|
On April 29 2010 16:43 Parnage wrote:
Okay I've read all I can, page 30+ sorry guys I am overwhelmed by thoughts at this point..
BroodWar is amazing, I love watching it, playing it on the other hand, is fighting the engine, the units, and your hands. Dragoon control isn't micro so much as forcing it to not be retarded. That's skill, but fun it is not. Don't tell me you never wanted to strangle a blizzard programmer as you watched a dragoon fail to fire or mindlessly get stuck on a building.
Starcraft 2 is amazing, I love watching it and I enjoy playing it. I feel I have more control, simply because I am not fighting with the AI every time I move. While I do agree with some changes(ala: would love to see a tad faster phoenix control) I think alot of things are just fine.
Hellion micro is amazing to watch and requires you to think ahead of time to get the angle to roast a line of drones or zerglings also allowing your enemy to do the same to counter-act the power of a linear splash attack. And yes Hellions die quickly to properly guarded bases, just like vultures, what is the problem?
Overall I think sc2 is more of a thinking man's game, which I don't feel is a bad thing. Beta is a good time to be explaining problems but I think alot of it is just you and many others wanting broodwar in 3d. It sounds great in theory till you realize how damn annoying alot of that is. Once again the dragoon comes to mind. It's fun to watch, but not fun to play and in the end Blizzard is making a game to play not just to watch.
Perhaps I am just crazy but I love sc2 and I love broodwar. Why can't you love both?
I love broodwar and I love sc2 too! But that doesn't change the fact that sc2 is a MUCH simpler game. And while it's fun, it's just not competitive. And longevity = competitive. All i'm trying to do is make sure sc2 becomes the most popular RTS of all time.
On April 29 2010 16:47 ZergOwaR wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2010 15:47 Rokk wrote:On April 29 2010 15:25 Rabiator wrote:On April 29 2010 11:59 Xenocide_Knight wrote:
There is no new micro in sc2 Who said there had to be new micro? Oh and you actually can do new funky stuff with the queued commands, but that isnt clicky-hungry enough for you I suppose. Burrowing injured Roaches from your pack during the fight and blinking Stalkers apparently isnt enough micro for you, but then nobody forces you to buy the game. I have already seen a TvT with both of them getting Thors and dropping them onto the others base. The result was like a gunfight from a Western ... whoever activated his 250mm strike cannon faster (stun + 500 dmg = dead opposing Thor) won the duel. No new micro indeed ... just not the stuff you are looking for. How long exactly did it take to find out about the moving Muta shot and stacking in BW? Years if my information is correct. The point is we know about that stuff now. We're not as ignorant of rts mechanics as we were when bw was released. We know what made it a great game, and we see some of those aspects missing from sc2. How long do you think that thor mechanic in tvt will keep the matchup interesting? Will the timing of one large ability keep the game fresh for a long time? What makes some of the micro exciting is that it is so easy to make small mistakes that will influence the outcome of an encounter, but when everything is done correctly beautiful things can happen. Is burrowing roaches still really viable after all the nerfs it has gotten? Has anyone successfully shown this to make a difference lately, especially after the hivetech upgrade? Roaches are so spammable that the damage you lose from burrowing them seems to outweigh the gains in keeping the roach alive. Blinking stalkers is interesting to me, although I know many have complained. I've only seen it really used in blink-rush builds that solely use stalkers. If people actually can do it in larger engagements while still doing everything else I think it could be exciting. well yeah we know about rts mechanics, but that doesn't mean there will never be discovered new tricks in sc2, like the thor drop... someone has been thinking, and i bet blizzard didnt expect that fully. how about the reaver drop in BW? It was said that the reaver was never ever inteded for such work, just some nerd in the world that figured it out. same with moving a worker through the temples? that bit was fun to watch even if it failed  I can understand that many here want air combat to be more like the old sc, it does look damn cool, but at some point in the OP he made it seem that he just wanted SC:BW with better graphics and that kinda made it feel more like a well documented rant, but a rant nontheless. I have seen some pretty wild micro thus far, micro that made/broke the game. like a cool zerglings vs less zerglings + 1 baneling. i would love to see more micro like that
uh huh. Your example is Thor drop? So you drop a thor, and who ever activates the ability first wins.. Huh, it's kind of like how every single tvt game was in Broodwar. Except it Broodwar instead of 1 or 2 thors, you had like 30 tanks that had to drop into position, and siege.
