On November 27 2012 20:38 Unshapely wrote: Yes, that is the core reason why units are spread out in BW. They just don't move as one (in SC2, units move really smoothly). I've just tested this with marines as well, and a couple of larger units such as dragoons.
In that case in SC2 Blizzard should have done smooth movement but kept end result of movement from BW (spread out units).
...You can't have smooth movement that spreads out units. The bumpiness is what makes them form a line and space themselves out.
You can simulate that easily. You could easily add something similar to the game and through a small random factor which says that a unit does NOT move in a straight line towards the target and instead wiggles slightly left or right. Bumping into other units would push them as well. In any case you could easily add a "wide berth variable" to make units spread out while they are "moving = true". Just because Blizzard didnt do it doesnt mean its impossible.
The problem is that we don't control our armies like that. Most players control them through a large number of tiny clicks as they move across the map. Any movement system they place to make the game look nicer will be canceled out by players attempting to move their armies in ways that make them most ready for combat. If people do not like clumped units, we should stop asking for maps with tiny chokes, ramps everywhere and small open areas. I can't think of how I would move my army in Cloud Kingom or daybreak except in a large ball.
Unit AI and pathing is not the solution to the clumping issue and Blizzard is right for not focusing on it. There are better ways for them to encourage players to split up their army.
The "large number of tiny clicks" would be removed if Blizzard added in 12 unit limited selection ... which is one part of the right way to solve the problem of the deathball in addition to making the units spread out.
If the players "overrule" the spreading out then they will have to be PUNISHED for it by rebalancing the AoE attacks of certain units/spells ... which is necessary if "spread out" becomes the defined norm for unit movement (and thus the beginning of a fight). + Show Spoiler +
There is ZERO punishment in the game right now for putting all your units in a tight ball ... well maybe Fungal Growth can be counted as one and Storm as the other, but Terrans have nothing since the Siege Tank got nerfed to be only tickling to non-armored units.
This is all perfectly acceptable and fully taken into account and basically is the CHOICE which the players have after the change compared to NO CHOICE right now. Oh and players can learn to play differently just as they learned to spam-click ...
You can still move your army in a pretty massive formation ... it just requires 1a2a3a4a instead of a simple 1a. Oh and I am also of the opinion that Blizzard should take out the production speed boosts, because they add too many units to a battlefield anyways ... so your "big army" wouldnt be quite as big anymore, but since that works for both sides it is ok.
POWER (tight unit formation and thus high dps per area) has to be balanced by CONSEQUENCES (losing a lot to AoE if you choose to take the risk) and WORK (1a2a3a) instead of being available in ez-mode!
On November 27 2012 20:38 Unshapely wrote: Yes, that is the core reason why units are spread out in BW. They just don't move as one (in SC2, units move really smoothly). I've just tested this with marines as well, and a couple of larger units such as dragoons.
In that case in SC2 Blizzard should have done smooth movement but kept end result of movement from BW (spread out units).
...You can't have smooth movement that spreads out units. The bumpiness is what makes them form a line and space themselves out.
C&C has pathing where the units move perfectly, and they dont clump (not to the extend sc2 does). A possibly problem with that pathing is that the units always stand in formation, which doesnt look weird for Terran, but it would be weird for Zerg.
On November 27 2012 20:38 Unshapely wrote: Yes, that is the core reason why units are spread out in BW. They just don't move as one (in SC2, units move really smoothly). I've just tested this with marines as well, and a couple of larger units such as dragoons.
In that case in SC2 Blizzard should have done smooth movement but kept end result of movement from BW (spread out units).
...You can't have smooth movement that spreads out units. The bumpiness is what makes them form a line and space themselves out.
C&C has pathing where the units move perfectly, and they dont clump (not to the extend sc2 does). A possibly problem with that pathing is that the units always stand in formation, which doesnt look weird for Terran, but it would be weird for Zerg.
You can artificially spread units out if you want with code that deliberately bastardizes the operation of the pathing algorithm. That's not what I'm talking about. That would operate beyond the inherent properties of unit collision based on actual size, and it would be rather a phony way to go about it.
