EPTBlizzard is experimenting with new Protoss Macro! - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
StorrZerg
United States13919 Posts
| ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On December 01 2009 09:40 Archerofaiur wrote: You an Ork fanboy FA? Waaaagh imo. Red ones go faster, blue ones are lucky. Yeah, I love the 40k Orks, so cute =] | ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
On December 01 2009 13:57 StorrZerg wrote: so updating a previous macro/protoss macro thread is to hard yes? I could have but I dont think as many people would notice it. To clarify I dont think a thread is nessisary every time there is twitter news. But this specific news certainly is! Consider if they said the Mothership was being removed and the protoss were getting a new capital ship. Would you stick it as a footnote in a Carrier thread? | ||
|
ForTheSwarm
United States556 Posts
On December 01 2009 06:38 grobo wrote: for every mouse1 click you instantly spawn a free DT at a random location on the map. Don't even joke about this | ||
|
DoX.)
Singapore6164 Posts
this is funny :D | ||
|
DanceDance
226 Posts
 | ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
| ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
| ||
|
avilo
United States4100 Posts
I love blizzard after 4-5 years+ of development on this vaporware of a game still is refusing to acknowledge they are looking for solutions to an imaginary problem. SC1 macro is perfect. SC1 interface ended up being perfectly balanced between human input and how much the game helps you. SC2 is not going to come out at this rate with such condilluded development over and over again on unneeded macro mechanics. How come the cnc developer Dustin Browder appeases the SC community by saying a few times, "if things do not work, we can always go to SC1 macro," yet there has been NO SIGN AT ALL that Browder has attempted pure SC1 macro within their SC2 development process at this stage. It is time for Browder to try a "different solution" that is "out of the box" for what they are currently trying -> aka SC1 macro which is already tried and tested for 10 years. That's right, a decade. Solution to macro mechanics? There never was a problem in the firstplace. /facepalm. Browder claims to want to make the game great and that it is possible to attempt SC1 macro as a "solution" yet at this stage of development he has not considered it as an option. | ||
|
DeCoup
Australia1933 Posts
there have been many many many posts and topics on TL alone which say that the Protoss macro mechanic (Proton Charge) is not up to par with thenother two races. Reasons vary from the effect of Proton Charge on new (low saturated) bases thru to the lack of decision making requirements that it shares with the other oblisk abilties. Furthermore the Zerg and Terran macro mechanics appear to not only work, but to enrich the entire play experience, creating more diversity and individuality to both the race and to that of the players. Only 1/3 races has a problem, and that problem is being addressed. The proposal to scrap th entire macro mechanic system is both unjustified and laughable at this point in development with all that it brings to the table. | ||
|
beetlelisk
Poland2276 Posts
On December 01 2009 16:13 avilo wrote: qft meeple and others that said the same about nothing being wrong with SC1 macro. I love blizzard after 4-5 years+ of development on this vaporware of a game still is refusing to acknowledge they are looking for solutions to an imaginary problem. SC1 macro is perfect. SC1 interface ended up being perfectly balanced between human input and how much the game helps you. SC2 is not going to come out at this rate with such condilluded development over and over again on unneeded macro mechanics. How come the cnc developer Dustin Browder appeases the SC community by saying a few times, "if things do not work, we can always go to SC1 macro," yet there has been NO SIGN AT ALL that Browder has attempted pure SC1 macro within their SC2 development process at this stage. It is time for Browder to try a "different solution" that is "out of the box" for what they are currently trying -> aka SC1 macro which is already tried and tested for 10 years. That's right, a decade. Solution to macro mechanics? There never was a problem in the firstplace. /facepalm. Browder claims to want to make the game great and that it is possible to attempt SC1 macro as a "solution" yet at this stage of development he has not considered it as an option. I love to see how after 10 years when there is a problem in gameplay aka PvZ people don't really start using things that were in the game for the whole time but just think if they should. Why progamers aren't the strongest force opposing this but random foreigners in red ranks? | ||
|
niteReloaded
Croatia5282 Posts
On December 01 2009 09:10 CharlieMurphy wrote: ROFL, is this because David Kim lost to Nada TvP ??? WUT | ||
Nyovne
Netherlands19138 Posts
On December 01 2009 05:56 Hot_Bid wrote: Maybe you'll get 10 minerals for every forum post you making whining about ZvP imbalance. To enhance community participation for everyone! | ||
|
NiGoL
1868 Posts
| ||
|
ix
United Kingdom184 Posts
| ||
|
edahl
Norway483 Posts
On December 01 2009 09:31 Archerofaiur wrote: That was Demosquid's article about how Proton Charge was impossible to balance. Without going into too many details for how he is completly wrong, Blizzard has never said anything about the Obelisk being imbalanced. Rather they said that there wasnt allot of tension. While were on the subject have you checked out this shameless plug? http://sclegacy.com/feature/9-contributor/543-examining-the-macro-mechanics ![[image loading]](http://sclegacy.com/features/editorials/archermacroexamine/header.jpg) I don't remember his mathematics, because the notation was so horrible. My general model for mineral harvesting would look something like the following: Let b be the number of probes built throughout the game (assuming a continuous buildup). If w is the number of starting workers, then clearly the number of workers at time b(t) would be w+b. If k is the number of minerals collected each round-trip, and r is the number of round trips, the expression would yield C=kr(w+b) where C is the number of minerals collected in total. To account for time, we let instead the two constants b and r account for the time it takes to build workers and collect minerals respectively. The new expression would be C(t)=krt(w+bt), which would assume a continuous rate of collection, and a continuous rate of worker production. At which point I got bored for now, I should drink coffee and work on differential equations o_O | ||
|
SWPIGWANG
Canada482 Posts
On December 01 2009 22:37 ix wrote: They're going to waste so much time trying to hammer in the macro mechanics. It's always harder to fit bad ideas into games. Can't blame them for the whines of players. Personally, I think Dune 2 unit mechanics are perfect, and multiple unit select is the first step to failure. We all know that every unit should be controlled individually!~ | ||
|
Lovin
Denmark812 Posts
On December 01 2009 10:21 sob3k wrote: Hey, you know what would be really cool? Instead of a macro ability that increases your own gather rate, why not have one that negatively impacts your opponent?. Like a reverse proton charge, or a big cork that goes into their gas, or manner pylons that drop from the sky. That would be awesome! Not to mention so much more fun to use that some dumb worker buff. dude, manner pylons that drop from the sky! WHO'S WITH ME! I'm sure there's a reason for that to be completely retarded, but it sounds awesome! | ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
On December 01 2009 Archerofaiur wrote:What are the new Protoss Macro Mechanics you are experimenting with? Thank you  Sorry, I thought this was a good answer. Yes, there have been some changes and we hope to be able to give you details on them quite soon, as personally I love them already. But we want to make sure that the developpment team is happy with how they play out before announcing details. While you wait, feel free to speculate and write down your own ideas of how you'd like them to work. -Xordiah | ||
|
onmach
United States1241 Posts
| ||
| ||
