EPTPump units out faster as Z - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Scorch
Austria3371 Posts
| ||
|
BurningSera
Ireland19621 Posts
On December 04 2010 16:09 JoeSchmoe wrote: it's sad because I didn't even know you could hold down one key until today.. you wont ever need to do that unless you are zerg in fairness  so dont feel sad! (if you are zerg than forget what i say >_>)the holding down key in all honesty really matters only to zerg players. i still see some zerg hate from blizzard here =_= | ||
|
ALPINA
3791 Posts
On topic: you can also bind Z X C all to zergling so you can spam even faster all 3 keys. | ||
|
ReketSomething
United States6012 Posts
| ||
|
dvide
United Kingdom287 Posts
On December 04 2010 19:31 ReketSomething wrote: I wonder if holding down f and then click click to cast forcefields are nonexistent now. I realized this 3 days ago and if it disappeared that would suck It's gone too. All instances of holding down a key to repeat presses is gone. What a terrible change. I understand why they removed it, because the repeat rate was dependent upon windows settings. I guess they used the same API for typing (by listening for WM_KEYDOWN events?). I have no idea whether this functionality was ever even possible on macs, which would give windows players an unfair advantage over them. But still, it wouldn't be too hard for them to re-implement the same repeat functionality for themselves with a consistent rate and small delay. Obviously a small delay is needed to prevent accidental repeats, but this is EASY. This needs to exist! It's so useful in many different contexts. Zergs just use it the most often  | ||
|
DoubleLariat
Canada190 Posts
On December 04 2010 17:26 JWill wrote: Do you ever hold down A to attack move? I press a, release a, then left click. If you do hold a, and are worried about this, you could set up autohotkey to not mouse-click-repeat for the A-key specifically. Focus firing should not be a problem, if you just right click on a unit, or a-click on a unit. >_< Reading my post again after having a good night's sleep made me realize how stupid my question was. Nice work around =D | ||
|
Galleon.frigate
Canada721 Posts
maybe there was a bug where holding down would sometimes cause some glitchy behaviour and that's all their fixing? -- small retort to those you feel that zerg needs/desirves this mechiancal nerf: it is by far my impression that zerg already has the most demanding macro, in there there is little wiggle room, every second that a hatch is not spawning larva can never be made up (with out the production of more hatch) where as it's common practice to drop multiple mules and mutli chronoboosts at little to no cost to the player. Production as zerg is actually mechanicly easier (I find at least) however it's hard to argue that this isn't more than offset by creep tumors and spawn larva. | ||
|
Scrimpton
United Kingdom465 Posts
If you are constantly spending your minerals and larvae as they are coming, i dont really see the issue. (and if you aren't, maybe its time to step up :D) | ||
|
King of Blades
United States94 Posts
On December 05 2010 00:49 Scrimpton wrote: But.. Good zerg players should aim for situations where they dont have thousands of banked mins and gas.. you know like other players of other races. If you are constantly spending your minerals and larvae as they are coming, i dont really see the issue. (and if you aren't, maybe its time to step up :D) Late game maxed armies where there's a ton of larva on each hatch is the only problem anyone has with this, other than mass ling early on which isn't that much of a problem. Replacing a 200/200 army through this seriously takes easily 8-10 seconds, waaaay too long considering how much apm zerg takes to play anyways. | ||
|
cannavaro
Italy86 Posts
| ||
|
blitzkrieger
United States512 Posts
| ||
|
floor exercise
Canada5847 Posts
On December 04 2010 19:31 Alpina wrote: The only reason I see why they made this is cause they thought zerg macro is too strong and you need to waste more time producing units. On topic: you can also bind Z X C all to zergling so you can spam even faster all 3 keys. If that's the excuse it's a horrible one. "This mechanic might be too strong, let's force the player to repeatedly press the same key 20-30 times, that will fix it" That is like the worst possible solution to a perceived problem. It's really awful, it's like two steps forward and countless steps back in streamlining the UI and mechanical requirements of SC2. Pressing the same key over and over is nothing like BW either, people using that excuse have clearly never played the game. | ||
|
King of Blades
United States94 Posts
On December 05 2010 01:25 blitzkrieger wrote: What really? This is a really bad change and I'm toss. I actually went into my keypress delay settings and turned it to the lowest (same for anything similar) because I realize its important when making a lot of units. Why Blizzard is doing this makes no sense. Even if this balanced the game 100% its really stupid and unfair to Zerg players mid/late game. Thank you. Thank you. You are seriously the only non zerg player I've seen so far who was unhappy about it and wasn't like "QQ moar zerg, u suck, cant press key 40 times in 3s? O.o goml scrub". Edit: not to say that there aren't any, but the general pattern is self stated zerg players = unhappy, self-stated T or P = QQ moar scrub. | ||
|
Jyon
United Kingdom39 Posts
Bind the zergling hotkey to mouse scroll up and mouse scroll down. Bam. | ||
|
Ryhn
United States509 Posts
I have carpal tunnel in both of my hands (Thanks BW! :3), and it was a saving grace to be able to hold down hotkeys for production/baneling morphs. This new button mashing is painful for me. My poor, poor hands. ; ~ ; | ||
|
stimtokolos
Australia77 Posts
On December 05 2010 01:35 Jyon wrote: Go counterstrike duelies style. Bind the zergling hotkey to mouse scroll up and mouse scroll down. Bam. This is a fantastic idea. Brb using mouse drivers to make MWHEELUP/DOWN register as Z. | ||
|
gdTyrael
49 Posts
| ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
| ||
|
Lobo2me
Norway1213 Posts
| ||
|
Sentrosi
United States2 Posts
On December 04 2010 17:22 Askesis wrote: If warp prism's gave us supply instead of requiring it, then yes, those would be exactly what I was talking about. Why in the world would you want to get supply capped if they killed a warp prism? | ||
| ||