For the record, I agree that we shouldn't expect a pathing engine change. I just want to make it clear that BW style pathing would single handedly curb the deathball play we see in SC2 by dint of A) literally impossible and B) much better defender's advantage.
On November 27 2012 20:38 Unshapely wrote: Yes, that is the core reason why units are spread out in BW. They just don't move as one (in SC2, units move really smoothly). I've just tested this with marines as well, and a couple of larger units such as dragoons.
In that case in SC2 Blizzard should have done smooth movement but kept end result of movement from BW (spread out units).
...You can't have smooth movement that spreads out units. The bumpiness is what makes them form a line and space themselves out.
C&C has pathing where the units move perfectly, and they dont clump (not to the extend sc2 does). A possibly problem with that pathing is that the units always stand in formation, which doesnt look weird for Terran, but it would be weird for Zerg.
You can artificially spread units out if you want with code that deliberately bastardizes the operation of the pathing algorithm. That's not what I'm talking about. That would operate beyond the inherent properties of unit collision based on actual size, and it would be rather a phony way to go about it.
For the record, I agree that we shouldn't expect a pathing engine change. I just want to make it clear that BW style pathing would single handedly curb the deathball play we see in SC2 by dint of A) literally impossible and B) much better defender's advantage.
Why would adding "left and right movement" or a "bounce into each other mechanic" be phony? Just because it "ruins" the supposedly perfect movement system we have now?
It is realistic because running right next to the Tank as a Marine will be really bad, because eventually the tank has to turn and will run you over. Thus a wider berth than 0,0 cm should be added. That shouldnt be too difficult either, but so far there hasnt even been any indication by Blizzard that they understand the problem or rather ... the potential of this solution at all ... which is really depressing.
On November 23 2012 11:47 Firkraag8 wrote: I don't like the idea of changing the way movement is handled as shown in the videos. I see the manual splitting of units as not only fun to watch but also to play.
do some fucking research on bw please. So you got your marine splitting in sc2. I can name one unit and already equalize the scale, hydralisk storm dodging with 3-4 groups of hydralisks is just as hard in bw.
And now to tip the scale into favour of broodwar, you've also got mutalisk micro, scourge micro, wraith micro, marine splitting micro vs lurkers, carrier micro, dragoon vs mine micro, vulture micro,........
On November 23 2012 11:47 Firkraag8 wrote: I don't like the idea of changing the way movement is handled as shown in the videos. I see the manual splitting of units as not only fun to watch but also to play.
do some fucking research on bw please. So you got your marine splitting in sc2. I can name one unit and already equalize the scale, hydralisk storm dodging with 3-4 groups of hydralisks is just as hard in bw.
And now to tip the scale into favour of broodwar, you've also got mutalisk micro, scourge micro, wraith micro, marine splitting micro vs lurkers, carrier micro, dragoon vs mine micro, vulture micro,........
First of all, chill out. He isn't hurling insults at BW or anything. Second of all, we're talking about a pathing change here. Not various micro techniques that have everything to do with bugs (good ones, of course) and nothing to do with spread out pathing.
On November 23 2012 11:47 Firkraag8 wrote: I don't like the idea of changing the way movement is handled as shown in the videos. I see the manual splitting of units as not only fun to watch but also to play.
do some fucking research on bw please. So you got your marine splitting in sc2. I can name one unit and already equalize the scale, hydralisk storm dodging with 3-4 groups of hydralisks is just as hard in bw.
And now to tip the scale into favour of broodwar, you've also got mutalisk micro, scourge micro, wraith micro, marine splitting micro vs lurkers, carrier micro, dragoon vs mine micro, vulture micro,........
First of all, chill out. He isn't hurling insults at BW or anything. Second of all, we're talking about a pathing change here. Not various micro techniques that have everything to do with bugs (good ones, of course) and nothing to do with spread out pathing.
The micro in BW was required NOT because of bugs, but because of the movement system ... which in itself was NOT a bug. It was clunky, but thats not the same as a bug.
