EPTOn April 27 2010 11:52 mmp wrote:
I blame...Blizzard
I blame...Blizzard
This seems to be quite the rage lately.
Oh Micro, Where Art Thou? - Page 14
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
ComradeDover
Bulgaria758 Posts
This seems to be quite the rage lately. | ||
|
Esli
United States36 Posts
| ||
|
FoBuLouS
United States570 Posts
| ||
|
Ideas
United States8091 Posts
I really miss good micro. I mean they added in more spellcasters to try to make up for it, but spellcasters just arent nearly as fun as vultures or BW mutas. But I'm like 95% certain that it's impossible to bring it into the SC2 engine since Blizzard has known it's not as good for years and hasnt done anytihng about it. lets all go back to bw! | ||
|
rockslave
Brazil318 Posts
The argument has been given a thousand times and no one has given a descent refutation: SC2 has been played for a REALLY short time. Just look at any old Brood War game and you can clearly see that the top players didn't know stuff even I do now. Not only about micro (muta stacking is the obvious example), but about strategy too (PvZ FE being the obvious example here), not even considering how much the maps will change the balance yaddayadda. I for one love MBS and automining. Not just because I am bad and think sending guys to mine every x seconds is boring, but because it frees anyone's APM to do other interesting stuff (some of which we will only find out some years from now). For instance, if the game is "easy" and there is no "skill", why don't we see players multitasking like crazy and controlling 5 armies at different places? I bet people will say "you're saying that because you're a bad player". Well first of all, that's the weakest argument you can use, but if you still want some authority to speak, I think Nony is enough =P. But back to the topic (micro), my question is this: does the game necessarily revolve around ball vs ball a-move, or is just everyone playing ball vs ball a-move now because we don't know the game enough...? | ||
|
beetlelisk
Poland2276 Posts
It disgusts me that every time I see someone on these forums bash down on a flaw in the game, all he’s ever met with is the same generic response: “Yes but Starcraft II is a different game, ’other’ types of micro/whatever might show up in the future as it develops and evolves”. You don't want to be disregarded as someone opposed to any kind of change in this particular case but you sound exactly like one in your conclusions. Keep macro in threads about macro, don't bitch about chat channels when it has been already explained why there are none atm and it's obvious there are going to be chat channels in released version. Putting someone like Dustin Browder in charge of development for SC2 though, is almost like letting one of the many overly-enthuasiastic-and-overly-optimistic TL forum resident D- noobs have the last say about what is good and bad for a multi million dollar game. Sure those crazy (slightly delusional) threads about the viability of some obscure unit or strategy can be fun to read from time to time. But in the end it's always reassuring to have that old veteran come in, one of those fountains of cynicism, to tell you what will work and what won't. What's realistic and what's not. Where your focus should rather lie instead of wasting your time with things might be awesome but don't work in reality. I feel that Blizzard desperately needed but lacked one of those voices in the development of SC2. Are you still talking about SC2 in this paragraph? If you are trying to say it's "solved" with nothing new to be seen after only 2 months of playing then you hurt the case you are fighting for here. You make it easier to be ignored. You make me think devs will ignore this thread the same way they ignored all MBS "discussions" and I am worried about that also because you missed that Banshees can dance perfectly, with hardly any slowing down noticeable. I'm not going to forget a game on Scrap Station on some stream where Banshees had 15, even 26 kills. Major part of those were Marines too. This isn't the same as Mutalisk and Drones being able to pull something similar off but is definitely a proof this isn't completely gone. If you are trying to prove it is and add some bashing on top of that you are not going to bring it back imo. And I write this even though at first, lenght of the OP alone made me wrote your article isn't in Final Edits only because it needs to catch more views, my post was 7th on the 1st page I was so glad someone elaborated about this. | ||
|
fulmetljaket
482 Posts
On April 27 2010 11:18 fulmetljaket wrote: dear lalush, taking a break. its been a long 12 years. sincerely, micro i lol'd | ||
|
teekesselchen
Germany886 Posts
On April 27 2010 11:54 FoBuLouS wrote: Very thorough argument, I really do agree that this is a NECESSARY change; the game just wouldn't fit the feel of an e-Sport and just wouldn't feel like starcraft:BW without the moving shot. THE GAME JUST WOULDNT FIT ESPORTS????? It's STARCRAFT by BLIZZARD, it has to fit eSports o_O I can't give you a confirming quote right now but I'm a 100% sure they mentioned several times that they want it to be fit for esports. However, yes they screwed up. | ||
|
HalfAmazing
Netherlands402 Posts
I'm having the same feelings I did during the WarCraft III beta; unless drastic changes are made, I won't be buying the retail version. Tired of the game feeling like I'm dragging units through thick syrup making attack-move my only option. | ||
|
LaLuSh
Sweden2358 Posts
