|
I highlighted the part where you prove to me your the stereotypical SC2 player. If you don't want mechanics go play chess. Or if you want to play a game that is so easy and everyone can feel good about themselves, go play Halo3.
For a second i thought that i could actually have a conversation with you about this. But now that you are the casual, just returned to the SC scene because of SC2 player- and will probably leave this community once the next new games comes around, i really don't feel that by arguing with you I could ever change your opinion. In your eyes less is more, and blizz and activision are prophets from god bestowing an amazing game upon you, a game that you will no doubt turn pro in.
I highlighted the part that makes you sound like a typical old, elitist person who can't adapt to a new technology that removes a lot of the "annoying" necessities with the previous technology. No one is stopping you from playing BW and not having to mingle with SC2 players.
Blizz decided to take the twitch out of strategy gaming, which is a move I totally agree with. Yes, the learning curve for a basic understanding of game play is much, much lower, but in the end it has the potential to be more fun to more people. "Less is more" is a beautiful thing in all aspects of life, and applying it to a game is not a bad thing. It's not like top level players have anything to fear, unless the only skill they have is being to click very quickly.
My gf never touched a strategy or FPS game in her life (she hates the concept of twitch-gaming), her entire experience was with Super Mario Galaxy & some other "casual" Wii games. I showed her SC2 in P1 and now she's hooked and has managed to learn all the basic skills (macro/micro), honestly it was an impressive transition seeing how SC2 actually manages to appeal to casual gamers, yet offers so many layers that it's nearly impossible for a non-pro to hit a skill ceiling, sort of like chess.
There are still mechanics, and I sure as hell don't feel good when losing to a good player even with the shitty ladder system which makes me feel good when just looking at the rankings.
I was a young SC player in the day, too immature to play ladder matches by a long shot but enjoyed UMS maps for a few years, and yes SC2 is "bringing me back to scene". But you know what? That's not a bad thing, and if you think it is, go back to playing on the BW ladder and don't just assume you can't have a conversation with someone because you're on an APM high-horse.
|
On July 10 2010 01:19 clusen wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2010 01:11 morimacil wrote:
I do understand the fact that people who spent hours upon hours training their multitasking skills and trying to get higher APM hate to see that "skill" go to waste.
but if I have the choice, I prefer a strategy game, where what strategy you do actually matters. I would prefer it much more to a mechanical game, where a win/loss is based more on how much multitasking you can do, how fast you can do it, and little on what your actual decisions are. A RTS it not only about "strategy" it is about strategy and execution. Otherwise your perfect game would just include a script that you write beforehand(your strategy), and you watch some AI-player executing it. Does that sound fun? I don't think so.
execution IMO is about proper timing and placement, not about how many things you can achieve that don't add value to your strategy.
Having to individually select buildings instead of selecting them all at once does not add value to a strategy, it only makes it more complicated. This might not be a great analogy, but look at it this way: Would chess be any better if you had to physically alter a piece each time you wanted to move?
|
Calgary26003 Posts
Should just be a toggle.
Save that, it should be move.
|
A RTS it not only about "strategy" it is about strategy and execution.
Otherwise your perfect game would just include a script that you write beforehand(your strategy), and you watch some AI-player executing it. Does that sound fun? I don't think so.
True, some part of execution is good. But stopping your units from suiciding themselves doesnt sound like "executing a strategy".
|
I for one am very disappointed in Blizzard's recent decision to change this mechanic of the game back to Attack-Move. I will admit, at first I longed for it, because I was used to it from Broodwar. But eventually I came to realize that the new way (rally-attack-move) is much better suited to SCII than it would have been to SC1.
SC2 is a much faster, more franticly paced game. This is what the designers were aiming for, and they achieved it with great success and good game design that is extremely fun to play. However, because of this fast-paced frantic playstyle, rally-attack-move is a lot more fitting. This is most easily expressed from a Zerg point of view, but it applies to all races. When the enemy beats you in that first battle in the middle of the map and rolls into your base while you have 20 roaches cued up to put up a second fight, you can rally them to where they are needed and save precious seconds to save your base.
With Rally-move you have those 20roaches cued up from 3 different hatcheries from 3 different points on the map, and u rally them to your main. Now you have to wait for them to hatch, then grab each group individually (one group from each hatchery), and re-apply the attack move command while frantically trying to defend your base. Is it micro that makes the good players stand out from the crowd? Perhaps, but IMHO I think it is annoying micro that detracts from the overall style and pace of play.
I'm not sure I expressed what I was thinking as clearly as I wanted to, but it shall suffice. What do you guys think?
|
United States47024 Posts
On July 10 2010 01:43 morimacil wrote:
True, some part of execution is good. But stopping your units from suiciding themselves doesnt sound like "executing a strategy".
Your units suicide themselves far more often if it's an attack-rally than a move-rally.
If you've got zealots coming 1-by-1 out of gateways, and they attack into a bunch of lings along the way, they're going to get killed. Don't pretend that with an attack-move command, single zealots rallied to an opponent's natural are going to be able to kill 12 zerglings sent to stop them. At least if you give them a move-rally, they might reach your other troops in time for you to do something about it.
|
On July 10 2010 09:58 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2010 01:43 morimacil wrote:
True, some part of execution is good. But stopping your units from suiciding themselves doesnt sound like "executing a strategy". Your units suicide themselves far more often if it's an attack-rally than a move-rally. If you've got zealots coming 1-by-1 out of gateways, and they attack into a bunch of lings along the way, they're going to get killed. Don't pretend that with an attack-move command, single zealots rallied to an opponent's natural are going to be able to kill 12 zerglings sent to stop them. At least if you give them a move-rally, they might reach your other troops in time for you to do something about it.
but isnt that what most of you want, having more things to look at and do, that adds micro to the game. saving a suuiciding unit is just as APM intensive as gathering units at ramp or w,e and sending them to attack if not even more APM intensive.