The point about Firkraag8's post is that he seems to suggest that there was no micro to do and watch in BW while there was FAR MORE MICRO in that game due to the movement and unit selection systems. So answering such a post with a bit more harsh language is justified. The SC2-Blizzard fanboys who have never even played a game of BW in their life are the worst, because they are arrogant as heck and think that going back to spread out units and a 12 unit selection limit will ruin the game because they wont have Marine splitting micro anymore ... when the opposite is true and you have to micro far more. I am sick of the ignorant and arrogant idiots by now who either cant or dont want to understand.
On November 30 2012 13:34 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:
On November 30 2012 06:48 wcr.4fun wrote:
On November 23 2012 11:47 Firkraag8 wrote: I don't like the idea of changing the way movement is handled as shown in the videos. I see the manual splitting of units as not only fun to watch but also to play.
do some fucking research on bw please. So you got your marine splitting in sc2. I can name one unit and already equalize the scale, hydralisk storm dodging with 3-4 groups of hydralisks is just as hard in bw.
And now to tip the scale into favour of broodwar, you've also got mutalisk micro, scourge micro, wraith micro, marine splitting micro vs lurkers, carrier micro, dragoon vs mine micro, vulture micro,........
First of all, chill out. He isn't hurling insults at BW or anything. Second of all, we're talking about a pathing change here. Not various micro techniques that have everything to do with bugs (good ones, of course) and nothing to do with spread out pathing.
The micro in BW was required NOT because of bugs, but because of the movement system ... which in itself was NOT a bug. It was clunky, but thats not the same as a bug.
Carrier micro was actually only possible due to glitches. Mutalisk micro vs. scourge also incorporated glitches. This is why these units cannot be micromanaged the same way in SC2. They definitely have everything to do with bugs like AnachronisticAnarchy said. You also need to chill out, by the way.
On November 30 2012 13:34 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:
On November 30 2012 06:48 wcr.4fun wrote:
On November 23 2012 11:47 Firkraag8 wrote: I don't like the idea of changing the way movement is handled as shown in the videos. I see the manual splitting of units as not only fun to watch but also to play.
do some fucking research on bw please. So you got your marine splitting in sc2. I can name one unit and already equalize the scale, hydralisk storm dodging with 3-4 groups of hydralisks is just as hard in bw.
And now to tip the scale into favour of broodwar, you've also got mutalisk micro, scourge micro, wraith micro, marine splitting micro vs lurkers, carrier micro, dragoon vs mine micro, vulture micro,........
First of all, chill out. He isn't hurling insults at BW or anything. Second of all, we're talking about a pathing change here. Not various micro techniques that have everything to do with bugs (good ones, of course) and nothing to do with spread out pathing.
The micro in BW was required NOT because of bugs, but because of the movement system ... which in itself was NOT a bug. It was clunky, but thats not the same as a bug.
Carrier micro was actually only possible due to glitches. Mutalisk micro vs. scourge also incorporated glitches. This is why these units cannot be micromanaged the same way in SC2. They definitely have everything to do with bugs like AnachronisticAnarchy said. You also need to chill out, by the way.
Maybe it were bugs (I have no idea). In Quake strafe jumping was a bug. But it was awesome, and the dev decided to keep it in the game.
I dont think something good should be taken out of the game just because the dev didnt intend it to work like that originally.
On November 30 2012 13:34 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:
On November 30 2012 06:48 wcr.4fun wrote:
On November 23 2012 11:47 Firkraag8 wrote: I don't like the idea of changing the way movement is handled as shown in the videos. I see the manual splitting of units as not only fun to watch but also to play.
do some fucking research on bw please. So you got your marine splitting in sc2. I can name one unit and already equalize the scale, hydralisk storm dodging with 3-4 groups of hydralisks is just as hard in bw.
And now to tip the scale into favour of broodwar, you've also got mutalisk micro, scourge micro, wraith micro, marine splitting micro vs lurkers, carrier micro, dragoon vs mine micro, vulture micro,........
First of all, chill out. He isn't hurling insults at BW or anything. Second of all, we're talking about a pathing change here. Not various micro techniques that have everything to do with bugs (good ones, of course) and nothing to do with spread out pathing.
The micro in BW was required NOT because of bugs, but because of the movement system ... which in itself was NOT a bug. It was clunky, but thats not the same as a bug.
