if the SC2 designers (mostly not the same people who made brood war, mind you) are hesitant to throw away all their work in favour of BW units. It's a slap in the face, professionally. | ||
|
ReketSomething
United States6012 Posts
| ||
|
SigmaoctanusIV
United States3313 Posts
On September 17 2012 09:37 MahE wrote: I feel like part of it is pride for their game? Most of the changes that people want for SC2 are 'make X unit like Y unit from Brood War and everything will be better!' I agree, but.. I can't help but wonder if the SC2 designers (mostly not the same people who made brood war, mind you) are hesitant to throw away all their work in favour of BW units. It's a slap in the face, professionally. They are already doing that, Swarm host = Lurker, viper = Defiler sure they are different and play slightly differently but they pretty much just recycled BW ideas. | ||
|
Aerisky
United States12129 Posts
It's not just about BW nostalgia; it's about doing what worked and what launched BW onto the big competitive stage, and in this case, probably the best thing to do is to bring back the carrier micro of old! | ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
| ||
Falling
Canada11571 Posts
On September 17 2012 09:37 MahE wrote: I feel like part of it is pride for their game? Most of the changes that people want for SC2 are 'make X unit like Y unit from Brood War and everything will be better!' I agree, but.. I can't help but wonder if the SC2 designers (mostly not the same people who made brood war, mind you) are hesitant to throw away all their work in favour of BW units. It's a slap in the face, professionally. I don't think so. From the beginning they should have been (I imagine they were) looking at what made BW successful as a competitive game. Learn from even the accidents and include it intentionally. However, for some reason, they never picked up on the importance of these skilled masteries that made it such an awesome game for competitors and spectators alike. It doesn't really matter if a lot of things were developed from bugs. There's no reason to not have things like carrier micro, moving-shot, proper ground magic boxing, and maybe even ways to bug units over top of mineral lines/ buildings. There are so many of these cool, visual things that BW developed that SC2 seems to have completely left behind. Taking what was accidental and including it purposefully from the beginning would have been fine. Nothing to do with being slapped in the face professionally. And if we need to balance out the new micro (example) a muta cloud move shotting- just make it so 2-11 muta's will stack properly and 12 and more unstack so you can't have 30 muta's 1 shotting everything. Worry about including awesome skills before balance. It's really frustrating seeing the BW pro's switch over without having these extremely visual ways of microing. | ||
|
a176
Canada6688 Posts
but i still wonder about corrupter counter | ||
|
NEOtheONE
United States2233 Posts
And it explained exactly what I felt was missing in the SC2 carrier. | ||
|
ULuMuGuLu
190 Posts
Btw.: NonY for President! | ||
|
NEOtheONE
United States2233 Posts
On September 17 2012 09:57 a176 wrote: if toss can go mothership with regularity in sc2, they can definitely try for carrier switches but i still wonder about corrupter counter Leash range > corruptor range so it would make for some really epic micro battles. | ||
|
PineapplePizza
United States749 Posts
On September 17 2012 10:06 NEOtheONE wrote: Leash range > corruptor range so it would make for some really epic micro battles. They're going to have to do something about Fungal Growth...it already makes TvZ a pain in the butt. It's hard to handle 20+ corruptors shift-clicked onto your carriers when you can't move your junk at all. | ||
|
Geos13
437 Posts
On September 17 2012 09:45 Falling wrote: I don't think so. From the beginning they should have been (I imagine they were) looking at what made BW successful as a competitive game. Learn from even the accidents and include it intentionally. However, for some reason, they never picked up on the importance of these skilled masteries that made it such an awesome game for competitors and spectators alike. It doesn't really matter if a lot of things were developed from bugs. There's no reason to not have things like carrier micro, moving-shot, proper ground magic boxing, and maybe even ways to bug units over top of mineral lines/ buildings. There are so many of these cool, visual things that BW developed that SC2 seems to have completely left behind. Taking what was accidental and including it purposefully from the beginning would have been fine. Nothing to do with being slapped in the face professionally. And if we need to balance out the new micro (example) a muta cloud move shotting- just make it so 2-11 muta's will stack properly and 12 and more unstack so you can't have 30 muta's 1 shotting everything. Worry about including awesome skills before balance. It's really frustrating seeing the BW pro's switch over without having these extremely visual ways of microing. I'm fairly certain there are quotes of Blizzard explaining that they feel micro tricks are unintuitive to the viewer and therefore a negative factor for esports. I think their philosophy is to keep the game simple but with much depth. I don't agree with this view but I think it is important to understand their vision in order to persuade them. | ||
|
Falling
Canada11571 Posts
On September 17 2012 10:22 Geos13 wrote: I'm fairly certain there are quotes of Blizzard explaining that they feel micro tricks are unintuitive to the viewer and therefore a negative factor for esports. I think their philosophy is to keep the game simple but with much depth. I don't agree with this view but I think it is important to understand their vision in order to persuade them. I actually don't get what 'uninituitive' actually means except that it's a label that Blizzard uses for things they don't like. What makes something "unintuitive" really? If a set of actions creates certain unit behaviour, such as carrier micro, then that is what players can expect. Thing is is, even if it is 'uninituitive' it doesn't even touch true newbs that don't even know how to a-move. (Yes they do exists.) They can happily right click around their massive fleet of carriers that took them 40 minutes to build from 1 stargate with 20 workers. It doesn't touch their world so 'unintuitive' doesn't even come into play. Beyond that, a competent and competitive player learns that a certain set of actions will create a desired unit response and they'll use it if they want to. I understand this isn't your argument, but it's one that I've understood less and less. | ||
|
Aetherial
Australia917 Posts
Those of you who can, make sure to show your support in the http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/6606291001 thread. | ||
| ||
