EPTBlizzard is experimenting with new Protoss Macro! - Page 5
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
| ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
| ||
|
beetlelisk
Poland2276 Posts
 | ||
|
Jobbies
Scotland72 Posts
http://www.gamereplays.org/starcraft2/portals.php?show=page&name=starcraft-2-protoss-macro-mechanic-experiment tl;dr, I'm happy with a change of macro mechanics as long as they continue to be race specific. Personally I think that, since Terran has increased mining capabilities and Zerg has increased production capabilities, what if Protoss were to get reduced production times? Something along those lines. | ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
On December 02 2009 02:28 Jobbies wrote: Personally I think that, since Terran has increased mining capabilities and Zerg has increased production capabilities, what if Protoss were to get reduced production times? ![[image loading]](http://s3.amazonaws.com/readers/2009/09/16/warpgate_1.jpg) | ||
|
Jobbies
Scotland72 Posts
In essence it's not really increased productivity imo. | ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
| ||
|
beetlelisk
Poland2276 Posts
----warp--- + --cooldown---- ? | ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
| ||
|
avilo
United States4100 Posts
On December 01 2009 23:20 SWPIGWANG wrote: 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!~ People that try to use the "Dune argument" need to be shot in the face. There is a concept known as interface balance, too easy is not good, too difficult is not good either. SC is at the center - it's perfectly balanced in how easy it is for a player to be in control of the game, yet not so easy that the game plays itself or does too many things for the player to eliminate skill differentiation. So if you are fucking noobie that randomly pops up in a thread about mechanics don't think you are fucking witty with your sarcastic dune1/2 rts argument. just stfu. | ||
|
Captain Peabody
United States3126 Posts
People that try to use the "Dune argument" need to be shot in the face. There is a concept known as interface balance, too easy is not good, too difficult is not good either. SC is at the center - it's perfectly balanced in how easy it is for a player to be in control of the game, yet not so easy that the game plays itself or does too many things for the player to eliminate skill differentiation. So if you are fucking noobie that randomly pops up in a thread about mechanics don't think you are fucking witty with your sarcastic dune1/2 rts argument. just stfu. Peace. While the "Dune argument" is indeed stupid and invalid, being a jerk is doubly so. In addition, it is worth pointing out that, while of course the macro issue comes down to a balance of competing things, it is by no means self-evident that Starcraft's balance in this area is perfect and cannot be improved upon. There are many legitimate reasons why Blizzard and various players would wish to alter the SC2 macro model from the SC1 original; and many legitimate arguments that could be made for the current SC2 one. | ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
On December 02 2009 05:55 Captain Peabody wrote: Peace. While the "Dune argument" is indeed stupid and invalid, being a jerk is doubly so. Excelent point. While were on topic the "movie arguement" were every game process is automated is equally invalid. | ||
|
Meta
United States6225 Posts
It's an awesome mechanic, but far more difficult to use than the classic macro style, and would best be used in the late mid game or later when you absolutely need good army positioning, or need your next units to arrive for flanks. | ||
Last Romantic
United States20661 Posts
| ||
|
Drunken.Jedi
Germany446 Posts
On December 02 2009 04:33 avilo wrote: People that try to use the "Dune argument" need to be shot in the face. There is a concept known as interface balance, too easy is not good, too difficult is not good either. SC is at the center - it's perfectly balanced in how easy it is for a player to be in control of the game, yet not so easy that the game plays itself or does too many things for the player to eliminate skill differentiation. So if you are fucking noobie that randomly pops up in a thread about mechanics don't think you are fucking witty with your sarcastic dune1/2 rts argument. just stfu. What makes you think that Starcraft has perfect "interface balance"? Why are for example production queues and rally points fine, but MBS and smartcasting not? Why is 12 just the right maximum for unit selection? Why not 6 or 9 or 20? There is no objective point where the "interface balance" is just right. I fully accept that in your opinion, Starcraft strikes that perfect balance, but you also need to recognise that the vast majority of potential sc2 customers disagrees with you. Blizzard is not a charitable organisation, so they want to sell their game to as many people as possible. They don't really need to market the game to the Starcraft fans, because we will buy the game anyway, but Joe Average won't buy the game if it has archaic controls. | ||
|
Zexion
Sweden971 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. http://www.starcraftzone.com/forums/index.php?topic=962.0 I can't be arsed to rewrite what this guy had mind. Enough said about why they should change the macro mechanics in my opinion. | ||
|
shin ken
Germany612 Posts
I recently read in an old FAQ about Warcraft: Orcs and Humans: Why can I only select 4 men per group? In an earlier, pre-release version, you could select as many men as you wanted, but it made the game too easy and boring. You'd build for a while, then select all your men to attack, go get some coffee, and start the next scenario. With every subsequent RTS release, Blizzard changed the interface balance drastically! And every potenial SC2 buyer, with the exception of some SC1 fanatics, expects an equally drastic change in SC2. | ||
|
fishyjoes
Germany644 Posts
On December 02 2009 07:22 Zexion wrote: http://www.starcraftzone.com/forums/index.php?topic=962.0 I can't be arsed to rewrite what this guy had mind. Enough said about why they should change the macro mechanics in my opinion. Thanks for registering dude! | ||
|
ix
United Kingdom184 Posts
In SC2 it will be more like WC3 where unloading a cast quantity of spells is trivial, which will knock on to create either a need to nerf the spells or a persistent balance problem as the nerf hurts other aspects of the game like harassment with spells. The Dune argument is a classical bit of rhetoric- the reductio ad absurdam (take something to the ludicrous extreme to belittle it) and the slippery slope (the implication that one change takes you inevitably to the extreme). I've not yet seen a good argument for the macromechanics though, it's not like the game needs new things to occupy my attention, SC does that fully already. The only argument I see is that it's a newbie helper feature (no need to tell workers to rally) with a dodgy hack on top to try to make macro skillful again. | ||
|
beetlelisk
Poland2276 Posts
The only thing I don't like is that Terran macro boost just falls from the skies to mine a bit and become piece of junk -_- it doesn't fit nomad race lift-offing and salvaging buildings. How about Orbital Command making MULEs and launching them to far away expansions for small additional energy? Once MULE is out of energy it becomes small, additional patch of ~30 minerals? | ||
| ||