On April 27 2010 11:52 Ballistixz wrote: i have no idea what game you played but scouts was not a efficient counter to mutas at all. muta/scourge demolished them. it may have had "perfect moving shots" but that did not matter when scourge/mutas demolish them. ppl used corsairs because they had splash and if u got enought of them u could take out a good fleet of mutas/scourge with proper micro. thats something scouts could and will never do because they have no splash. just imagine for a minute if corsairs did not have splash dmg. how effective would they be against scourge/mutas even with moving shots? phoenixes has no splash dmg against air targets. give phoenixes splash dmg and i guarantee u they will be usefull with our without the moving shots. Let's check what points we actually agree with eachother on and what you've misinterpreted me saying: Scouts are not an efficient counter to mutas That's what I said in my last post. And I even gave an argument as to why. So I take it we agree? You even say "it may have had perfect moving shots", then you go on attacking me for stuff I haven't said again. Scouts could never micro against muta/scourge Well we're lucky there aren't any scourge in SC2 aren't we? But that's not what I meant to say. SPEED UPGRADED (put it in caps so you can't miss it) scouts are just as good as mutalisks when microing vs scourge/muta. Scratch that, they're even better! They're faster, have faster turning animation. The only downside is they don't have glaives bouncing off on other scourge when microing vs scourge. Now you can make another post where you say scouts were never used and that corsairs were better. But that's got nothing to do with what I'm arguing. | ||
|
Whiplash
United States2928 Posts
I agree with pretty much every point you made, this is something that blizzard really needs to look at and test. Hell, test it in a patch and see what people make of it. I do hate how everything feels so floaty and bubbly, that was 1 of the first things I noticed in sc2. I remember feeling that the micro wasn't there as much as it was in sc1. People were like yah give it time (and that has started to happen) but the issue is that the micro is more in using unit abilities, not unit control, which is the entire issue of this article. | ||
|
ComradeDover
Bulgaria758 Posts
On April 27 2010 12:03 LaLuSh wrote: SPEED UPGRADED (put it in caps so you can't miss it) scouts are just as good as mutalisks when microing vs scourge/muta. Scratch that, they're even better! They're faster, have faster turning animation. The only downside is they don't have glaives bouncing off on other scourge when microing vs scourge. You missed the part about scouts dealing half damage to both mutalisks and scourge. I'd take a mutalisk to micro against scourge over a scout any day, speed upgraded or no. | ||
rotinegg
United States1719 Posts
On April 27 2010 12:03 LaLuSh wrote: Let's check what points we actually agree with eachother on and what you've misinterpreted me saying: Scouts are not an efficient counter to mutas That's what I said in my last post. And I even gave an argument as to why. So I take it we agree? You even say "it may have had perfect moving shots", then you go on attacking me for stuff I haven't said again. Scouts could never micro against muta/scourge Well we're lucky there aren't any scourge in SC2 aren't we? But that's not what I meant to say. SPEED UPGRADED (put it in caps so you can't miss it) scouts are just as good as mutalisks when microing vs scourge/muta. Scratch that, they're even better! They're faster, have faster turning animation. The only downside is they don't have glaives bouncing off on other scourge when microing vs scourge. Now you can make another post where you say scouts were never used and that corsairs were better. But that's got nothing to do with what I'm arguing. yelling over the internet and getting into semantics to continue flame wars will not earn your argument any credibility. Good ideas in your OP, but you are doing a terrible job presenting them throughout this entire thread | ||
|
teekesselchen
Germany886 Posts
On April 27 2010 12:03 HalfAmazing wrote: Excellent article. There is nothing I've been shown by high level players that was impressive or interesting to watch. Macro is easy, micro is non existant, it's nothing but timing. Timing, timing, timing. I don't enjoy watching it and even playing it is getting really stale. Good job pointing out exactly why the game feels the way it does. I'm having the same feelings I did during the WarCraft III beta; unless drastic changes are made, I won't be buying the retail version. Tired of the game feeling like I'm dragging units through thick syrup making attack-move my only option. Yes I think this dragging-through-syrup-feeling is a thing that also applies to CS 1.6 players who dislike other shooter games. However in Warcraft 3 there still was a huge portion of micro involved, actually a gigantic part with those tiny armies, heros and lots of items, skills, positioning etc. It really seems to totally miss in SC2. Back to the syrup-thingy, it seems to be some accompyining illness to modern fancy games. Like designers decide it doesn't fit anymore when units make those rapid stop-move-movements anymore and put a buffer in between everything that annoys the crap out of every devoted player but pleases graphic fetishists. | ||
|
aztrorisk
United States896 Posts
They don't want mutalisk micro because the unlimited selection makes mutalisk micro too powerful and it will be unbalanced. "A good solution would be to make multalisk more expensive but stronger" I agree, some micro should be added back. I don't believe in devolution. The think that I think is the most annoying is the zergling. Zergling used to look like beasts but now they are more like rams. They also seem much weaker to me. Blizzard, make zerglings much faster already!!! | ||
|
rasers
Sweden691 Posts