Carrier micro was actually only possible due to glitches. Mutalisk micro vs. scourge also incorporated glitches. This is why these units cannot be micromanaged the same way in SC2. They definitely have everything to do with bugs like AnachronisticAnarchy said. You also need to chill out, by the way.
Maybe it were bugs (I have no idea). In Quake strafe jumping was a bug. But it was awesome, and the dev decided to keep it in the game.
I dont think something good should be taken out of the game just because the dev didnt intend it to work like that originally.
Oh don't get me wrong, I agree with you. I'd love to see Blizzard modify the Carrier in SC2 to function the same (or at least similar) as in BW, so it could be micromanaged in the same way. I was just addressing the fellow saying this sort of micro was only the result of the pathing AI in Brood War, and not bug exploit.
Um, the unit movement is intended to make you pull units into a concave/separate positions. It's called micro. Stop whining to Blizzard about everything and make the effort to get better.
I'm a diamond player and it erks me how simple user fixes or practice can eliminate the problems with HoTS and WoL everyone talks about.
On November 30 2012 17:03 slytown wrote: Um, the unit movement is intended to make you pull units into a concave/separate positions. It's called micro. Stop whining to Blizzard about everything and make the effort to get better.
I'm a diamond player and it erks me how simple user fixes or practice can eliminate the problems with HoTS and WoL everyone talks about.
Oh please ... shoving around your clumps of units isnt the "pinnacle of micro", but we could have A LOT MORE to micro if the movement system was changed AND you would still be able to "micro" your units into a concave, but with additional micro added to the game. Thats one of the points of the discussion here and the other is "balancing is made unnecessarily hard through too many units in the battles" and another is "tight clumps of units are ugly and harder to understand for a viewer".
Basically you have said that you are AGAINST adding more micro to the game by keeping its "autoclumping stupidity".
On November 30 2012 13:34 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:
On November 30 2012 06:48 wcr.4fun wrote:
On November 23 2012 11:47 Firkraag8 wrote: I don't like the idea of changing the way movement is handled as shown in the videos. I see the manual splitting of units as not only fun to watch but also to play.
do some fucking research on bw please. So you got your marine splitting in sc2. I can name one unit and already equalize the scale, hydralisk storm dodging with 3-4 groups of hydralisks is just as hard in bw.
And now to tip the scale into favour of broodwar, you've also got mutalisk micro, scourge micro, wraith micro, marine splitting micro vs lurkers, carrier micro, dragoon vs mine micro, vulture micro,........
First of all, chill out. He isn't hurling insults at BW or anything. Second of all, we're talking about a pathing change here. Not various micro techniques that have everything to do with bugs (good ones, of course) and nothing to do with spread out pathing.
The micro in BW was required NOT because of bugs, but because of the movement system ... which in itself was NOT a bug. It was clunky, but thats not the same as a bug.
Carrier micro was actually only possible due to glitches. Mutalisk micro vs. scourge also incorporated glitches. This is why these units cannot be micromanaged the same way in SC2. They definitely have everything to do with bugs like AnachronisticAnarchy said. You also need to chill out, by the way.
A glitch isnt the same as a bug ... using those glitches tool SKILL and thus they were a good addition to the game.
One rather wise rock musician once said something like this: "If you have a bad day and dont hit the right note at one part of the song you better make the same mistake again later on so you can say that was on purpose." So glitch or no glitch is part of the perspective.
I dont get to chill out, because of posts like the one I quoted above. People who seem to claim to be "pro micro" and who seem to have no clue about BW and the necessary micro an unclumped movement would have.
One thing i need to say...The fact is that thing right now is clumpy... Like it or not (probably not) I hope they change it simply fact that game is not looking good from E sport perspective...
Also there is one more problem...if you are Protoss or Zerg you want your units to be able to spread and not stay clump up ...
You should have that option because this is strategy game and spreads and unite movement is also important for gameplay... Also in WC3 you have option to unite stay clump or spread around why not have that option in sc2 ?
Bigger AoE and spread formations could help this game become much bather than it is right now.. and more exciting to watch!!!
(FACT IS PATHING IS CLUMPY AND ITS NOT GOOD FOR THE GAME) end..
