EPTI am not going to touch on the queen since that seems more complex (though I still have doubts about larva inject thing) but I want to know if anyone out there actually likes the terran and toss macro mechanics. And if they do, what do they see as their point. To me, they are just annoying non-fun tasks that are there for no good reason...
Macro mechanics still just apm sinks
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
phexac
United States186 Posts
I am not going to touch on the queen since that seems more complex (though I still have doubts about larva inject thing) but I want to know if anyone out there actually likes the terran and toss macro mechanics. And if they do, what do they see as their point. To me, they are just annoying non-fun tasks that are there for no good reason... | ||
|
Disarray
United States1164 Posts
| ||
|
Osmoses
Sweden5302 Posts
In starcraft1 there was no automining, WAAAAAAH APM SINK, goddamnit just stop. | ||
|
sob3k
United States7572 Posts
plus, If you aren't in on the beta it seems a bit dumb to be starting any complaint thread not related to the viewing experience. | ||
|
NeoLearner
Belgium1847 Posts
On February 19 2010 20:27 phexac wrote: What's more upsetting is that terran Mule, which is a must have, basically takes place of the comsat scan as far as energy spending goes, thus taking away a fun and useful terran ability. I don't get your point... Bad Blizzard for putting 2 useful abilities on the same building and making us choose, damn you!  Choice is a good thing! And they had to do something to limit comsat, detection is a lot bigger in SC2. And I agree with Osmoses, SC1 had quite a few APM sinks. We'll have to wait a bit before everything will be clear... | ||
|
Uno
Korea (South)3 Posts
| ||
|
Orbifold
United States1922 Posts
| ||
|
Kentucky
United States63 Posts
The difference is: -Macro time sink in SC1 was more physical, involved dexterity, and was immediately comprehensible to pretty much any viewer whether they knew anything about Starcraft or not -Macro time sink in SC2 is less physical, takes less dexterity, but adds to the game in the form of a knowledge build order type of skill rather than dexterity, and makes no sense to passive viewers whatsoever I agree that SC2's macro features are stupid, but the reason I don't like them is the fact that they're replacing dexterity, make gameplay less visually stunning, and don't make any sense to spectators. | ||
|
EchOne
United States2906 Posts
I've been playing mostly Protoss and I have to say that I'm really enjoying the Chrono Boost mechanic. Since it can benefit virtually any structure, once you've saturated a base or two (or even before then, really) there are as many choices as you have types of buildings. Once the game gets mapped out, perhaps some macro mechanics will become attention sinks, but right now it's too early to say for sure. Anyways the fact that there are decisions involved make the macro mechanics not completely mindless... at least not on the level of sending idle probes to mine, a task that is always the same and must always be done. | ||
|
Vedic
United States582 Posts
On February 19 2010 20:56 Kentucky wrote: I agree that SC2's macro features are stupid, but the reason I don't like them is the fact that they're replacing dexterity, make gameplay less visually stunning, and don't make any sense to spectators. Err, what? Spectators don't see macro, as they don't see first-person. The new macro mechanics ARE visible, which old macro was not. Dexterity requirements are marginally different. | ||
|
mahnini
United States6862 Posts
| ||
|
SoleSteeler
Canada5449 Posts
The Protoss mechanic is super nice and you will find yourself targetting different buildings to quicken all throughout the game. My only beef with it is that the Nexus has a 100 energy capacity, and it costs 25, so it's pretty rare to let it get up to 100 and have it "wasted." It should be 50 or so, I think. Zerg's is just awesome all around. It's pretty simple to move your Queen back and forth, but at least you can choose to make attacking units or drones etc... A nice choice there. | ||
|
NeoLearner
Belgium1847 Posts
On February 19 2010 21:10 SoleSteeler wrote: The Protoss mechanic is super nice and you will find yourself targetting different buildings to quicken all throughout the game. My only beef with it is that the Nexus has a 100 energy capacity, and it costs 25, so it's pretty rare to let it get up to 100 and have it "wasted." It should be 50 or so, I think. For the protoss mechanic, the bigger energy pool can be used for saving up. Let's say you want to void-ray rush. You save energy, build 3 startports and chrono boost them all. 3 void rays at half the time. A lower energy pool would limit the ability to just probe spamming... Although I do agree, the 100 energy seems a bit much if it is not shared between Nexii (Nexusses? ) | ||
|
SoleSteeler
Canada5449 Posts
On February 19 2010 21:16 NeoLearner wrote: For the protoss mechanic, the bigger energy pool can be used for saving up. Let's say you want to void-ray rush. You save energy, build 3 startports and chrono boost them all. 3 void rays at half the time. A lower energy pool would limit the ability to just probe spamming... Although I do agree, the 100 energy seems a bit much if it is not shared between Nexii (Nexusses? )That's certainly true, and I did find myself saving up at times... Maybe it's okay then. | ||
|
Navane
Netherlands2749 Posts
On February 19 2010 20:55 Orbifold wrote: When you get down to it, isn't life just an apm sink? muhaha | ||
| ||