Like you said yourself, things like muta micro and reaver harass took years to develop. And now, years after that, we know the RTS mechanics inside and out. I guarantee people have tried every possible command for every possible unit, in hopes of "discovering" the new muta micro. And guess what, no unit is microable in sc2 like the muta in BW.
We weren't looking for micro in BW, thats why it took years to find. In sc2, we are ACTIVELY searching and we still haven't found it. And we won't find it because honestly, there really aren't that many key combination you can try out.
On April 29 2010 20:01 Snake626 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2010 11:59 Xenocide_Knight wrote:On April 29 2010 11:29 Snake626 wrote:
It's so cute when someone thinks they can complain how a game isnt similar enough to the original and some complain its not different enough. I guess people are too lazy to actually come up with NEW strategies and NEW ways to micro. We should all yell at blizzard because they didnt want to actually HARD CODE GLITCHES, into their new game. Sorry, they should put back dark archons for the kids who miss multi racing on fastest, put back vultures for kids who miss patrol micro (yes because patrol was intended to be used like that), Etc. etc.
For the love of God, the game isnt even out yet, its just Beta and your already complaining how you cant do 1 or 2 things you could in the original. Here for you to feel better how about they name it something else so your not butt hurt when it doesnt AUTOMATICALLY fill the shoes that the original set into place. Please before you set a huge number of paragraphs how you cant do what you used to beable to do actually think about the fact there are probably more things in this game then at first sight, and its up to us to find them out just as it was in the original.
I want Starcraft 2, not Starcraft 1.1 or 1.5. I want a new game where i can learn new things, invent my own strategies (Starcraft was out for 10 years and they still invented new ways to play and new ways to micro, Beta has had a few months and its already getting beat with a stick for not living up to the "Hard Core Gamers" expectations). Just give the game time. Remember when everyone complained, WOW SC2 LOOKS SO CARTOONY WITH ITS RENDERS, ITS LIKE WOW NOW. Didnt they fix that up quite nice? I think so. Give Blizzard some space to work on THEIR game. Not yours. If starcraft broodwar was a flashlight, sc2 is like giving someone a candle and then telling them to innovate to the level of the flashlight. There is no new micro in sc2 They just removed the majority of micro from sc:bw thats that Sorry, Ill just mention a few that have already been discovered. Blink micro, Roach burrow, Sentry Force field, kiting with reapers up and down cliffs. Im sorry you are correct in your saying that there will be no new micro in sc2, I dont want to stupid glitches of making patrol and spam clicking the screen to rev my apm to 300+ to do things theyre not meant to do. Your ignorant in saying that broodwar was a flashlight, It was a busted flashlight that didnt even do what it was supposed to, but you liked it because it made some cool effect. Starcraft 2 is a flashlight that has yet to be discovered what it can possibly do. So instead of making such outworldy assumptions, Play the game and invent them.
I'm sorry did you ever play broodwar? I can already tell that you are some WoW player or something based on what you call "micro".
Blink micro, Roach burrow, Sentry Force field, kiting with reapers up and down cliffs.
do you know why people like you are saying this is "newly discovered" micro? Because in Broodwar, this was so common even the lowliest D- scrub was expected to pull off such moves with precision. We didn't have terms like "kiting" because it was the norm in Broodwar. Only the computer wouldn't utilize such basic control.
