EPTGood reading
Oh Micro, Where Art Thou? - Page 52
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Woija
Denmark61 Posts
Good reading | ||
|
Seku
United States313 Posts
| ||
|
yomi
United States773 Posts
FYI BW did in fact have a damage and armor system, and most of the micro tricks that developed in the game were bugs and not intended. | ||
|
Squeegy
Finland1166 Posts
On April 28 2010 15:57 Xeogt wrote: Yadda yadda yadda... So, to sum it up: Don't share your opinion. Not even if this is the whole point of beta. And why? Because Blizzard probably won't care. And you registered just to say that! You WoW kids sure are something! | ||
|
Squeegy
Finland1166 Posts
On April 28 2010 19:54 yomi wrote: Poorly written, factually incorrect or illogical in many points. Please learn to write in a concise fashion. I agree with you that moving shot would likely improve the game but you aren't making complete and logical arguments. People will praise anything of length written about Starcraft but this is really a trash article. FYI BW did in fact have a damage and armor system, and most of the micro tricks that developed in the game were bugs and not intended. Can you point out to me an illogical part in his argument? | ||
|
ChApFoU
France2986 Posts
On April 28 2010 19:54 yomi wrote: Poorly written, factually incorrect or illogical in many points. Please learn to write in a concise fashion. I agree with you that moving shot would likely improve the game but you aren't making complete and logical arguments. People will praise anything of length written about Starcraft but this is really a trash article. FYI BW did in fact have a damage and armor system, and most of the micro tricks that developed in the game were bugs and not intended. I don't agree with everything either in the article but could YOU please point out what are the incorrect facts and illogical points plz ? Saying article X sucks because I think it sucks won't get us very far and makes you sound like a prick. Indeed you do not have any issue with being concise ... FYI reply : Lalush knows this and his thread isn't about the absence of a few tricks like muta stacking but about a much deeper issue in the engine of the game. | ||
|
Fizban140
Korea (South)129 Posts
On April 28 2010 20:20 Squeegy wrote: So, to sum it up: Don't share your opinion. Not even if this is the whole point of beta. And why? Because Blizzard probably won't care. And you registered just to say that! You WoW kids sure are something! That wasn't at all what he was saying. He is saying if you are going to make an argument you should back it up with facts and a solid logic. Not saying I agree with what anyone has said, just felt that you needed his post clarified. | ||
|
SubtleArt
2710 Posts
On April 28 2010 13:42 alexanderzero wrote: Macro is BW is more difficult because...? BW didn't even have macro mechanics like chronoboost, mules, larva, ect. These macro mechanics all represent strategic decisions (Such as choosing to use energy from an orbital command on a mule or scan, or chronoboosting economy vs. unit production). As for the claim that BW had better army diversity... Really? I don't know what games you've been watching, but many high level SC2 games feature almost all of the units available. Just look at TvT now, it's not that unlikely to see every Terran unit make an appearance at some point during the game. There are a few underutilized units in SC2, but the same is true of BW was well. As for strategy in SC2. The beta has only been around for a few months and there are tons of different strategies being employed. To me it seems like there still hasn't been an established, standard play style for each match up. There are so many different things that your opponent can open with, let alone try to finish the game with. On the subject of micro, I still maintain my position that it is different micro. A good example is the hellion. Everyone rags on this unit for having to stop when it fires. I happen to think this makes the unit way more exciting then if it could fire while moving. Every time you want to attack you have to commit to being in a specific position for a period of time. Choose the wrong moment or the wrong spot and not only could your attack be ineffective, but you may be put at risk and get killed. Certain other strategies like phoenix harass can be very micro intensive as well. I believe that SC2 has the potential for an extreme level of micro. Given the diversity in how every unit functions, if there were a player godly enough to multi task with every unit effectively, they would be absolutely dominant. I just happen to think that people aren't good enough at SC2 yet to claim that the game isn't as intense as BW. I read those two quotes you showed me. I don't understand what you showed me them for, they only seem to work against your point that SC2 is easier than BW because I see a similar amount of actions being taken in both situations... Oh yeah, and also this: "Please name 1 thing in sc2 that is more difficult than it's broodwar counterpart micro, strategy, macro, anything" Worker split, YEAH! To start with, worker split can be mastered in 2 seconds in Sc2 if you use the idle workers hotkey. As for more macro, I think you'd have to be an idiot not to realize brood war's is much...much...MUCH harder. I find the macro abilities giving strategic choice thing bullshit. With Zerg and terran theres almost no debate of whether to use their abilities, other than the odd time you want to scan, but this is about as deep strategically as a kiddie pool. With protoss you have some variation, but it generally still amounts to "If I want to rush or commit to an attack, I boost non workers". I've never found my face covered in sweat as I anxiously anticipate what to use my boost on. And having to use macro abilities does NOT make the game as hard as brood war...not even close. MBS kills that. It's so easy to macro, and if you hotkey properly you don't even have to go to your base half the time. Just click on the hotkey and click the unit you want to make. You don't need to juggle between base management and micro nearly as much (especially with automine), and even Browder admitted this much. I played 160 APM in broodwar and I feel I can macro much much more consistently at 80 APM in Sc2 On April 28 2010 19:54 yomi wrote: Poorly written, factually incorrect or illogical in many points. Please learn to write in a concise fashion. I agree with you that moving shot would likely improve the game but you aren't making complete and logical arguments. People will praise anything of length written about Starcraft but this is really a trash article. FYI BW did in fact have a damage and armor system, and most of the micro tricks that developed in the game were bugs and not intended. So point us to some of these. Don't make a statement like "this sucks theres so many errors" without pointing at any of them Otherwise your post is just laughable | ||
