|
On November 01 2013 21:20 Sissors wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2013 20:35 Miragee wrote:On November 01 2013 19:45 Sissors wrote:On November 01 2013 19:17 Miragee wrote:On November 01 2013 18:35 Sissors wrote:
1. And what you don't seem to understand is that I think that is a GOOD thing. I don't think requiring you to click faster makes it a better game. I think it makes it a worse game. If clicking alot is more important, than automatically everything else is less important. I don't think positioning should be less important, or strategy, or unit composition, etc.
2. Also I didn't play very little BW. I didn't play it at all. I used to play AOE games.
3. And it makes no sense whatsoever to say the winners are volatile due to the lack of required clicks. The winners are volatile because it is still a relative new game that is evolving. If it was volatile due to the lack of required clicks as you claim, then innovation would never have been able to dominate as he did. Because then also during his domination he would lose due to the lower skill ceiling or whatever. But he didn't, he won pretty much everything. He started losing because the meta evolved, balance patch, he became worse, pick one. But not because of randomness, then he would also have lost alot more during his domination period. 2. Did you ever asked yourself why AoE wasn't near as competetive as SC was? Did you ever wonder if I care? I don't play a game because progamers do it. Oh sure I enjoy watching WCS when it happens to be a good time I don't have anything else planned, but I don't play the game because pros do, I play the game because I enjoy playing it. So why are you even bothering with sc2 then? It's meant to be competetive on a very high level, drawing viewership and sponsors alike and showing very high skill matches for their excitement. That could lead into you enjoying the game because it stimulates your inner competetive instincts and you enjoy the controls/strategies/mechanics of the game and like to fight against your own cap. If you don't like that, it's perfectly fine. I have nothing against AoE or the like (I enjoyed them myself playing on lans), but you can't turn on the metric's of those games on games that are supposed to be highly competetive (and blizzard wants that for the sake of money and publicity). Sadly you didn't read the rest of my comment but still use the same argument of lower strategic depth because of higher requiered apm, which was invalidated before. Does that mean I, and 99% of the paying customers of Blizzard, could get a full refund? Apparantly according to you I shouldn't play SC2 if I just play it for fun and not for competition. 90% of those ranked are already plat or lower. And if you really play to do it competitive, you are above plat. Then add that the ALOT of players don't play ranked at all, add that of those in diamond or higher many also just play for fun and not for competition, and you end up with a really small minority who meet your requirements. Yes blizzard wants pro playing for sake of money and publicity, but not at the cost of their entire casual player base.
Here I make my last point on this totally off-topic conversation: Yes, I think it's a huge mistake to try to aim for a casual player basis in a highly competetive game. There is a pretty big difference between designing a game for casuals and a game that also suits casuals to some extend.
|
A very informed and well done video, I feel that these changes properly implemented would do wonders for SC2.
The above poster you are right in some ways but wrong in others, making a game have micro-able units won't mean that the casual player base will lose out if anything it will make them more likely to play the game.
Lets look at the micro techniques used currently by Terran, the two biggest ones are stutter stepping and splitting.
Someone at bronze level is unlikely to employ these techniques but they still have fun building a base and making the units they want to A move into the opponent and watch the battle.
The game becomes harder to be "good" at but it doesn't become harder to play, if you don't have the skills to do all the micro techniques that should be implemented then the chances are you're up against someone who also doesn't have the skills to do them, making the game balanced because both players are at the same level.
It would be great for the pro scene allowing for players to express themselves by being the embodiment of a unit (Like Jaedong was/is for Mutalisks)
Overall I think DK should take note, and implement these changes but accordingly balance the game. Done well you've got a even greater game on your hands!
|
Its impossible to argue with you guys, why take a select portion of my quote? Even Jaedong says SC2 is harder, BW has the better player winning more often than SC2 sure, but to say SC2 isnt getting better is ridiculous. Each year the skill ceiling for even high master players are better than he first 2 GSL winners, and in 4 more years ittl be the same thing. More strategies, more macro games its been an awesome last few tourneys so stop arguing and enjoy and get better or shut up and make your ProMod.
|
On November 01 2013 19:54 Sissors wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2013 19:49 flashimba wrote:
In summary, you don't want the game to become any harder for you.
That's perfectly acceptable. So in summary: Your positioning, strategy and decision making sucks, so you want that to be less important. That's perfectly acceptable.
Oh. Don't be silly. I share the same views as you. ^_^
I am glad to know that I summarized those blobs of paragraphs correctly.
|
On November 01 2013 21:13 VArsovskiSC wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2013 08:45 TaShadan wrote:
I appreciate your effort but Blizzard showed several time that they give a shit. Overkill prevention is the greatest crap they ever implemented. This is probably the only thing that SC2 is better than BW.. That's what makes Siege-Tanks viable.. The new ground unit's pathing is much superior to BW's and if this didn't exist, tanks would be totally useless.. I mean tanks are kinda useless ATM, but with the overkill - they'd be totally useless..  Everything else in this video was legit though.. Sry for being late on this topic though, hope I didn't "ressurect" a topic in a way, still - haven't seen it before.. Better not implement all of the suggestions, but some of them will improve the game drastically though..