On December 01 2012 00:13 bole wrote: One thing i need to say...The fact is that thing right now is clumpy... Like it or not (probably not) I hope they change it simply fact that game is not looking good from E sport perspective...
Also there is one more problem...if you are Protoss or Zerg you want your units to be able to spread and not stay clump up ...
You should have that option because this is strategy game and spreads and unite movement is also important for gameplay... Also in WC3 you have option to unite stay clump or spread around why not have that option in sc2 ?
Bigger AoE and spread formations could help this game become much bather than it is right now.. and more exciting to watch!!!
(FACT IS PATHING IS CLUMPY AND ITS NOT GOOD FOR THE GAME) end..
WC3 formation wouldnt look right for SC2 and the point is to add more chances for micro instead of adding more automatism.
On November 30 2012 17:03 slytown wrote: Um, the unit movement is intended to make you pull units into a concave/separate positions. It's called micro. Stop whining to Blizzard about everything and make the effort to get better.
I'm a diamond player and it erks me how simple user fixes or practice can eliminate the problems with HoTS and WoL everyone talks about.
Oh please ... shoving around your clumps of units isnt the "pinnacle of micro", but we could have A LOT MORE to micro if the movement system was changed AND you would still be able to "micro" your units into a concave, but with additional micro added to the game. Thats one of the points of the discussion here and the other is "balancing is made unnecessarily hard through too many units in the battles" and another is "tight clumps of units are ugly and harder to understand for a viewer".
Basically you have said that you are AGAINST adding more micro to the game by keeping its "autoclumping stupidity".
On November 30 2012 13:34 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:
On November 30 2012 06:48 wcr.4fun wrote:
On November 23 2012 11:47 Firkraag8 wrote: I don't like the idea of changing the way movement is handled as shown in the videos. I see the manual splitting of units as not only fun to watch but also to play.
do some fucking research on bw please. So you got your marine splitting in sc2. I can name one unit and already equalize the scale, hydralisk storm dodging with 3-4 groups of hydralisks is just as hard in bw.
And now to tip the scale into favour of broodwar, you've also got mutalisk micro, scourge micro, wraith micro, marine splitting micro vs lurkers, carrier micro, dragoon vs mine micro, vulture micro,........
First of all, chill out. He isn't hurling insults at BW or anything. Second of all, we're talking about a pathing change here. Not various micro techniques that have everything to do with bugs (good ones, of course) and nothing to do with spread out pathing.
The micro in BW was required NOT because of bugs, but because of the movement system ... which in itself was NOT a bug. It was clunky, but thats not the same as a bug.
Carrier micro was actually only possible due to glitches. Mutalisk micro vs. scourge also incorporated glitches. This is why these units cannot be micromanaged the same way in SC2. They definitely have everything to do with bugs like AnachronisticAnarchy said. You also need to chill out, by the way.
A glitch isnt the same as a bug ... using those glitches tool SKILL and thus they were a good addition to the game.
One rather wise rock musician once said something like this: "If you have a bad day and dont hit the right note at one part of the song you better make the same mistake again later on so you can say that was on purpose." So glitch or no glitch is part of the perspective.
I dont get to chill out, because of posts like the one I quoted above. People who seem to claim to be "pro micro" and who seem to have no clue about BW and the necessary micro an unclumped movement would have.
Ah, if you want to get into details about difference between glitch and bug, then change my usage of "glitch" to "bug". After all, a glitch is generally a temporary and quickly rectified mistake in a program's function, while a bug is a mistake due to the actual code, and is possible to replicate 100%.
I was just using the terms synonymously out of laziness. Either way, AnachronisticAnarchy was still completely correct.
On November 30 2012 17:03 slytown wrote: Um, the unit movement is intended to make you pull units into a concave/separate positions. It's called micro. Stop whining to Blizzard about everything and make the effort to get better.
I'm a diamond player and it erks me how simple user fixes or practice can eliminate the problems with HoTS and WoL everyone talks about.
Oh please ... shoving around your clumps of units isnt the "pinnacle of micro", but we could have A LOT MORE to micro if the movement system was changed AND you would still be able to "micro" your units into a concave, but with additional micro added to the game. Thats one of the points of the discussion here and the other is "balancing is made unnecessarily hard through too many units in the battles" and another is "tight clumps of units are ugly and harder to understand for a viewer".