Not saying you said that you want more things to do, but thats what people where complaining about earlier (the game beinmg to easy).
|
On July 10 2010 00:15 mijones wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2010 00:10 HubertFelix wrote:On July 10 2010 00:00 Misrah wrote:
if it makes the game easier, then hell yes! do anything necessary! god forbid you have to baby sit your units ever- sc2 players have more pressing things to think about... like macro or micro ohh wait... This is not about easier or harder mechanics, it's about units doing what you told them to do. It's about control. yes, and the most control is where the game would provide you the ability to choose Rally-Move and Rally-Attack-Move. I think everyone would be happy to have both options available in-game. I've posted a suggestion thread on the official forums regarding this, here: http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=25968747183&postId=259664203839&sid=5000#0
ohh yea thanks for posting this up on the Official forums
|
Ok people who bash SC2 say that stuff like this is what made BW more 'skillful'. So to spite them I say leave it, I mean it does require a little bit more APM so your units don't just kill themselves when they spawn. So i say leave it to benefit the "skillfull" factor.
|
On July 10 2010 12:06 MadVillain wrote:
Ok people who bash SC2 say that stuff like this is what made BW more 'skillful'. So to spite them I say leave it, I mean it does require a little bit more APM so your units don't just kill themselves when they spawn. So i say leave it to benefit the "skillfull" factor.
thats just them there is other players too, people just gota get use to moving on and adapting to change, and where not even asking for change its more of an option. if players wanna be gosu then they dont have to use the feature. simple
|
A TOGGLE FOR IT is an absolutely fantastic idea. you could keep it move most of the time, and when your base is under attack toggle it, and bam, it's attack move. I think that's a very very good idea.
On July 09 2010 03:09 Chriamon wrote:
This change is retarded. I just lost a game because I nydused and set the rally to his worker line, and all my units suicided
Do they really expect me to individually select every unit as it comes out and tell it to attack? or do I have to wait until my entire army comes out of the nydus and then attack...
They really didn't think this through, they just changed it on a whim...
wow, lol. so much for nydus being zerg version of the nuke, eh...
On July 10 2010 00:31 Misrah wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2010 00:26 mijones wrote:On July 10 2010 00:19 Misrah wrote:
This thread makes me sick. i want to play a game that i don't need to play- blizz come up with a macro for everything so i can be a better strategist. If people are so worried about having to think about a few things, and or actually have mechanics to play the game- chess would be a great option, i mean you don't need any mechanics for that game, or macro- but micro you need that. this is about improving the mechanics to make the final release more fun, theres nothing wrong with that. we love the game, and that's why we want to have the mechanics portion perfected to our liking. metaphorically, it's almost as if blizzard invented automatic transmission. then forced everyone to switch back to manual transmission. Granted, alot of people love manual, but alot of people love automatic as well. Give the car owner the option to choose. LOL improving mechanics? what mechanics? the game is going to be playing its self soon. 1a2a3a is now just reduced to click rally points, use mbs to build army- which automatically walks to desired location and attacks. what a joke. If your idea of fun is just sitting around and playing a game a monkey could play then fine, but for me and thousands of other players, i actually want to move my fingers once and awhile.
oh please...consider all the crazy new splash in sc2...hunter seekers, psionic storms and banelings... rally every army unit to enemy base and just letting the units attack move only works if the opponent is too weak in skill to defend against a player attacking with 0 apm in micro. macro with 0 apm micro is overrated by you.
|
Toggle is best, if not that just go back to attack move. Attack move has far fewer problems. For instance say you are zerg fe and your main is under attack. Now you can no longer rally both hatches to your base because if you do your reincforments will get killed trying to walk through their army. It's dumb that you can't concentrate on microing your forces in your main because you have to watch the other hatch and attack move with the units coming out of it.
|
This is a RTS. I know it has been marketed and spruced up for the little public, but all you noobs need to realize this isn't supposed to be an automated game. You are supposed to control your army. P.S. Stop crying noobs. Ty.
|
also, it's too hard to set rally points as zerg if it's not attack move. if you have hatcheries everywhere expanding all over the map...unless you have a nydus for every base you can't safely gather your forces.
|
Btw, im pretty sure any argument for taking out the attack move rally could also be used as an argument for taking out the attack move command altogether, prove me wrong.
|
sounds like most of the people advocating for attack move rp are noobs that haven't played an RTS competitively before or just bad. i bet most of them made their TL account sometime early-mid 2010 and are probably below diamond or have less than 2:1 ratio in ladder
btw the diff between attack move command and attack-move rp is the rp is just an automated action where you can set it once and never look at your units again, whereas the a-move is actually actively telling your units to do something. its important to have an rts game where you actually have to control your own units
|
Eh.... It's good in some situations, but I liked the old Attack move RP better. I think you should be able to hold CTRL while setting a rally point to allow a person to choose whether or not it's an attack move RP.
|
I just dont understand why blizzard changed something that wasnt broken NO1 complained about this and they just come out of nowhere with this retarded patch iv lost 3 games so far because saviour units spawn and just die ( this is a big probleme for zerg) because everything is rallyed, protoss isnt effected to much because of the warp in and im not to sure about terran but i really want them to changed it back
|
I'm sorry for all of you that relied on the old system of rallying being attack move, but what you need to realize is that Blizzard is going to be changing the game often. The game is still in beta, and it is possible that rallying will be switched back to attack move, but until that time it is probably best that all of you get used to the new way that it works. Complaining about something isn't going to help you improve, and if you find a way to deal with how it works it won't bother you.
|
I liked attack more better then regular move - but this could be an option in game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