|
Squeegy
Finland1166 Posts
On April 28 2010 20:29 Fizban140 wrote: That wasn't at all what he was saying. He is saying if you are going to make an argument you should back it up with facts and a solid logic. Not saying I agree with what anyone has said, just felt that you needed his post clarified. Oh? Maybe he used invisible text to say that! My glasses that allow me to read such text are missing though, so obviously I missed it! My apologies! Your post in large is a lot of rabble rabble about a whole deal of nothing, mixed in with childish misunderstanding of the fact that blizzard does own the Starcraft franchise, and sells games to the mainstream these days. Their main audience will not be catering to the exclusive desires of the Teamliquid community in regards to the missing feel of brood war. You are not bargaining, you are not in an adversarial position to the blizzard management, you have no say in the matter of how the game will be made, other than how your concerns will influence sales, and sales of further games. If you wish to be effective in your criticism, or efforts to reform, possibly ranting, you ought to consider how big of the projected market for the game the progamers - unhappy about MBS, Mineral-rally and spellcasters accessible and useful for all - really are. You will buy the game either way - you probably have it pre-ordered in the special edition - as such blizzard is in fact, controary to your beliefs, a company out to make a lot of money, so they will cater to new audiences, to expand the franchise, at your perceived expense. Cellestial mounts anyone? Or maybe you could find this hidden message in the rebuttals of the missing features? I sure didn't. Feel free to quote me the parts that makes you think he's preaching about logic. | ||
|
Fizban140
Korea (South)129 Posts
Poorly written, factually incorrect or illogical in many points. Please learn to write in a concise fashion. I agree with you that moving shot would likely improve the game but you aren't making complete and logical arguments. People will praise anything of length written about Starcraft but this is really a trash article. FYI BW did in fact have a damage and armor system, and most of the micro tricks that developed in the game were bugs and not intended. | ||
|
[DUF]MethodMan
Germany1716 Posts
| ||
|
Fizban140
Korea (South)129 Posts
| ||
|
Squeegy
Finland1166 Posts
On April 28 2010 20:47 Fizban140 wrote: It appears that your glasses that allow you to read text right infront of you are missing as well, let me help you out. Poorly written, factually incorrect or illogical in many points. Please learn to write in a concise fashion. I agree with you that moving shot would likely improve the game but you aren't making complete and logical arguments. People will praise anything of length written about Starcraft but this is really a trash article. FYI BW did in fact have a damage and armor system, and most of the micro tricks that developed in the game were bugs and not intended. Thank you, mister. But how about we discuss what Xeogt said first? Or maybe you wish to discuss Barack Obama? I am not sure anymore. | ||
|
beetlelisk
Poland2276 Posts
On April 28 2010 21:00 Fizban140 wrote: I don't want to argue with you since you already said that Blizzard made perfect games but I do have to point something out. A lot of what made BW so popular as a competitive game was not intended to be in the game at all. Most of it was accidental. It has been repeated many times in this thread and really it doesn't matter if it was intentional or not just that it was and now isn't. Well Blizzard itself recognized it as something that should stay http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=120957¤tpage=27#525 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=120957¤tpage=27#528 you make it sound almost as if it shouldn't. I'm looking forward for someone to do complete research instead wasting time and walls of text on bashing devs... only to learn it's just harder but still there and can be changed to the easier BW way through editor. | ||
|
Fizban140
Korea (South)129 Posts
Anyways xeoGT makes a lot of good points. Did people honestly think that a mainstream (SC1 was mainstream too) game released in 2010 wasn't going to have MBS and smart casting? Did you really think unit selection would be 12? | ||
|
SubtleArt
2710 Posts
On April 28 2010 21:08 Fizban140 wrote: I thought you were responding to yomi, saw the Yadda yaddas. Its been a long day and I need sleep. Anyways xeoGT makes a lot of good points. Did people honestly think that a mainstream (SC1 was mainstream too) game released in 2010 wasn't going to have MBS and smart casting? Did you really think unit selection would be 12? Blizzard was the only company I put above selling out and catering a game to the mainstream audience  . | ||
|
Squeegy
Finland1166 Posts
On April 28 2010 21:08 Fizban140 wrote: I thought you were responding to yomi, saw the Yadda yaddas. Its been a long day and I need sleep. Anyways xeoGT makes a lot of good points. Did people honestly think that a mainstream (SC1 was mainstream too) game released in 2010 wasn't going to have MBS and smart casting? Did you really think unit selection would be 12? Are people wrong to be disappointed? Are people wrong in voicing their opinion? That is the issue. | ||
|
Fizban140
Korea (South)129 Posts
Yes people are wrong to expect SC2 to not have those features, blizzard actually wants to sell some copies of this game. This game would fail incredibly hard if it didn't have new features to make the game easier to get into. It doesn't dumb it down, what are people afraid that MBS takes away? It lets people without 150 APM macro a little easier? | ||
|
LaLuSh
Sweden2358 Posts
On April 28 2010 21:08 Fizban140 wrote: I thought you were responding to yomi, saw the Yadda yaddas. Its been a long day and I need sleep. Anyways xeoGT makes a lot of good points. Did people honestly think that a mainstream (SC1 was mainstream too) game released in 2010 wasn't going to have MBS and smart casting? Did you really think unit selection would be 12? No, and I even acknowledge those changes as good ones. Most people do after having played the game. If anything, the fact that we embraced certain changes but didn't like the absence of moving shot, should strengthen our argument. We tried the game. We liked certain changes and certain innovations. We thought the absence of moving shot was a step in the wrong direction. Maybe we aren't the nostalgic brainless fanatics you think we are after all? | ||
|
Fizban140
Korea (South)129 Posts
| ||
| ||