After two days of trying to purge this thread of ignorance, I am giving up. Every few hours, some new 4 post account will be making the exact same claims over and over again. Just read the whole damn thread before you post..
|
United Kingdom12022 Posts
Longevity doesn't make a competative game Xenocide.
|
On April 29 2010 20:29 lamo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2010 20:09 Rabiator wrote:On April 28 2010 21:16 LaLuSh wrote: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? Who is "we"? and why do you phrase the original post as if moving shot was the only micro that mattered (the title suggests that there is no more micro, but the only argument you bring is moving shot)? While I may agree that bringing moving shot back wont be such a big deal I think there are much bigger problems in SC2 which affect the gameplay negatively. Why does it make sense to get rid of stacking air units when ground units are enabled to do almost the same thing? The increased damage density does effectively kill all strategic and defensive play on larger maps, because it is not feasible to build enough defenses to survive against a "typical" SC2 task force (usually at least 70-80% of all troops of one player). Having no viable option for defensive play will practically kill large scale maps and the "instant reinforcement / movement options" for Protoss / Zerg will add to the problem of not being able to defend on a large scale. Obviously this mostly hurts Terrans, who have a large part of their army specialized on immobility. Watching BW matches you can see spread out forces, but every SC2 battle is between tight balls of units on just a portion of a screen. That is the much bigger problem than moving shot IMO. Countermeasures (all area attacks / splash damage) to tight balls get nerfed to be "fair" to these packed formations ... You just said yourself that it is hard to defend, while the thread clearly defined how moving shot helps to defend or have a chance against larger armies. Moving shot is the biggest issue, because atm the fate of a battle is mainly defined by unit composition and size rather than the ability to control it.
How often did you see moving shot in the BW late game? Not often, and only during harass. As army size increases the viability of doing moving shot decreases since it becomes so much harder to do efficiently. No one would ever use moving shot in SC2 for controlling their own large army. They would use it to harass and pick off strays, just like they did in SC1.
As a result large army dynamics would remain unchanged. There would still be ranged blobs, Terran would still be immobile aside from their harassing units and have a hard time defending on a large map vs Toss and Zerg...
Honestly, I'm not good enough at this game to say whether or not moving shot should be included. But to act as if it's some kind of panacea to SC2's problems is just wishful thinking.
|
wow, only now i had the time to read it.
If you're doing more stuff like this you might end up in the TL staff, your writing skills are very good!
And also if i'm not mistaken you're a really good sc2 player
|
This threads first post was written by an experienced SC/SC2 player in platinum, supported by all SC2 players in platinum/high gold, and criticised by everyone in mid-gold and below. That says it all, really. SC2 caters to noobs.
|
On April 29 2010 23:41 Perfect Balance wrote:
This threads first post was written by an experienced SC/SC2 player in platinum, supported by all SC2 players in platinum/high gold, and criticised by everyone in mid-gold and below. That says it all, really. SC2 caters to noobs.
And the latter's background seems to be in WoW quite often.
|
Okay, He want to point out flaws in BETA built, that's fine. But assume SC2 is a simpler game is absurd, because it's still a BETA built. 
|
that guy is hurt, he prolly isnt as good as when he was playing broodwar lol
|
United Kingdom12022 Posts
On April 29 2010 23:41 Perfect Balance wrote:
This threads first post was written by an experienced SC/SC2 player in platinum, supported by all SC2 players in platinum/high gold, and criticised by everyone in mid-gold and below. That says it all, really. SC2 caters to noobs.
Wait, I'm sorry what?
There's plenty of other platinum/gold players who have said they don't agree with the post and I really don't think rank in a beta should affect your opinion on peoples right to an opinion. There's interesting sides to both sides of the fence.
|
On April 29 2010 20:29 lamo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2010 20:09 Rabiator wrote:On April 28 2010 21:16 LaLuSh wrote: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? Who is "we"? and why do you phrase the original post as if moving shot was the only micro that mattered (the title suggests that there is no more micro, but the only argument you bring is moving shot)? While I may agree that bringing moving shot back wont be such a big deal I think there are much bigger problems in SC2 which affect the gameplay negatively. Why does it make sense to get rid of stacking air units when ground units are enabled to do almost the same thing? The increased damage density does effectively kill all strategic and defensive play on larger maps, because it is not feasible to build enough defenses to survive against a "typical" SC2 task force (usually at least 70-80% of all troops of one player). Having no viable option for defensive play will practically kill large scale maps and the "instant reinforcement / movement options" for Protoss / Zerg will add to the problem of not being able to defend on a large scale. Obviously this mostly hurts Terrans, who have a large part of their army specialized on immobility. Watching BW matches you can see spread out forces, but every SC2 battle is between tight balls of units on just a portion of a screen. That is the much bigger problem than moving shot IMO. Countermeasures (all area attacks / splash damage) to tight balls get nerfed to be "fair" to these packed formations ... You just said yourself that it is hard to defend, while the thread clearly defined how moving shot helps to defend or have a chance against larger armies. Moving shot is the biggest issue, because atm the fate of a battle is mainly defined by unit composition and size rather than the ability to control it.
