On October 29 2011 12:44 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:42 Talin wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:33 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:15 DEN1ED wrote:
On October 29 2011 11:10 ScoutingDrone wrote: BW is the equivalent of wheelchair basketball, and SC2 is the equivalent of normal basketball.
BW mechanics that makes it "harder" are nothing but unnecessary handicaps placed on players to make it "harder".
A few examples are: limited to 12 units per control group (unnecessary) no rally point for workers to minerals (unnecessary) cannot put multiple buildings in one control group (unnecessary)
As you can see, what makes BW "harder" are mostly caused by unnecessary handicaps, just like how wheelchair basketball is "harder" because you're handicapped and can't use your legs, but this doesn't make wheelchair basketball "better" than normal basketball.
But why is being able to rally your worker to mineral patches NECESSARY? You can do it yourself.
I'm sure if Blizzard had the idea and/or technology back then to automatically rally workers to the mineral patches and start mining, they would have. Seeing as they've done it in SC2, I don't see why they'd remove it in the future.
You shouldn't be so sure about things.
There were absolutely no technological or engine barriers to implementing this. As long as rally points are implemented, not only is it straightforward to have workers automine, but I can't imagine a program structure in which it would take more than a few harmless lines of code that wouldn't affect performance in the slightest.
As for the idea, it's actually very intuitive so I doubt it never crossed anyone's mind. Besides, there were a few RTS games back in the time that had automatic gathering of resources (though not in the SC2 sense, more like in make a building and it gives you stuff over time sense), they could have gotten the idea from a number of places.
It was just a design decision. Starcraft 1 was a classic RTS in every sense of the word - you order units, units finish building/training, and then you command units and tell them what you want them to do. It's actually a very clean and simple solution.
And yet they didn't implement it, and it's not to make the 'game harder for esports' because there was no motivation or foreknowledge at all to make SC1 a professional esport when they were developing it, but simply a design choice. They realized it was a bad choice, and fixed it in SC2. If it wasn't a bad idea, they wouldn't have allowed automining after worker creation in SC2.
Honestly if we are gonna go down that road, why not get rid of creep spread and larva inject, or just make them automatic, seeing as there is never a time you shouldn't be doing this.
On October 29 2011 11:10 ScoutingDrone wrote: BW is the equivalent of wheelchair basketball, and SC2 is the equivalent of normal basketball.
BW mechanics that makes it "harder" are nothing but unnecessary handicaps placed on players to make it "harder".
A few examples are: limited to 12 units per control group (unnecessary) no rally point for workers to minerals (unnecessary) cannot put multiple buildings in one control group (unnecessary)
As you can see, what makes BW "harder" are mostly caused by unnecessary handicaps, just like how wheelchair basketball is "harder" because you're handicapped and can't use your legs, but this doesn't make wheelchair basketball "better" than normal basketball.
If you think BW is "better" than SC2 because it has "harder mechanics", then I can make a better game than BW by tomorrow. I'll just copy everything about BW except make it so each control group is limited to only 3 units instead of 12. Does this make my game "harder" than BW? Yes. Does this make my game "better" than BW? Hmmmmm.....
Precisely. You can also add that pro players must juggle knives while they play inside a moving vehicle they are steering. BAM harder game right?
The difference is that juggling knives and riding wheelchairs make the game less exciting (oh well, at least the wheelchair part but the juggling thingie still makes the game enjoyable in another way) while watching people do difficult things in BW that create tension, drama and awe is not just because it´s harder for the sake of being hard, it´s because it´s harder for the sake of excitement.
Right, because having limited units per control group, no rally for workers, and no multiple buildings in one control group makes BW create more tension and drama right?
Yes actually.. i don't know why it's so hard to understand. Put MBS and everything else into BW, it would not have strategically evolved to this day. It makes the moments when people manage to pull off perfect spellcasting or army control more special, you don't see it every game. The mechanical difficultly directly led to it's success as an eSport. If people could play at a Flash level, say in 2001, then there would not have been the last 10 years of games. And 2001 is already 2 years after BW's release, so it wouldn't be a stretch to say it might have been possible for it to happen with MBS/automining/smartcasting etc.
If your logic is:
harder -> more special when something good happens
then you must enjoy watching wheelchair basketball more than normal basketball because:
wheelchair basketball -> harder to score -> more special when they do score -> wheelchair basketball better than normal basketball.
No joke wheelchair basketball is seriously intense shit. If the scene was not so much more developped or popular on the normal basketball side (and that you didn't have to be disabled to play (legitimately)) It would be so much better to just watch that instead.
Terrible analogy.
Wheelchair basketball is easier to score, how the hell do you block? Its like in netball, once the person gets to the net, the ball is basically in, no?. Like SC2, you know how the battle is gonna end up before it even begins.
lol actually wheelchair basketball is harder than normal basketball because not only do you not have legs, but its even harder to block. Thanks for proving the point.
On October 29 2011 12:52 Avan wrote: So, we all know BW players are living legends and we all know that their skill is theoretically far superior than the skill of SC2 players. Does it mean we'll finally have some crazy stuff going on in SC2? How's (im)balance going to affect this possible switch?
By the way, since English is not my first language, I want to know...
Is this the time to say "BRING IN THE BIG GUNS!" ?
They haven't switched yet, and may not for probably more than half a year, so not yet. When they do finally switch, then you can say it.
On October 29 2011 12:33 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:15 DEN1ED wrote:
On October 29 2011 11:10 ScoutingDrone wrote: BW is the equivalent of wheelchair basketball, and SC2 is the equivalent of normal basketball.
BW mechanics that makes it "harder" are nothing but unnecessary handicaps placed on players to make it "harder".
A few examples are: limited to 12 units per control group (unnecessary) no rally point for workers to minerals (unnecessary) cannot put multiple buildings in one control group (unnecessary)
As you can see, what makes BW "harder" are mostly caused by unnecessary handicaps, just like how wheelchair basketball is "harder" because you're handicapped and can't use your legs, but this doesn't make wheelchair basketball "better" than normal basketball.