Why are they not useless in BW then?
Maybe its because along with overkill they also have massively more damage. Maybe its because BW has way fewer hard counter units.
The tank needs overkill prevention to not be utterly useless, because its already made a useless unit with the changes to overall unit design.
The SC2 gameplay is designed so very few units have general counter strategies. Overkill prevention is one of the measures used to do this. Intead you have to rely on either brute strength or counter units to stop a given unit.
In my opinion this is just bad design. Units should have some disadvantage that allows most other units to deal with them in some way.
Micro should be the way these units perform these countermeasures. Marine splits are a good example of this. So is blinking/dropping on top of Tanks. Kiting units with slow damage points can also do the same (see Probes kiting Zerglings from BW).
When we look for things to add to this game we should really be asking: Is this adding counterplay from both sides? and if it is, it is probably a good thing.
|
I'd really like the change about the Immortal and Tanks. Blizzard should really look this video which is very interesting even if Lalush's voice is ... ^^.
Anyway, I really liked this video and Leta's Wraith Micro and the choice you made for your examples.
Vultures micro ftw !
|
On November 01 2013 20:06 Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:
One of the things people need to realize about this kind of micro is the fact that its massively OP - But in BW this was fine due to one important fact.
The fact is that BW is unlike most RTS games in the way that its impossible to play a perfect game. To play perfectly you need so much EAPM that its inhuman, so players have to prioritize. Other RTS games usually place realistic demands for the players in terms of unit movements, production and map awereness. In BW those demands are far beyond human capabilities. Suddenly this micro trick that makes a unit massively OP is not an issue due to all the other stuff the player needs to use his time on. He can only focus on a few things, so while this OP trick might win the battle, its likely to lose him the war.
/BW rant
Now on to implementing these kinds of micro in SC2. It would definately add to the depth of the game, but as long as there are not enough other stuff for players to do, these kinds of OP micro tricks would actually hurt the balance. There is no middle road. Either the game gets much more demanding micro and macro tricks, or none at all. If only a few things are implemented they would make certain things so OP that it would severely limit the viable strategies at higher levels of play.
I would love to see a lot of the ideas and mechanics tested in StarBow or Onegoal transferred to the real game, but half measures simply won't cut it. If these micro multipliers are implemented they need to be used together with other attention demanding features. Bingo.
And I would point to how graveyard-dead StarBow and Onegoal are as a reason why those full measures shouldn't be implemented any more so than the half-measures.. If they were substantially better versions of the game, they would have a playerbase.
|
|
|
On November 01 2013 22:24 StarStruck wrote:
He's still going. :V Hey there pot, I'm kettle.
|
I was microing against a fucking AI in the video. You think a human opponent would keep chasing indefinitely with units that are barely out of range of firing? Micro goes both ways.
If an opponent pulls back from my units' optimal range like any intelligent player would do, then I have to use an incredible amount of attention and APM to make sure I follow the "dancing" back-and-forth movements that will result as a consequence.
If units, on the other hand, just stop dead when I fire? Well then I just don't bother firing and keep running away instead. Why bother risking to attack when the opponent will catch up to me if I do?
Get this in your heads and you've understood the core of the argument.
|
On November 01 2013 22:08 RampancyTW wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2013 20:06 Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:
One of the things people need to realize about this kind of micro is the fact that its massively OP - But in BW this was fine due to one important fact.
The fact is that BW is unlike most RTS games in the way that its impossible to play a perfect game. To play perfectly you need so much EAPM that its inhuman, so players have to prioritize. Other RTS games usually place realistic demands for the players in terms of unit movements, production and map awereness. In BW those demands are far beyond human capabilities. Suddenly this micro trick that makes a unit massively OP is not an issue due to all the other stuff the player needs to use his time on. He can only focus on a few things, so while this OP trick might win the battle, its likely to lose him the war.
/BW rant
Now on to implementing these kinds of micro in SC2. It would definately add to the depth of the game, but as long as there are not enough other stuff for players to do, these kinds of OP micro tricks would actually hurt the balance. There is no middle road. Either the game gets much more demanding micro and macro tricks, or none at all. If only a few things are implemented they would make certain things so OP that it would severely limit the viable strategies at higher levels of play.
I would love to see a lot of the ideas and mechanics tested in StarBow or Onegoal transferred to the real game, but half measures simply won't cut it. If these micro multipliers are implemented they need to be used together with other attention demanding features. Bingo. And I would point to how graveyard-dead StarBow and Onegoal are as a reason why those full measures shouldn't be implemented any more so than the half-measures.. If they were substantially better versions of the game, they would have a playerbase.
Not a valid argument.
