EPTCan't you guys at least be open to new ideas that are only trying to help make the game better with their intentions? People freak the fuck out over these threads all the time simply because someone wants to improve the game. Do you honestly want SC2 to be exactly how it is now forever? Because I sure as fuck don't.
Fungals, FF, Storms, and Smart-casting - Page 9
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Angra
United States2652 Posts
Can't you guys at least be open to new ideas that are only trying to help make the game better with their intentions? People freak the fuck out over these threads all the time simply because someone wants to improve the game. Do you honestly want SC2 to be exactly how it is now forever? Because I sure as fuck don't. | ||
|
Revelatus
United States183 Posts
| ||
|
Seldentar
United States888 Posts
On November 23 2012 10:36 Angra wrote: Holy fuck so many people in this thread are so fucking scared of change. Can't you guys at least be open to new ideas that are only trying to help make the game better with their intentions? People freak the fuck out over these threads all the time simply because someone wants to improve the game. Do you honestly want SC2 to be exactly how it is now forever? Because I sure as fuck don't. This. Thankfully, I think those guys are by far the minority though. It's just they stand out more and tend to be more vocal IMO. Most people DO want change, but many disagree about what type of change is needed. | ||
|
deafhobbit
United States828 Posts
http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/counter-play Also, speaking as a BW fan who has basically given up on SC2 after giving it numerous chances, the ideas in this thread, if implemented, would make me come back. | ||
|
Sawamura
Malaysia7602 Posts
| ||
|
playnice
Malaysia302 Posts
Well what exactly are your ideas that you want translated into the game? What if my idea I want translated into the game is to take three casters, spread them out and storm at the exact same time? SC2 is a hinderance to that. It literally disallows this action. It is true that SC2 disallows this action, but taking away smartcasting shouldn't be the only solution to this. Why can't both option exist in the game? Reintroducing magic-box cast is a great idea, but smartcasting isn't really in the way for the game developers to implement it. What are you saving your APM for? We saved the APM with MBS and the like-- so that we could have more time for things like casting. Better casting is the thing we want to spend apm on. And now we have more time to do it. (Well actually we don't if we're Zerg because of larvae injects and creep spread, but anyways.) If keep the old method of casting, our spells are awesomely powered and we have more time to do it. But instead the spells get diluted. Smartcasting is not designed to "save APM for players". That is a consequence of the intended goal, which is to not frustrate players. Same goes for all the MBS, rally mining and new path-finding. It was all designed to be more accessible to new players(in my case, old players too). It has always been the philosophy of Blizzard, and the sign of a good game, to be easily learnt, difficult to master. SC2 brings the easy to learn and play to another level. The problems we see now are a consequence of that. However, taking smartcasting away is akin to taking one step forward and one step back. The real goal for spell casting should be "easy to cast, difficult to cast right". It should feel powerful, and convey the players skill to the spectator when a spell hits, not when cast. For a start, Fungal with a projectile is a step to the right direction. Likewise, EMP should have a projectile speed of the old EMP of BW Science Vessel. Consequences of smartcasting can be reduced with these changes. To me this is better solved by Battlenet, then by trying to appeal to casuals to the detriment of our pro-scene. Appeal to the casuals, as well as not being a detriment to the pro-scene, is what the game should strive for. Instead of the removal of smartcasting, we should look at the game at its current state and introduce ideas that will broaden and deepen the gameplay and enhance the viewing experience. There is more to be done and better ideas to be explored. Discarding mechanics that are not in BW because BW is the perfect example of a successful competitive game does not change the fact that BW has clumsy controls that most people would unlikely want to experience to have fun or be good at, especially to those who have no idea why BW was a success, or was successful. Battlenet definitely needs improvement, but it is equally important to the game to achieve the same effect within the game itself. | ||
|
Acritter
Syria7637 Posts
For example? The issue with players maxing at 12 minutes could be fairly well addressed by giving each race access to very powerful worker harassment (think Reavers or Vulture Drops), so that people would have to devote much more attention to economy. That's a design solution to a design problem, and is many times better than your poorly conceived notion that inherent problems with the game's design can be solved just by breaking parts of the interface. | ||
|
Serpico
4285 Posts
On November 23 2012 12:21 Acritter wrote: Unfortunately, Smart Casting is here to stay, and the argument that we shouldn't be fighting the interface is completely valid. Instead of arguing why doing anything should be harder, you should be discussing how game DESIGN (not execution) should be changed to make the game more interesting. For example? The issue with players maxing at 12 minutes could be fairly well addressed by giving each race access to very powerful worker harassment (think Reavers or Vulture Drops), so that people would have to devote much more attention to economy. That's a design solution to a design problem, and is many times better than your poorly conceived notion that inherent problems with the game's design can be solved just by breaking parts of the interface. There should always be an execution barrier. You don't just draw up strategies on a white board and get to execute them easily. That's boring and not nearly difficult enough to sustain a pro scene. I hate this mindset that we should continually lower the bar for execution, that's a huge part of what separates pro plays from scrubs like me. Execution barriers in BW are what made macro monster players so scary and a completely valid way to win. You could simply outproduce other players when you focused on overwhelming them with units because you were more refined mechanically. That doesn't really happen in SC 2 the same way. "Making the game dumber" is just an oversimplification meant to attack the change to make casting very very powerful spells harder. They are too impactful on the game to just be spammed so easily. The problem with the game is it has issues like smart casting AND stuff like high ground, clumping, death balls, your aforementioned issue with maxing out quickly and not stressing space control because you don't need to