But why is being able to rally your worker to mineral patches NECESSARY? You can do it yourself.
I'm sure if Blizzard had the idea and/or technology back then to automatically rally workers to the mineral patches and start mining, they would have. Seeing as they've done it in SC2, I don't see why they'd remove it in the future.
You shouldn't be so sure about things.
There were absolutely no technological or engine barriers to implementing this. As long as rally points are implemented, not only is it straightforward to have workers automine, but I can't imagine a program structure in which it would take more than a few harmless lines of code that wouldn't affect performance in the slightest.
As for the idea, it's actually very intuitive so I doubt it never crossed anyone's mind. Besides, there were a few RTS games back in the time that had automatic gathering of resources (though not in the SC2 sense, more like in make a building and it gives you stuff over time sense), they could have gotten the idea from a number of places.
It was just a design decision. Starcraft 1 was a classic RTS in every sense of the word - you order units, units finish building/training, and then you command units and tell them what you want them to do. It's actually a very clean and simple solution.
And yet they didn't implement it, and it's not to make the 'game harder for esports' because there was no motivation or foreknowledge at all to make SC1 a professional esport when they were developing it, but simply a design choice. They realized it was a bad choice, and fixed it in SC2. If it wasn't a bad idea, they wouldn't have allowed automining after worker creation in SC2.
How was it a bad choice? It's only the most successful RTS ever right. I guess some of you were not around at Starcraft's release because it was criticized for these things by reviewers back then even, usually being compared with Total Annihilation's systems (guess which game worked out long-term). Automining wasn't a novel concept and neither was MBS or any of the other things. Can't believe someone actually suggested technology was why it's not in haha.
It's in SC2 simply because everything about SC2 is supposed to be accessible and to a wide audience. It's certainly not more appropriate for competitive play to have it in; simply because they didn't replace any of the difficulty with anything else. I'm not against any of those features in an RTS. But the fact they didn't add difficulty in unit control or other areas to replace what's taken out, infact they simplified areas where it could have been made harder too.
On October 29 2011 12:44 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:42 Talin wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:33 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:15 DEN1ED wrote:
On October 29 2011 11:10 ScoutingDrone wrote: BW is the equivalent of wheelchair basketball, and SC2 is the equivalent of normal basketball.
BW mechanics that makes it "harder" are nothing but unnecessary handicaps placed on players to make it "harder".
A few examples are: limited to 12 units per control group (unnecessary) no rally point for workers to minerals (unnecessary) cannot put multiple buildings in one control group (unnecessary)
As you can see, what makes BW "harder" are mostly caused by unnecessary handicaps, just like how wheelchair basketball is "harder" because you're handicapped and can't use your legs, but this doesn't make wheelchair basketball "better" than normal basketball.
But why is being able to rally your worker to mineral patches NECESSARY? You can do it yourself.
I'm sure if Blizzard had the idea and/or technology back then to automatically rally workers to the mineral patches and start mining, they would have. Seeing as they've done it in SC2, I don't see why they'd remove it in the future.
You shouldn't be so sure about things.
There were absolutely no technological or engine barriers to implementing this. As long as rally points are implemented, not only is it straightforward to have workers automine, but I can't imagine a program structure in which it would take more than a few harmless lines of code that wouldn't affect performance in the slightest.
As for the idea, it's actually very intuitive so I doubt it never crossed anyone's mind. Besides, there were a few RTS games back in the time that had automatic gathering of resources (though not in the SC2 sense, more like in make a building and it gives you stuff over time sense), they could have gotten the idea from a number of places.
It was just a design decision. Starcraft 1 was a classic RTS in every sense of the word - you order units, units finish building/training, and then you command units and tell them what you want them to do. It's actually a very clean and simple solution.
And yet they didn't implement it, and it's not to make the 'game harder for esports' because there was no motivation or foreknowledge at all to make SC1 a professional esport when they were developing it, but simply a design choice. They realized it was a bad choice, and fixed it in SC2. If it wasn't a bad idea, they wouldn't have allowed automining after worker creation in SC2.
Because there is a choice between using the energy for creep tumor, or inject.
I don't think BW pros makes the decision to tell their workers to stay idle or mine every time they make a worker. Honestly if we are gonna go down that road, why not get rid of creep spread and larva inject, or just make them automatic, seeing as there is never a time you shouldn't be doing this.
Yes. They do.
The BW style of mechanics actually ADDS to the strategy of the game. It adds strategy in the RT sense of RTS though. It forces you to make a strategic choice about how your going to spend your APM. Do you go back and macro hard, or do you micro your shuttle/reaver in the big battle, or do you focus most on the storm drop your trying to execute at his third, or do you go and send your workers to mine. Because the BW interface is more cumbersome it makes these decision quite a bit more difficult since each of these choices takes more actions and effort to perform.
People never actually seem to grasp the point that time is also a resource and the thing that made it so successful over the years. Personally i like the difficulty even as a low level player; it's very rewarding. I like no-MBS macro particularly, keeping my supply high is a real challenge and fun. To me it's part of Starcraft. Controlling the game is the game. In an RTS like Supreme Commander/Total Annihilation, i can understand it as a design choice.
Sad because it seems like the old guards of Pro Gaming (CS 1.6, Quake, and SCBW) are all on there last legs or on the way out. HOW DEPRESSING!
I am excited though for what this could mean for Starcraft as a whole. I didn't want SC to turn into what happened with CS 1.6 and CSS where the communities were fractured.
But the thing that excites me the most is how I think (if they really switch over) it will push the skill ceiling to the next level. I think the current cream of the crop will still stick around when all the brood war talent switches over BUT I think the Brood War players will push the current Top SC2 players to do things they are getting by without doing. I will be perfectly honest with you, I don't think top pros are REALLY trying to push the limits of what they can do and are right now just getting by with being better and more experienced than other players. Maybe I am wrong but honestly I hope not because that would mean even better games in the future ^_^
On October 29 2011 12:33 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:15 DEN1ED wrote:
On October 29 2011 11:10 ScoutingDrone wrote: BW is the equivalent of wheelchair basketball, and SC2 is the equivalent of normal basketball.