Moving shot is used to defend? Errr ... from what I have seen from BW replays it is just as well used for harrass, maybe even more than to defend. So you cant really claim that defense is losing out more than offense through the loss of moving shot.
On April 29 2010 20:38 MorroW wrote:
blizzard should really make micro more significant because its 10 times less than in wc3 and sc1 :/
Well micro only really matters if you have the time to spare for precise control of a small group of units. With the current state in SC2 of big bunches of units battling it out it seems rather useless to expect a lot of usefulness of precise control. Sure you can do some small bit of positional micro early on when your two Zealots and a Probe are fighting with 6-8 Zerglings, but thats only valid during the early stages of the game. Personally I would prefer if Blizzard could get rid of the tight balls of ground troops and put more emphasis on larger maps, but that would change the game in a really big way.
|
Poll: Should Hellion be able to "move and fire"?Yes (59) 68% No (28) 32% 87 total votes Your vote: Should Hellion be able to "move and fire"? (Vote): Yes
(Vote): No
|
I read the article (which I found to be well thought-out), and most of the 50+ pages of comments that followed, and I have to say I agree with the OP. I don't think adding moving shots will cure everything, but it will help.
What I have to disagree with, however, is the attitude in which the article was written, and many of the comments that followed. Many of you are acting like Blizzard has personally hurt you in some way, and you're using your "I'm a platinum/high-gold player" status to justify name-calling and saying that SC2 is for "lolnoobs." If you want to be taken seriously by Blizzard or the community as a whole, you have to have an unbiased tone and be professional. If you want your voice to be heard over those of the "noobs," yours has to be the one of calm and reason that invites everyone to see your point of view, not of insults towards Blizzard, its dev team, and a large part of the SC2 community.
I mean no disrespect to the OP or any of the posters here, I merely suggest a different tone of voice is necessary to gain overall support and adoption for your proposal.
|
Ok, too many people post without reading the thread, leading to the regurgitation of several arguments over and over again. I'm gonna post my response to these.
SC2 has plenty of micro! (insert "micro" here)
ie: has never played BW to a competitive level.
Forcefield spamming, stalker blink, even worker splits was harder than that.
Strategy over mindless clicks!
ie: the guy who thinks he's a strategical genius who is held down by the iron hand of mechanics.
Having a strategical mind isn't skill, having good mechanics is. You can't practice thinking strategically, you're born with it. Plus, strategy will be solved eventually. You CAN practice mechanics though, by playing alot. Skill vs talent.
But but but... it's still BETA, SC1 probably sucked in beta!!!
Pretty simple really, as someone here already mentioned, we weren't searching for (insert pro maneuver) back then, now we are.
MOAR CHANGE PLX!
Change for the sake of change... really... not a convincing argument.
Well, this is probably not going to get read...
|
On April 30 2010 01:28 buhhy wrote:
Ok, too many people post without reading the thread, leading to the regurgitation of several arguments over and over again. I'm gonna post my response to these.
SC2 has plenty of micro! (insert "micro" here)
ie: has never played BW to a competitive level.
Forcefield spamming, stalker blink, even worker splits was harder than that.
Strategy over mindless clicks!
ie: the guy who thinks he's a strategical genius who is held down by the iron hand of mechanics.
Having a strategical mind isn't skill, having good mechanics is. You can't practice thinking strategically, you're born with it. Plus, strategy will be solved eventually. You CAN practice mechanics though, by playing alot. Skill vs talent.
But but but... it's still BETA, SC1 probably sucked in beta!!!
Pretty simple really, as someone here already mentioned, we weren't searching for (insert pro maneuver) back then, now we are.
MOAR CHANGE PLX!
Change for the sake of change... really... not a convincing argument.
Well, this is probably not going to get read...