On April 27 2010 12:01 teekesselchen wrote: THE GAME JUST WOULDNT FIT ESPORTS????? It's STARCRAFT by BLIZZARD, it has to fit eSports o_O I can't give you a confirming quote right now but I'm a 100% sure they mentioned several times that they want it to be fit for esports. However, yes they screwed up. yeah... 80% of the people think "OMFG HAS STARCRAFT IN ITS NAME OMFG ITS GREAT". SCII wouldnt be that "great" for most of the people if they would name it different. some new rts or whatever ^^ just nto the same name. and the other reason is its just new atm. after playing SC:BW or whatever for so long u want something new atleast for some time. topic: agree most of it BUT i think u want 2 much SC:BW in SCII. | ||
|
LunarC
United States1186 Posts
Starcraft 2 will never even so much as touch Starcraft 1 if the fundamental elements of gameplay (i.e. linear economic growth aka no macro mechanics to screw up the steady progression of tech and expansion, units that need to be handled specially, a LARGE emphasis on micro to make units even BEGIN to be effective) are not transferred over and it never will if Blizzard doesn't have its entire design staff sit down, play massive amounts of Starcraft Brood War, and write down everything from how units handle to how much difference micro makes to how tech, unit production, and economic expansion scales in the absence of macro mechanics. Or they can watch the Proleague VODs. Why they don't already constantly reference Proleague VODs and design units and the engine based on the way progamers handle units and armies is beyond me. Without some serious and drastic changes, Starcraft 2 will be one of the greatest screw-ups in video game history and will never even come CLOSE to equaling Starcraft Brood War as an ESport. | ||
|
Zapdos_Smithh
Canada2620 Posts
There is a god and his name is LaLush. Thank you for finally writing an article that FULLY explains what is REALLY lacking from SC2 at the moment. I am SO TIRED of the "just wait for the game to evolve" concept! Amazing! | ||
|
GaMeOfFeAr
United States26 Posts
On April 27 2010 12:03 HalfAmazing wrote: Excellent article. There is nothing I've been shown by high level players that was impressive or interesting to watch. Macro is easy, micro is non existant, it's nothing but timing. Timing, timing, timing. I don't enjoy watching it and even playing it is getting really stale. Good job pointing out exactly why the game feels the way it does. I'm having the same feelings I did during the WarCraft III beta; unless drastic changes are made, I won't be buying the retail version. Tired of the game feeling like I'm dragging units through thick syrup making attack-move my only option. No one will miss you. No drastic changes are necessary. Stop comparing the micro and macro of players like Jaedong and Flash, to your "high level players", who are really just amateurs playing an incomplete game. | ||
|
ymirheim
Sweden300 Posts
So we got a lot of people, mainly those who played broodwar a lot wanting starcraft 2 to be fixed to bring back the micro of broodwar. First of all "fixed" I think is a weird look at it because the micro in broodwar was in many cases not features at all but rather glitches or unexpected behavior of mechanics that gave the game depth. The thing I have to ask and this is not a rhetorical question or a gotcha kinda thing, I am genuinely curious because I did not follow broodwar continuously from its launch until now, but just how much of the "micro" in broodwar were people actually aware of early in its existance? Did people vulture kite in the starcraft beta? Did people know you could attack move with Goliaths to get way more shots off at an enemy air force? Actually I believe I heard somewhere that mutalisk stacking was not discovered until very very late in broodwars lifespan. I say people are obsessing too much about how starcraft 2 is not broodwar and missing out on instead finding out the perks in starcraft 2. If you don't want autosplitting, multiple building selection a 3d view in which you can't hide things under floating buildings then broodwar still works on modern computers so just go play it. I actually think there is quite a bit of micro in starcraft 2, it might be different but its there and to a great extent people just have not figured out how to abuse the game mechanics either as well as in broodwar. We still got 10 years to go on that one. All in all, starcraft, one and two is such a fast and complex game with so much stuff going on that no matter how high your apm is, it is not theoretically possible to have full attention on everything all the time, when blizzard introduced mbs for example it did not kill off a part of the game, it just freed up some attention that went in to going back and clicking all your buildings but that attention just then got funneled into something else. Same with micro and the longer the game lives, the competitiveness of top level play is going to make the best players find the tiny little things that give an edge and that will grow into finding out all new stuff that no one thought of before. Wouldn't it just be a mistake to assume that we can say at this point that micro in stracraft 2 is fully developed, the gaming community has now perfected it to its full extent? edit: I also really have to wonder just how many of all the people who sign up on the nay sayers side about starcraft 2 depth are actually playing the beta. I know there are people who play beta and make these arguments that sc2 will never be broodwar etc but I think there is just loads of people who played a lot of bw who are very conservative about the game and are pretty much just wanting to hear someone confirm their unjustified preconceptions that the game is too slick and then whenever someone makes that argument they just take it at face value. | ||
| ||