BW mechanics that makes it "harder" are nothing but unnecessary handicaps placed on players to make it "harder".
A few examples are: limited to 12 units per control group (unnecessary) no rally point for workers to minerals (unnecessary) cannot put multiple buildings in one control group (unnecessary)
As you can see, what makes BW "harder" are mostly caused by unnecessary handicaps, just like how wheelchair basketball is "harder" because you're handicapped and can't use your legs, but this doesn't make wheelchair basketball "better" than normal basketball.
But why is being able to rally your worker to mineral patches NECESSARY? You can do it yourself.
I'm sure if Blizzard had the idea and/or technology back then to automatically rally workers to the mineral patches and start mining, they would have. Seeing as they've done it in SC2, I don't see why they'd remove it in the future.
You shouldn't be so sure about things.
There were absolutely no technological or engine barriers to implementing this. As long as rally points are implemented, not only is it straightforward to have workers automine, but I can't imagine a program structure in which it would take more than a few harmless lines of code that wouldn't affect performance in the slightest.
As for the idea, it's actually very intuitive so I doubt it never crossed anyone's mind. Besides, there were a few RTS games back in the time that had automatic gathering of resources (though not in the SC2 sense, more like in make a building and it gives you stuff over time sense), they could have gotten the idea from a number of places.
It was just a design decision. Starcraft 1 was a classic RTS in every sense of the word - you order units, units finish building/training, and then you command units and tell them what you want them to do. It's actually a very clean and simple solution.
And yet they didn't implement it, and it's not to make the 'game harder for esports' because there was no motivation or foreknowledge at all to make SC1 a professional esport when they were developing it, but simply a design choice. They realized it was a bad choice, and fixed it in SC2. If it wasn't a bad idea, they wouldn't have allowed automining after worker creation in SC2.
1. It was (and still is) a valid design choice regardless of e-sports. Nobody complained about it, nor was it ever a topic of discussion. You have no arguments to call it a "bad" choice (obviously you can dislike it, but that's not the same).
2. People who worked on design and made decisions for Starcraft 1 are not making decisions for Starcraft 2. So they didn't "realize" anything or "fix" anything. The new team made its own choices, for better or worse. Just like different choices were made for WC3 (and they were not made to fix perceived problems in SC1).
On October 29 2011 12:44 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:42 Talin wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:33 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:15 DEN1ED wrote:
On October 29 2011 11:10 ScoutingDrone wrote: BW is the equivalent of wheelchair basketball, and SC2 is the equivalent of normal basketball.
BW mechanics that makes it "harder" are nothing but unnecessary handicaps placed on players to make it "harder".
A few examples are: limited to 12 units per control group (unnecessary) no rally point for workers to minerals (unnecessary) cannot put multiple buildings in one control group (unnecessary)
As you can see, what makes BW "harder" are mostly caused by unnecessary handicaps, just like how wheelchair basketball is "harder" because you're handicapped and can't use your legs, but this doesn't make wheelchair basketball "better" than normal basketball.
But why is being able to rally your worker to mineral patches NECESSARY? You can do it yourself.
I'm sure if Blizzard had the idea and/or technology back then to automatically rally workers to the mineral patches and start mining, they would have. Seeing as they've done it in SC2, I don't see why they'd remove it in the future.
You shouldn't be so sure about things.
There were absolutely no technological or engine barriers to implementing this. As long as rally points are implemented, not only is it straightforward to have workers automine, but I can't imagine a program structure in which it would take more than a few harmless lines of code that wouldn't affect performance in the slightest.
As for the idea, it's actually very intuitive so I doubt it never crossed anyone's mind. Besides, there were a few RTS games back in the time that had automatic gathering of resources (though not in the SC2 sense, more like in make a building and it gives you stuff over time sense), they could have gotten the idea from a number of places.
It was just a design decision. Starcraft 1 was a classic RTS in every sense of the word - you order units, units finish building/training, and then you command units and tell them what you want them to do. It's actually a very clean and simple solution.
And yet they didn't implement it, and it's not to make the 'game harder for esports' because there was no motivation or foreknowledge at all to make SC1 a professional esport when they were developing it, but simply a design choice. They realized it was a bad choice, and fixed it in SC2. If it wasn't a bad idea, they wouldn't have allowed automining after worker creation in SC2.
How was it a bad choice? It's only the most successful RTS ever right. I guess some of you were not around at Starcraft's release because it was criticized for these things by reviewers back then even, usually being compared with Total Annihilation's systems (guess which game worked out long-term). Automining wasn't a novel concept and neither was MBS or any of the other things. Can't believe someone actually suggested technology was why it's not in haha.
It's in SC2 simply because everything about SC2 is supposed to be accessible and to a wide audience.
Not having automine was the right choice at the time for BW. There wasn't such a goal of making it accessible for casual players, things like no automining weren't seen as repetitive or especially clunky, and there wasn't even really an environment/culture of casual gaming at the time.
For SC2, automining was the right choice as well. I don't think it's because automining is inherently better or worse choice for a game but it simply fits the times and the market blizzard is aiming for much, much better.
On October 29 2011 12:44 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:42 Talin wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:33 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:15 DEN1ED wrote:
On October 29 2011 11:10 ScoutingDrone wrote: BW is the equivalent of wheelchair basketball, and SC2 is the equivalent of normal basketball.
BW mechanics that makes it "harder" are nothing but unnecessary handicaps placed on players to make it "harder".