And this is where I would pull the "not sure if serious..." image.
|
On April 29 2010 23:41 Perfect Balance wrote:
This threads first post was written by an experienced SC/SC2 player in platinum, supported by all SC2 players in platinum/high gold, and criticised by everyone in mid-gold and below. That says it all, really. SC2 caters to noobs.
This just in according to Perfect Balance: Nony is a mid gold noob.
|
On April 30 2010 01:33 Shade692003 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2010 01:28 buhhy wrote:
Ok, too many people post without reading the thread, leading to the regurgitation of several arguments over and over again. I'm gonna post my response to these.
SC2 has plenty of micro! (insert "micro" here)
ie: has never played BW to a competitive level.
Forcefield spamming, stalker blink, even worker splits was harder than that.
Strategy over mindless clicks!
ie: the guy who thinks he's a strategical genius who is held down by the iron hand of mechanics.
Having a strategical mind isn't skill, having good mechanics is. You can't practice thinking strategically, you're born with it. Plus, strategy will be solved eventually. You CAN practice mechanics though, by playing alot. Skill vs talent.
But but but... it's still BETA, SC1 probably sucked in beta!!!
Pretty simple really, as someone here already mentioned, we weren't searching for (insert pro maneuver) back then, now we are.
MOAR CHANGE PLX!
Change for the sake of change... really... not a convincing argument.
Well, this is probably not going to get read... And this is where I would pull the "not sure if serious..." image.
Lol, tell me more about your plan to increase one's intelligence.
|
On April 30 2010 01:28 buhhy wrote:
Ok, too many people post without reading the thread, leading to the regurgitation of several arguments over and over again. I'm gonna post my response to these.
SC2 has plenty of micro! (insert "micro" here)
ie: has never played BW to a competitive level.
Forcefield spamming, stalker blink, even worker splits was harder than that.
Strategy over mindless clicks!
ie: the guy who thinks he's a strategical genius who is held down by the iron hand of mechanics.
Having a strategical mind isn't skill, having good mechanics is. You can't practice thinking strategically, you're born with it. Plus, strategy will be solved eventually. You CAN practice mechanics though, by playing alot. Skill vs talent.
But but but... it's still BETA, SC1 probably sucked in beta!!!
Pretty simple really, as someone here already mentioned, we weren't searching for (insert pro maneuver) back then, now we are.
MOAR CHANGE PLX!
Change for the sake of change... really... not a convincing argument.
Well, this is probably not going to get read...
If strategy is something someone is born with, why do they have military officer's schools? War colleges? Military training?
One of the dumbest posts in a thread full of them. Strategy is learned, not an innate talent.
|
On April 29 2010 18:26 mfukar wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2010 01:40 LaLuSh wrote:Haha nice find. I recall reading somewhere that they weren't necessarily expecting to make a profit out of SC2. Profit would be an added bonus. So the ones going on about "Blizzard only wants to make money", need to rethink. I recall someone, somewhere, attributing some words to someone without a proper source. Know what I called him? Idiot.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=121471
Yonhap: What's Blizzard's vision for E-sports?
MM (Michael Morhaime): Our understanding of E-sports is as a community project that increases the enjoyment of the game for the players. It's going to be popular not only in Korea, but worldwide.
Of course it could be profitable as well, but we're focusing on the community aspect of E-sports more than the financial aspects. If we turn a profit, we plan to reinvest a large portion of it to development e-sports even further, in the form of sponsorships, prize money, etc.
I'm a real idiot aren't I? I looked it up just to make you look bad. Not exactly what I recalled reading, but I don't really think SCII is one of their cash cow games. If they wanted money they'd make another MMORPG.
On April 29 2010 22:29 Rus_Brain wrote:Dear LaLuSh, I have translated your article into Russian. See reps.ruHope you don't mind  Many thanks for you article. Truly yours, Kirill
I take it as a compliment. You have my permission.
I'd be interested to hear about some of the opinions in the comments to the article. I saw temujin and strelok reply among others, it'd be interesting to hear what they had to say.
|
Nony actually agreed about the moving shot thing, if any of you would actually read what he said...
|
They're saying they're not planning on making a profit on SC2 e-sports, Not that they're not planning on making a profit on SC2 as a whole.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