Basically you have said that you are AGAINST adding more micro to the game by keeping its "autoclumping stupidity".
On November 30 2012 14:41 iamcaustic wrote:
On November 30 2012 14:09 Rabiator wrote:
On November 30 2012 13:34 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:
On November 30 2012 06:48 wcr.4fun wrote:
On November 23 2012 11:47 Firkraag8 wrote: I don't like the idea of changing the way movement is handled as shown in the videos. I see the manual splitting of units as not only fun to watch but also to play.
do some fucking research on bw please. So you got your marine splitting in sc2. I can name one unit and already equalize the scale, hydralisk storm dodging with 3-4 groups of hydralisks is just as hard in bw.
And now to tip the scale into favour of broodwar, you've also got mutalisk micro, scourge micro, wraith micro, marine splitting micro vs lurkers, carrier micro, dragoon vs mine micro, vulture micro,........
First of all, chill out. He isn't hurling insults at BW or anything. Second of all, we're talking about a pathing change here. Not various micro techniques that have everything to do with bugs (good ones, of course) and nothing to do with spread out pathing.
The micro in BW was required NOT because of bugs, but because of the movement system ... which in itself was NOT a bug. It was clunky, but thats not the same as a bug.
Carrier micro was actually only possible due to glitches. Mutalisk micro vs. scourge also incorporated glitches. This is why these units cannot be micromanaged the same way in SC2. They definitely have everything to do with bugs like AnachronisticAnarchy said. You also need to chill out, by the way.
A glitch isnt the same as a bug ... using those glitches tool SKILL and thus they were a good addition to the game.
One rather wise rock musician once said something like this: "If you have a bad day and dont hit the right note at one part of the song you better make the same mistake again later on so you can say that was on purpose." So glitch or no glitch is part of the perspective.
I dont get to chill out, because of posts like the one I quoted above. People who seem to claim to be "pro micro" and who seem to have no clue about BW and the necessary micro an unclumped movement would have.
Ah, if you want to get into details about difference between glitch and bug, then change my usage of "glitch" to "bug". After all, a glitch is generally a temporary and quickly rectified mistake in a program's function, while a bug is a mistake due to the actual code, and is possible to replicate 100%.
I was just using the terms synonymously out of laziness. Either way, AnachronisticAnarchy was still completely correct.
I could start a "definition duel" by saying that the glitches werent removed from BW, so they became features of the game, but that is not the point. The point rather is that - looking at the "Carrier Micro thread there seem to be some small hints that Blizzard is looking to change that unit to include just such "glitch micro" OR something similar. Maybe they will see that nothing changes due to the tight clumps of Marines and Hydralsks and thats hopefully when they will understand the damage tight clumping does to the game. I dont get my hopes high though, but we cant stop asking for better pathing ...
On November 30 2012 17:03 slytown wrote: Um, the unit movement is intended to make you pull units into a concave/separate positions. It's called micro. Stop whining to Blizzard about everything and make the effort to get better.
I'm a diamond player and it erks me how simple user fixes or practice can eliminate the problems with HoTS and WoL everyone talks about.
units move to get into their own concaves automatically. Btw making changes due to spectator experience is completely valid if it makes it much easier and enjoyable to watch. It's part of the whole esports/growth/entertainment thing. Have to please spectators and players if people want SC 2 to go down that route. Which is obviously harder than just one or the other.
On November 30 2012 17:03 slytown wrote: Um, the unit movement is intended to make you pull units into a concave/separate positions. It's called micro. Stop whining to Blizzard about everything and make the effort to get better.
I'm a diamond player and it erks me how simple user fixes or practice can eliminate the problems with HoTS and WoL everyone talks about.
units move to get into their own concaves automatically. Btw making changes due to spectator experience is completely valid if it makes it much easier and enjoyable to watch. It's part of the whole esports/growth/entertainment thing. Have to please spectators and players if people want SC 2 to go down that route. Which is obviously harder than just one or the other.