A few examples are: limited to 12 units per control group (unnecessary) no rally point for workers to minerals (unnecessary) cannot put multiple buildings in one control group (unnecessary)
As you can see, what makes BW "harder" are mostly caused by unnecessary handicaps, just like how wheelchair basketball is "harder" because you're handicapped and can't use your legs, but this doesn't make wheelchair basketball "better" than normal basketball.
But why is being able to rally your worker to mineral patches NECESSARY? You can do it yourself.
I'm sure if Blizzard had the idea and/or technology back then to automatically rally workers to the mineral patches and start mining, they would have. Seeing as they've done it in SC2, I don't see why they'd remove it in the future.
You shouldn't be so sure about things.
There were absolutely no technological or engine barriers to implementing this. As long as rally points are implemented, not only is it straightforward to have workers automine, but I can't imagine a program structure in which it would take more than a few harmless lines of code that wouldn't affect performance in the slightest.
As for the idea, it's actually very intuitive so I doubt it never crossed anyone's mind. Besides, there were a few RTS games back in the time that had automatic gathering of resources (though not in the SC2 sense, more like in make a building and it gives you stuff over time sense), they could have gotten the idea from a number of places.
It was just a design decision. Starcraft 1 was a classic RTS in every sense of the word - you order units, units finish building/training, and then you command units and tell them what you want them to do. It's actually a very clean and simple solution.
And yet they didn't implement it, and it's not to make the 'game harder for esports' because there was no motivation or foreknowledge at all to make SC1 a professional esport when they were developing it, but simply a design choice. They realized it was a bad choice, and fixed it in SC2. If it wasn't a bad idea, they wouldn't have allowed automining after worker creation in SC2.
Because there is a choice between using the energy for creep tumor, or inject.
I don't think BW pros makes the decision to tell their workers to stay idle or mine every time they make a worker. Honestly if we are gonna go down that road, why not get rid of creep spread and larva inject, or just make them automatic, seeing as there is never a time you shouldn't be doing this.
Yes. They do.
The BW style of mechanics actually ADDS to the strategy of the game. It adds strategy in the RT sense of RTS though. It forces you to make a strategic choice about how your going to spend your APM. Do you go back and macro hard, or do you micro your shuttle/reaver in the big battle, or do you focus most on the storm drop your trying to execute at his third, or do you go and send your workers to mine. Because the BW interface is more cumbersome it makes these decision quite a bit more difficult since each of these choices takes more actions and effort to perform.
Being forced to repeat that same action 60-70 times a game requires no decision making. Yes, it is very mechanically demanding, but no, a player who couldn't keep up with sending his workers to mineral patches while micro-ing a battle at the front is simply not mechanically competent enough, and not that is not because he's not *strategically* sound. There's no decision making involved in that.
I'll agree that having a max unit selection of 12 might make things very strategical because of how you assign unit groupings, and how you would actually have to make decisions to send them to various parts of the map. But it is definitely a no-brainer *decision* (if you can call it that) to send workers to mine.
On October 29 2011 12:44 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:42 Talin wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:33 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:15 DEN1ED wrote:
On October 29 2011 11:10 ScoutingDrone wrote: BW is the equivalent of wheelchair basketball, and SC2 is the equivalent of normal basketball.
BW mechanics that makes it "harder" are nothing but unnecessary handicaps placed on players to make it "harder".
A few examples are: limited to 12 units per control group (unnecessary) no rally point for workers to minerals (unnecessary) cannot put multiple buildings in one control group (unnecessary)
As you can see, what makes BW "harder" are mostly caused by unnecessary handicaps, just like how wheelchair basketball is "harder" because you're handicapped and can't use your legs, but this doesn't make wheelchair basketball "better" than normal basketball.
But why is being able to rally your worker to mineral patches NECESSARY? You can do it yourself.
I'm sure if Blizzard had the idea and/or technology back then to automatically rally workers to the mineral patches and start mining, they would have. Seeing as they've done it in SC2, I don't see why they'd remove it in the future.
You shouldn't be so sure about things.
There were absolutely no technological or engine barriers to implementing this. As long as rally points are implemented, not only is it straightforward to have workers automine, but I can't imagine a program structure in which it would take more than a few harmless lines of code that wouldn't affect performance in the slightest.
As for the idea, it's actually very intuitive so I doubt it never crossed anyone's mind. Besides, there were a few RTS games back in the time that had automatic gathering of resources (though not in the SC2 sense, more like in make a building and it gives you stuff over time sense), they could have gotten the idea from a number of places.
It was just a design decision. Starcraft 1 was a classic RTS in every sense of the word - you order units, units finish building/training, and then you command units and tell them what you want them to do. It's actually a very clean and simple solution.
And yet they didn't implement it, and it's not to make the 'game harder for esports' because there was no motivation or foreknowledge at all to make SC1 a professional esport when they were developing it, but simply a design choice. They realized it was a bad choice, and fixed it in SC2. If it wasn't a bad idea, they wouldn't have allowed automining after worker creation in SC2.
Honestly if we are gonna go down that road, why not get rid of creep spread and larva inject, or just make them automatic, seeing as there is never a time you shouldn't be doing this.
Because they aren't even comparable, and you do not want to have them done ALL the time. Creep spread requires decision making to place a tumor at a preferable location for efficiency, and there are times when you wouldn't want to spread creep because there are hellions waiting at your door step.
Likewise some people wouldn't want to spend that 25 energy on injecting immediately, and would rather use it on a fresh creep tumor or even pool up for transfuse. There is decision making at every turn.
A freshly created worker is going to be mining 95% of the time.
99% of the time the queen will be injecting (unless its the second built queen which drops a tumor before going to the natural and then after that its all injects), if you do a Spanishiwa build you will already have some queens for creep tumors or transfusion. Queens will save up some energy anyway even if you have perfect injects.
The amount of decision making for creep spread is the same as deciding which mineral patch I should send my scv to (which adds to mining efficiency) and whether I'm being harassed or not.
95% of the time its creep spread finished, creep spread some more, just like sending workers to mine.