expand enough. Lots of stuff that comes together to make any flashy new units irrelevant in a small sense because they will always be operating within a space that has these problems. | ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On November 23 2012 12:26 Serpico wrote: There should always be an execution barrier. You don't just draw up strategies on a white board and get to execute them easily. That's boring and not nearly difficult enough to sustain a pro scene. I hate this mindset that we should continually lower the bar for execution, that's a huge part of what separates pro plays from scrubs like me. Execution barriers in BW are what made macro monster players so scary and a completely valid way to win. You could simply outproduce other players when you focused on overwhelming them with units because you were more refined mechanically. That doesn't really happen in SC 2 the same way. "Making the game dumber" is just an oversimplification meant to attack the change to make casting very very powerful spells harder. They are too impactful on the game to just be spammed so easily. People like to say "making the game dumber" a lot. It's not about being dumber, it's about being intuitive. When you tell a unit to go somewhere, it should take the obvious path. When you click once to perform an action, it should happen once. When you try to select multiple units, there shouldn't be an arbitrary limit stopping you. We could make that hardest game ever, where AI is garbage without constant babysitting, every button needs perfect press timing or else it does nothing, every action needs 100% precision...and it would be an absolutely terrible game. Let's be clear here, no smart-casting, limited hotkey groups, bad pathing AI, none of them are needed to increase the skill cap. People only bring them up because BW had a high skill bar, and they wrongly associate everything BW with everything complex. Flawed UI is not a necessity, it's a crutch. | ||
|
TheFish7
United States2824 Posts
| ||
|
shizaep
Canada2920 Posts
On November 23 2012 10:50 Revelatus wrote: I don't think "smart casting" is a good description if this mechanic. It seems a lot less "smart" than the current way. You misunderstand. The SC2 mechanic where you can have multiple spell casters selected and they will all cast spells one at a time is called *cough* "smart casting." The mechanic Falling describes from Brood War was not called "smart casting." Falling is just trying to make a point that it was overall more beneficial for the game even though at first glance *cough* "smart casting" seems like a superior mechanic. | ||
|
Serpico
4285 Posts
On November 23 2012 12:54 WolfintheSheep wrote: People like to say "making the game dumber" a lot. It's not about being dumber, it's about being intuitive. When you tell a unit to go somewhere, it should take the obvious path. When you click once to perform an action, it should happen once. When you try to select multiple units, there shouldn't be an arbitrary limit stopping you. We could make that hardest game ever, where AI is garbage without constant babysitting, every button needs perfect press timing or else it does nothing, every action needs 100% precision...and it would be an absolutely terrible game. Let's be clear here, no smart-casting, limited hotkey groups, bad pathing AI, none of them are needed to increase the skill cap. People only bring them up because BW had a high skill bar, and they wrongly associate everything BW with everything complex. Flawed UI is not a necessity, it's a crutch. It's not even close to a flaw or a crutch. I have no idea how making something harder is a crutch when blizzard has proven they can't make the game more interesting through their unit design. Obviously BW was doing something right. You keep associating things that aren't even related. Smart casting is not intuitive, it's plain easy. | ||
Falling
Canada11548 Posts
On November 23 2012 12:56 TheFish7 wrote: Hatcheries (larva) have smart-casting now as well. I'm wondering if the OP would advocate getting rid of that as well? I'm not sure that macro-mechanics is smart-casting. But how do you define smart? Even with MBS you are actually clicking more buttons with this so-called 'smart-casting.' 5sh6sh would make 6 hydralisks vs 5shhhhhh. It's pretty much a non-issue as it is the proverbial six of one, half dozen of the other. Day9 has talked about missing the rhythm of BW hatches and there definitely is a rhythm to it, but that really has no significant impact on the battles or viewability so I really don't care that much to make a thread on it. | ||
|
BigRedDog
461 Posts
I agreed that the majority of the problem is that spells become such a dominant factor in winning battle. | ||
|
Integra
Sweden5626 Posts
On November 23 2012 12:56 TheFish7 wrote: Hatcheries (larva) have smart-casting now as well. I'm wondering if the OP would advocate getting rid of that as well? Why don't we just dumb down the game back to Warcraft2, (before BattleNet edition) and remove everything UI improvement including building ques and auto-attack. It would, without a doubt, solve practically every problem we have in SC2 and really distinct the good from the best.  | ||
|
CHOBOGGNORE
11 Posts
| ||
|
lazyitachi
1043 Posts
Let's tweet this to Blizzard and Mike Morhaime! I am sure we can do it! SC2 is a dead game anyway! Port BW to 3d! This way all the actual non-casual can then play the real game! If not lets get Valve to do it since Valve is like super awesome! If not Valve, I am sure all the geniuses on TL can do it! From reading many threads on TL, we have like super businessmen, millionaires, game designers, GM players and professional game balancers in abundance! #ReviveBW2013 Let's do this guys! BW is not the game we deserved but not the one we need! | ||
|
mucker
United States1120 Posts
IMO the problem is that, given the spells as they are now and an interface that isn't going to change, infestors and sentries are just too cheap to build. That's why they get massed, that's why we're seeing such tiresome play at the pro level. If ravens cost 50/150 and could be built with a reactor every terran would just mass ravens. We'd be complaining about mass turrets and pdds locking down opposing armies completely and how bad it was to watch. | ||
|
Gaius Baltar
United States449 Posts
| ||
|
ShadeR
Australia7535 Posts
On November 21 2012 15:31 Ryder. wrote: ^Unintuitive because there is zero reason you would ever want every HT storming the same place at the same time, which is what the UI encourages. The UI is supposed to facilitate the units acting in the way you want them, and there is never a single reason you would want them to act that way. Granted I don't really know much about magic box casting so maybe you have a point with that, but I think my previous point about intuition remains (depending on how you want to define intuition I guess) yeah man. when i box dragged over my units and left clicked elsewhere on the map. They all moved instead of just a single unit like i wanted. DAFAQ???????????? | ||
| ||