It isnt hard to make the game easier for casuals, more interesting to view for spectators AND more challenging for progamers to play; it is relatively easy and all you have to do it make sure that there are FEWER UNITS in each battle.
Few units are easier to control for a casual; with few units in each control group it gets HARDER for the progamers to mass up large clumps of units to attack with and for the viewer this multitude of control groups will give more excitement, because things will be "less perfect" and "less 1a-clicky". Sadly Blizzard doesnt understand this and is determined to make the game more complex through its units and the functionality of the attacks/spells ... which is the wrong way to do it.
On November 30 2012 17:03 slytown wrote: Um, the unit movement is intended to make you pull units into a concave/separate positions. It's called micro. Stop whining to Blizzard about everything and make the effort to get better.
I'm a diamond player and it erks me how simple user fixes or practice can eliminate the problems with HoTS and WoL everyone talks about.
Oh please ... shoving around your clumps of units isnt the "pinnacle of micro", but we could have A LOT MORE to micro if the movement system was changed AND you would still be able to "micro" your units into a concave, but with additional micro added to the game. Thats one of the points of the discussion here and the other is "balancing is made unnecessarily hard through too many units in the battles" and another is "tight clumps of units are ugly and harder to understand for a viewer".
Basically you have said that you are AGAINST adding more micro to the game by keeping its "autoclumping stupidity".
On November 30 2012 14:41 iamcaustic wrote:
On November 30 2012 14:09 Rabiator wrote:
On November 30 2012 13:34 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:
On November 30 2012 06:48 wcr.4fun wrote:
On November 23 2012 11:47 Firkraag8 wrote: I don't like the idea of changing the way movement is handled as shown in the videos. I see the manual splitting of units as not only fun to watch but also to play.
do some fucking research on bw please. So you got your marine splitting in sc2. I can name one unit and already equalize the scale, hydralisk storm dodging with 3-4 groups of hydralisks is just as hard in bw.
And now to tip the scale into favour of broodwar, you've also got mutalisk micro, scourge micro, wraith micro, marine splitting micro vs lurkers, carrier micro, dragoon vs mine micro, vulture micro,........
First of all, chill out. He isn't hurling insults at BW or anything. Second of all, we're talking about a pathing change here. Not various micro techniques that have everything to do with bugs (good ones, of course) and nothing to do with spread out pathing.
The micro in BW was required NOT because of bugs, but because of the movement system ... which in itself was NOT a bug. It was clunky, but thats not the same as a bug.
Carrier micro was actually only possible due to glitches. Mutalisk micro vs. scourge also incorporated glitches. This is why these units cannot be micromanaged the same way in SC2. They definitely have everything to do with bugs like AnachronisticAnarchy said. You also need to chill out, by the way.
A glitch isnt the same as a bug ... using those glitches tool SKILL and thus they were a good addition to the game.
One rather wise rock musician once said something like this: "If you have a bad day and dont hit the right note at one part of the song you better make the same mistake again later on so you can say that was on purpose." So glitch or no glitch is part of the perspective.
I dont get to chill out, because of posts like the one I quoted above. People who seem to claim to be "pro micro" and who seem to have no clue about BW and the necessary micro an unclumped movement would have.
Ah, if you want to get into details about difference between glitch and bug, then change my usage of "glitch" to "bug". After all, a glitch is generally a temporary and quickly rectified mistake in a program's function, while a bug is a mistake due to the actual code, and is possible to replicate 100%.
I was just using the terms synonymously out of laziness. Either way, AnachronisticAnarchy was still completely correct.
I could start a "definition duel" by saying that the glitches werent removed from BW, so they became features of the game, but that is not the point. The point rather is that - looking at the "Carrier Micro thread there seem to be some small hints that Blizzard is looking to change that unit to include just such "glitch micro" OR something similar. Maybe they will see that nothing changes due to the tight clumps of Marines and Hydralsks and thats hopefully when they will understand the damage tight clumping does to the game. I dont get my hopes high though, but we cant stop asking for better pathing ...
Eh? Blizzard's own game guide says to make marines and hydralisks to counter-act Carriers. That's not a side effect of AI pathing in SC2, that's a deliberate design from Blizzard. You're still free to consider it silly, but the reason is different.
EPT