Honestly its a really poor argument to start off with, because when SC3 comes out, im sure SC2 fanboys will also start complaining about toggled unit production, automatic creep spread, and more C&C units.
On October 29 2011 12:44 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:42 Talin wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:33 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:15 DEN1ED wrote:
On October 29 2011 11:10 ScoutingDrone wrote: BW is the equivalent of wheelchair basketball, and SC2 is the equivalent of normal basketball.
BW mechanics that makes it "harder" are nothing but unnecessary handicaps placed on players to make it "harder".
A few examples are: limited to 12 units per control group (unnecessary) no rally point for workers to minerals (unnecessary) cannot put multiple buildings in one control group (unnecessary)
As you can see, what makes BW "harder" are mostly caused by unnecessary handicaps, just like how wheelchair basketball is "harder" because you're handicapped and can't use your legs, but this doesn't make wheelchair basketball "better" than normal basketball.
But why is being able to rally your worker to mineral patches NECESSARY? You can do it yourself.
I'm sure if Blizzard had the idea and/or technology back then to automatically rally workers to the mineral patches and start mining, they would have. Seeing as they've done it in SC2, I don't see why they'd remove it in the future.
You shouldn't be so sure about things.
There were absolutely no technological or engine barriers to implementing this. As long as rally points are implemented, not only is it straightforward to have workers automine, but I can't imagine a program structure in which it would take more than a few harmless lines of code that wouldn't affect performance in the slightest.
As for the idea, it's actually very intuitive so I doubt it never crossed anyone's mind. Besides, there were a few RTS games back in the time that had automatic gathering of resources (though not in the SC2 sense, more like in make a building and it gives you stuff over time sense), they could have gotten the idea from a number of places.
It was just a design decision. Starcraft 1 was a classic RTS in every sense of the word - you order units, units finish building/training, and then you command units and tell them what you want them to do. It's actually a very clean and simple solution.
And yet they didn't implement it, and it's not to make the 'game harder for esports' because there was no motivation or foreknowledge at all to make SC1 a professional esport when they were developing it, but simply a design choice. They realized it was a bad choice, and fixed it in SC2. If it wasn't a bad idea, they wouldn't have allowed automining after worker creation in SC2.
Because there is a choice between using the energy for creep tumor, or inject.
I don't think BW pros makes the decision to tell their workers to stay idle or mine every time they make a worker. Honestly if we are gonna go down that road, why not get rid of creep spread and larva inject, or just make them automatic, seeing as there is never a time you shouldn't be doing this.
Yes. They do.
The BW style of mechanics actually ADDS to the strategy of the game. It adds strategy in the RT sense of RTS though. It forces you to make a strategic choice about how your going to spend your APM. Do you go back and macro hard, or do you micro your shuttle/reaver in the big battle, or do you focus most on the storm drop your trying to execute at his third, or do you go and send your workers to mine. Because the BW interface is more cumbersome it makes these decision quite a bit more difficult since each of these choices takes more actions and effort to perform.
Being forced to repeat that same action 60-70 times a game requires no decision making. Yes, it is very mechanically demanding, but no, a player who couldn't keep up with sending his workers to mineral patches while micro-ing a battle at the front is simply not mechanically competent enough, and not that is not because he's not *strategically* sound. There's no decision making involved in that.
I'll agree that having a max unit selection of 12 might make things very strategical because of how you assign unit groupings, and how you would actually have to make decisions to send them to various parts of the map. But it is definitely a no-brainer *decision* (if you can call it that) to send workers to mine.
Stork is one of the top four players in BW and he sometimes leaves 5 idle workers at every base. Its his strategy and micro that gets him where he is.
That's the thing about BW, being specialised in any aspect of an RTS can get you to the top. Mechanics, Strategy, Metagaming, GameSense, doesn't matter, they all make a huge difference in how you will do as a player.
I don't get the same feeling from SC2. I feel like SC2 forces me into a certain style of play that I don't like, what units does he have? how do I counter it? Sure this existed in BW too, but it was an aspect I compensated with by doing other things. In BW as long as you are good at your own style, you will be good. I guess this has less to do with MBS or sending SCV's to mine though, that the game as a whole.
No to make it clear i agree totally; it worked for BW. It was the right choice. The one thing i think SC2 maybe could lose is smartcasting, but the rest basically had to be done because of the target audience.
One other people people don't get is the fact the difficulty actually adds to the amount of viable strategies. There's BW strategies entirely dependent on micro and hanging on with the minimal of expense to get into the mid/late game far more so than SC2 where you'll just get a-moved and lose. Not to mention the fact there's builds which are unique and mostly specific to players like Leta's 2port wraith, Jaedong's all-in 2hatch muta with 2 group muta control etc.. Helps gives the players a unique style that is great for spectating.
On October 29 2011 12:44 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:42 Talin wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:33 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:15 DEN1ED wrote:
On October 29 2011 11:10 ScoutingDrone wrote: BW is the equivalent of wheelchair basketball, and SC2 is the equivalent of normal basketball.
BW mechanics that makes it "harder" are nothing but unnecessary handicaps placed on players to make it "harder".
A few examples are: limited to 12 units per control group (unnecessary) no rally point for workers to minerals (unnecessary) cannot put multiple buildings in one control group (unnecessary)
As you can see, what makes BW "harder" are mostly caused by unnecessary handicaps, just like how wheelchair basketball is "harder" because you're handicapped and can't use your legs, but this doesn't make wheelchair basketball "better" than normal basketball.
But why is being able to rally your worker to mineral patches NECESSARY? You can do it yourself.
I'm sure if Blizzard had the idea and/or technology back then to automatically rally workers to the mineral patches and start mining, they would have. Seeing as they've done it in SC2, I don't see why they'd remove it in the future.
You shouldn't be so sure about things.
There were absolutely no technological or engine barriers to implementing this. As long as rally points are implemented, not only is it straightforward to have workers automine, but I can't imagine a program structure in which it would take more than a few harmless lines of code that wouldn't affect performance in the slightest.
As for the idea, it's actually very intuitive so I doubt it never crossed anyone's mind. Besides, there were a few RTS games back in the time that had automatic gathering of resources (though not in the SC2 sense, more like in make a building and it gives you stuff over time sense), they could have gotten the idea from a number of places.
It was just a design decision. Starcraft 1 was a classic RTS in every sense of the word - you order units, units finish building/training, and then you command units and tell them what you want them to do. It's actually a very clean and simple solution.
And yet they didn't implement it, and it's not to make the 'game harder for esports' because there was no motivation or foreknowledge at all to make SC1 a professional esport when they were developing it, but simply a design choice. They realized it was a bad choice, and fixed it in SC2. If it wasn't a bad idea, they wouldn't have allowed automining after worker creation in SC2.
Because there is a choice between using the energy for creep tumor, or inject.
I don't think BW pros makes the decision to tell their workers to stay idle or mine every time they make a worker. Honestly if we are gonna go down that road, why not get rid of creep spread and larva inject, or just make them automatic, seeing as there is never a time you shouldn't be doing this.
Yes. They do.
The BW style of mechanics actually ADDS to the strategy of the game. It adds strategy in the RT sense of RTS though. It forces you to make a strategic choice about how your going to spend your APM. Do you go back and macro hard, or do you micro your shuttle/reaver in the big battle, or do you focus most on the storm drop your trying to execute at his third, or do you go and send your workers to mine. Because the BW interface is more cumbersome it makes these decision quite a bit more difficult since each of these choices takes more actions and effort to perform.
Being forced to repeat that same action 60-70 times a game requires no decision making. Yes, it is very mechanically demanding, but no, a player who couldn't keep up with sending his workers to mineral patches while micro-ing a battle at the front is simply not mechanically competent enough, and not that is not because he's not *strategically* sound. There's no decision making involved in that.
I'll agree that having a max unit selection of 12 might make things very strategical because of how you assign unit groupings, and how you would actually have to make decisions to send them to various parts of the map. But it is definitely a no-brainer *decision* (if you can call it that) to send workers to mine.
Like i already posted if you want only decisions you don't want a real-time strategy, and there's plenty of examples in SC2 which can be automated. The only reason macro mechanics are even in the game is to add something repetitive to actually do, literally the only reason they were in is to add some extra mechanical difficulty. Doesn't go far enough at all imo though.
'm not defending or refuting the post you responded to, but merely responding to your post alone (DEN1ED). I think it is a balancing act. People only have so much APM, would you rather they dedicate it to moving individual workers and maintaining they sort of structure, or use it elsewhere (wherever that may be). There is no right answer, and it all comes down to design, but I don't think it is necessary as long as there is another outlet for that APM. For example, you may not have to focus on mining as much in BW as in SC2, but perhaps you need to redirect that APM towards building placement and movement since in SC2 buildings tend by more dynamic then in BW.
No right or wrong, just design. I would say the streamlined mining system would be a negative if it was purely a streamline with no other competitive outlet to put that energy towards. As of now I see it as just a redirection of focus, rather then a standalone easy-button.
(I posted this a few pages back, in response to the one of the posts that sparked this argument, but I kinda think its relevant more so now then back then. Either that or it was overlooked because it was so intensely wrong. I hoping the thread was just moving fast >_<)
On October 29 2011 12:44 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:42 Talin wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:33 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:15 DEN1ED wrote:
On October 29 2011 11:10 ScoutingDrone wrote: BW is the equivalent of wheelchair basketball, and SC2 is the equivalent of normal basketball.
BW mechanics that makes it "harder" are nothing but unnecessary handicaps placed on players to make it "harder".
A few examples are: limited to 12 units per control group (unnecessary) no rally point for workers to minerals (unnecessary) cannot put multiple buildings in one control group (unnecessary)
As you can see, what makes BW "harder" are mostly caused by unnecessary handicaps, just like how wheelchair basketball is "harder" because you're handicapped and can't use your legs, but this doesn't make wheelchair basketball "better" than normal basketball.
But why is being able to rally your worker to mineral patches NECESSARY? You can do it yourself.
I'm sure if Blizzard had the idea and/or technology back then to automatically rally workers to the mineral patches and start mining, they would have. Seeing as they've done it in SC2, I don't see why they'd remove it in the future.
You shouldn't be so sure about things.
There were absolutely no technological or engine barriers to implementing this. As long as rally points are implemented, not only is it straightforward to have workers automine, but I can't imagine a program structure in which it would take more than a few harmless lines of code that wouldn't affect performance in the slightest.
As for the idea, it's actually very intuitive so I doubt it never crossed anyone's mind. Besides, there were a few RTS games back in the time that had automatic gathering of resources (though not in the SC2 sense, more like in make a building and it gives you stuff over time sense), they could have gotten the idea from a number of places.
It was just a design decision. Starcraft 1 was a classic RTS in every sense of the word - you order units, units finish building/training, and then you command units and tell them what you want them to do. It's actually a very clean and simple solution.
And yet they didn't implement it, and it's not to make the 'game harder for esports' because there was no motivation or foreknowledge at all to make SC1 a professional esport when they were developing it, but simply a design choice. They realized it was a bad choice, and fixed it in SC2. If it wasn't a bad idea, they wouldn't have allowed automining after worker creation in SC2.
Honestly if we are gonna go down that road, why not get rid of creep spread and larva inject, or just make them automatic, seeing as there is never a time you shouldn't be doing this.
Because they aren't even comparable, and you do not want to have them done ALL the time. Creep spread requires decision making to place a tumor at a preferable location for efficiency, and there are times when you wouldn't want to spread creep because there are hellions waiting at your door step.
Likewise some people wouldn't want to spend that 25 energy on injecting immediately, and would rather use it on a fresh creep tumor or even pool up for transfuse. There is decision making at every turn.
A freshly created worker is going to be mining 95% of the time.
99% of the time the queen will be injecting (unless its the second built queen which drops a tumor before going to the natural and then after that its all injects), if you do a Spanishiwa build you will already have some queens for creep tumors or transfusion.
The amount of decision making for creep spread is the same as deciding which mineral patch I should send my scv to (which adds to mining efficiency) and whether I'm being harassed or not.
95% of the time its creep spread finished, creep spread some more, just like sending workers to mine.
Honestly its a really poor argument to start off with, because when SC3 comes out, im sure SC2 fanboys will also start complaining about toggled unit production, automatic creep spread, and more C&C units.
No, because you actually have to decide on where to extend the tumor. Sometimes you need it to go inward towards your base, sometimes you need to connect your natural to your main, and sometimes you need it to go in different directions if your natural is wide and open. So no, AI won't help you in WHERE would you want it at all.
And again, you don't want it to spread when it's within sight of enemy forces, because for obvious reasons they would just walk forward to kill it (i.e hellions).
There are also cases of queens dropping multiple tumors at the same spot in order to make creep spread go even faster. So yes, queens can pool energy for multiple reasons.
On October 29 2011 12:44 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:42 Talin wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:33 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:15 DEN1ED wrote:
On October 29 2011 11:10 ScoutingDrone wrote: BW is the equivalent of wheelchair basketball, and SC2 is the equivalent of normal basketball.
BW mechanics that makes it "harder" are nothing but unnecessary handicaps placed on players to make it "harder".
A few examples are: limited to 12 units per control group (unnecessary) no rally point for workers to minerals (unnecessary) cannot put multiple buildings in one control group (unnecessary)
As you can see, what makes BW "harder" are mostly caused by unnecessary handicaps, just like how wheelchair basketball is "harder" because you're handicapped and can't use your legs, but this doesn't make wheelchair basketball "better" than normal basketball.
But why is being able to rally your worker to mineral patches NECESSARY? You can do it yourself.
I'm sure if Blizzard had the idea and/or technology back then to automatically rally workers to the mineral patches and start mining, they would have. Seeing as they've done it in SC2, I don't see why they'd remove it in the future.
You shouldn't be so sure about things.
There were absolutely no technological or engine barriers to implementing this. As long as rally points are implemented, not only is it straightforward to have workers automine, but I can't imagine a program structure in which it would take more than a few harmless lines of code that wouldn't affect performance in the slightest.
As for the idea, it's actually very intuitive so I doubt it never crossed anyone's mind. Besides, there were a few RTS games back in the time that had automatic gathering of resources (though not in the SC2 sense, more like in make a building and it gives you stuff over time sense), they could have gotten the idea from a number of places.
It was just a design decision. Starcraft 1 was a classic RTS in every sense of the word - you order units, units finish building/training, and then you command units and tell them what you want them to do. It's actually a very clean and simple solution.
And yet they didn't implement it, and it's not to make the 'game harder for esports' because there was no motivation or foreknowledge at all to make SC1 a professional esport when they were developing it, but simply a design choice. They realized it was a bad choice, and fixed it in SC2. If it wasn't a bad idea, they wouldn't have allowed automining after worker creation in SC2.
Because there is a choice between using the energy for creep tumor, or inject.
I don't think BW pros makes the decision to tell their workers to stay idle or mine every time they make a worker. Honestly if we are gonna go down that road, why not get rid of creep spread and larva inject, or just make them automatic, seeing as there is never a time you shouldn't be doing this.
Yes. They do.
The BW style of mechanics actually ADDS to the strategy of the game. It adds strategy in the RT sense of RTS though. It forces you to make a strategic choice about how your going to spend your APM. Do you go back and macro hard, or do you micro your shuttle/reaver in the big battle, or do you focus most on the storm drop your trying to execute at his third, or do you go and send your workers to mine. Because the BW interface is more cumbersome it makes these decision quite a bit more difficult since each of these choices takes more actions and effort to perform.
Being forced to repeat that same action 60-70 times a game requires no decision making. Yes, it is very mechanically demanding, but no, a player who couldn't keep up with sending his workers to mineral patches while micro-ing a battle at the front is simply not mechanically competent enough, and not that is not because he's not *strategically* sound. There's no decision making involved in that.
I'll agree that having a max unit selection of 12 might make things very strategical because of how you assign unit groupings, and how you would actually have to make decisions to send them to various parts of the map. But it is definitely a no-brainer *decision* (if you can call it that) to send workers to mine.
Then there is no such thing as a mechanically competent player. Even top BW players have times were workers are sent or macro slips. Usually this is because they are trying to do 4 or 5 things at once, and have to make a choice which things they will allow to slip.
Yes, it's a no brainer decision that you want to send your workers to mine. However, its a strategic decision to actually choose to do so if your trying to deal with an attack at your front, harass at your main, and harass of your own at his base. You have 4 or 5 things you can choose to do.
1)Send workers to mine 2)Micro defense at front 3)Micro drop defense 4)Micro your own drop 5)Keep up with macro, add pylons
It's not possible to do all 5 optimally so your forced to make a choice about which ones you want to prioritize and which ones you want to let slip. All 5 of these are things you want to do. If it was possible to have the APM to do all 5, I feel it would be a no-brainer to do all 5. But no one can so they must make a choice about how to spend their time. It's an RT choice, as opposed to an S choice; but I would still argue that it's a tactical/strategic decision.
I'm not saying that forcing players to choose how to allocate APM like this with a less automated interface is a good way to add extra strategical considerations or is necessary for a good, interesting RTS. But I feel strongly it is a strategic issue.
On October 29 2011 13:13 infinity2k9 wrote: No to make it clear i agree totally; it worked for BW. It was the right choice. The one thing i think SC2 maybe could lose is smartcasting, but the rest basically had to be done because of the target audience.
One other people people don't get is the fact the difficulty actually adds to the amount of viable strategies. There's BW strategies entirely dependent on micro and hanging on with the minimal of expense to get into the mid/late game far more so than SC2 where you'll just get a-moved and lose. Not to mention the fact there's builds which are unique and mostly specific to players like Leta's 2port wraith, Jaedong's all-in 2hatch muta with 2 group muta control etc.. Helps gives the players a unique style that is great for spectating.
On October 29 2011 12:44 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:42 Talin wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:33 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On October 29 2011 12:15 DEN1ED wrote:
On October 29 2011 11:10 ScoutingDrone wrote: BW is the equivalent of wheelchair basketball, and SC2 is the equivalent of normal basketball.
BW mechanics that makes it "harder" are nothing but unnecessary handicaps placed on players to make it "harder".
A few examples are: limited to 12 units per control group (unnecessary) no rally point for workers to minerals (unnecessary) cannot put multiple buildings in one control group (unnecessary)
As you can see, what makes BW "harder" are mostly caused by unnecessary handicaps, just like how wheelchair basketball is "harder" because you're handicapped and can't use your legs, but this doesn't make wheelchair basketball "better" than normal basketball.
But why is being able to rally your worker to mineral patches NECESSARY? You can do it yourself.
I'm sure if Blizzard had the idea and/or technology back then to automatically rally workers to the mineral patches and start mining, they would have. Seeing as they've done it in SC2, I don't see why they'd remove it in the future.
You shouldn't be so sure about things.
There were absolutely no technological or engine barriers to implementing this. As long as rally points are implemented, not only is it straightforward to have workers automine, but I can't imagine a program structure in which it would take more than a few harmless lines of code that wouldn't affect performance in the slightest.
As for the idea, it's actually very intuitive so I doubt it never crossed anyone's mind. Besides, there were a few RTS games back in the time that had automatic gathering of resources (though not in the SC2 sense, more like in make a building and it gives you stuff over time sense), they could have gotten the idea from a number of places.
It was just a design decision. Starcraft 1 was a classic RTS in every sense of the word - you order units, units finish building/training, and then you command units and tell them what you want them to do. It's actually a very clean and simple solution.
And yet they didn't implement it, and it's not to make the 'game harder for esports' because there was no motivation or foreknowledge at all to make SC1 a professional esport when they were developing it, but simply a design choice. They realized it was a bad choice, and fixed it in SC2. If it wasn't a bad idea, they wouldn't have allowed automining after worker creation in SC2.
Because there is a choice between using the energy for creep tumor, or inject.
I don't think BW pros makes the decision to tell their workers to stay idle or mine every time they make a worker. Honestly if we are gonna go down that road, why not get rid of creep spread and larva inject, or just make them automatic, seeing as there is never a time you shouldn't be doing this.
Yes. They do.
The BW style of mechanics actually ADDS to the strategy of the game. It adds strategy in the RT sense of RTS though. It forces you to make a strategic choice about how your going to spend your APM. Do you go back and macro hard, or do you micro your shuttle/reaver in the big battle, or do you focus most on the storm drop your trying to execute at his third, or do you go and send your workers to mine. Because the BW interface is more cumbersome it makes these decision quite a bit more difficult since each of these choices takes more actions and effort to perform.
Being forced to repeat that same action 60-70 times a game requires no decision making. Yes, it is very mechanically demanding, but no, a player who couldn't keep up with sending his workers to mineral patches while micro-ing a battle at the front is simply not mechanically competent enough, and not that is not because he's not *strategically* sound. There's no decision making involved in that.
I'll agree that having a max unit selection of 12 might make things very strategical because of how you assign unit groupings, and how you would actually have to make decisions to send them to various parts of the map. But it is definitely a no-brainer *decision* (if you can call it that) to send workers to mine.
Like i already posted if you want only decisions you don't want a real-time strategy, and there's plenty of examples in SC2 which can be automated. The only reason macro mechanics are even in the game is to add something repetitive to actually do.
I'm all for real time strategy. I didn't say not having MBS in BW was retarded, and I even mentioned that having a max unit selection of 12 was very strategic, and both of these contributed to the mechanical difficulty which I have no objection to.
If you had actually read my post, I said that sending workers to mine involved ZERO decision making. Sending workers to mine manually doesn't make BW more strategic.
Macro mechanics aren't comparable. There is always a chance of you making a decision involving churning a different unit out of the same production structure at every cycle.
I'm referring to a freshly produced worker that just came out of your main.
99% of the time the queen will be injecting (unless its the second built queen which drops a tumor before going to the natural and then after that its all injects), if you do a Spanishiwa build you will already have some queens for creep tumors or transfusion.
The amount of decision making for creep spread is the same as deciding which mineral patch I should send my scv to (which adds to mining efficiency) and whether I'm being harassed or not.
95% of the time its creep spread finished, creep spread some more, just like sending workers to mine.
Honestly its a really poor argument to start off with, because when SC3 comes out, im sure SC2 fanboys will also start complaining about toggled unit production, automatic creep spread, and more C&C units.
Queens not auto injecting makes sense because players get to choose on how they want to use their energy on the queen, and its not always for injection. Creep not auto spreading makes sense because players get to choose which way they want their creep to spread.
Having no option for workers to auto-mine after they're made doesn't make sense because if a pro rallies their worker to a mineral patch, they would never choose their worker to stay idle at the mineral patch instead of mining from it.
If teams with big name players switch over, then sc2 will definitely change. Those top line players will most likely take over and be on top in this game as well, the players that are currently on top will probably drop down.
It does because of the aforementioned decision to use your attention on workers or other aspects. But really automining is not a big deal so i don't know why you want to argue on that point if you think MBS and max unit selection is fine. It's the addition which makes the least difference; if it was in BW it would make it a bit easier and close the gap between me and slightly better players i feel.
And you still both don't seem to understand it's totally simple to have an inject toggle on. You turn it on, it auto-injects, you turn it off it saves energy. There's no decision in repeatedly injecting and it really is only in the game to add mechanical difficulty.
EPT