The StarBow guys (me included) has been holding back on trying to make the mod more widely known due to not having it finished yet - and we don't want people to flock to it and get dissapointed with an unpolished experience. I suspect the onegoal guys have some of the same considerations.
Noone knows about them outside of TL - whereas many of the popular mods have had great exposure from youtube celebreties or just being favored by the arcade filters.
So the reason for StarBow and Onegoal not being played that much is mostly because they are unfinished at this point. Don't use assumed failed design as an argument please.
|
On November 01 2013 22:29 LaLuSh wrote:
I was microing against a fucking AI in the video. You think a human opponent would keep chasing indefinitely with units that are barely out of range of firing? Micro goes both ways.
If an opponent pulls back from my units' optimal range like any intelligent player would do, then I have to use an incredible amount of attention and APM to make sure I follow the "dancing" back-and-forth movements that will result as a consequence.
If units, on the other hand, just stop dead when I fire? Well then I just don't bother firing and keep running away instead. Why bother risking to attack when the opponent will catch up to me if I do?
Get this in your heads and you've understood the core of the argument. Get it through your head that this sort of micro doesn't require any more time attention (even if it requires a few more clicks) than the existing in-game micro already does.
Get it also in your head that an opponent literally can't fight back against a player microing in this fashion. All they can do is pray the other person either stops or screws up. It's a one-sided interaction. This was okay in BW where a lot more time/attention/APM had to be spent just to build units and/or economy, but it would be frustrating as hell in SC2.
|
That was a great video. I really hope some of these ideas become discussed or looked at by Blizzard.
|
On November 01 2013 22:29 Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2013 22:08 RampancyTW wrote:On November 01 2013 20:06 Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:
One of the things people need to realize about this kind of micro is the fact that its massively OP - But in BW this was fine due to one important fact.
The fact is that BW is unlike most RTS games in the way that its impossible to play a perfect game. To play perfectly you need so much EAPM that its inhuman, so players have to prioritize. Other RTS games usually place realistic demands for the players in terms of unit movements, production and map awereness. In BW those demands are far beyond human capabilities. Suddenly this micro trick that makes a unit massively OP is not an issue due to all the other stuff the player needs to use his time on. He can only focus on a few things, so while this OP trick might win the battle, its likely to lose him the war.
/BW rant
Now on to implementing these kinds of micro in SC2. It would definately add to the depth of the game, but as long as there are not enough other stuff for players to do, these kinds of OP micro tricks would actually hurt the balance. There is no middle road. Either the game gets much more demanding micro and macro tricks, or none at all. If only a few things are implemented they would make certain things so OP that it would severely limit the viable strategies at higher levels of play.
I would love to see a lot of the ideas and mechanics tested in StarBow or Onegoal transferred to the real game, but half measures simply won't cut it. If these micro multipliers are implemented they need to be used together with other attention demanding features. Bingo. And I would point to how graveyard-dead StarBow and Onegoal are as a reason why those full measures shouldn't be implemented any more so than the half-measures.. If they were substantially better versions of the game, they would have a playerbase. Not a valid argument. The StarBow guys (me included) has been holding back on trying to make the mod more widely known due to not having it finished yet - and we don't want people to flock to it and get dissapointed with an unpolished experience. I suspect the onegoal guys have some of the same considerations. Noone knows about them outside of TL - whereas many of the popular mods have had great exposure from youtube celebreties or just being favored by the arcade filters. So the reason for StarBow and Onegoal not being played that much is mostly because they are unfinished at this point. Don't use assumed failed design as an argument please. I'm not assuming their design is "failed." What I AM saying is that if the core design were OMG SO MUCH BETTER THAN SC2, then your early adopters would still be playing the mods (which they aren't).
|
If it weren't for Starbow, I wouldn't even have SC2 installed anymore, wtf? It's not "graveyard-dead" o_O
|
On November 01 2013 22:27 RampancyTW wrote:Hey there pot, I'm kettle.
That's going to be your argument? lol There's no point continuing this discussion.
|
On November 01 2013 22:44 RampancyTW wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2013 22:29 Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:On November 01 2013 22:08 RampancyTW wrote:On November 01 2013 20:06 Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:
One of the things people need to realize about this kind of micro is the fact that its massively OP - But in BW this was fine due to one important fact.
The fact is that BW is unlike most RTS games in the way that its impossible to play a perfect game. To play perfectly you need so much EAPM that its inhuman, so players have to prioritize. Other RTS games usually place realistic demands for the players in terms of unit movements, production and map awereness. In BW those demands are far beyond human capabilities. Suddenly this micro trick that makes a unit massively OP is not an issue due to all the other stuff the player needs to use his time on. He can only focus on a few things, so while this OP trick might win the battle, its likely to lose him the war.
/BW rant
Now on to implementing these kinds of micro in SC2. It would definately add to the depth of the game, but as long as there are not enough other stuff for players to do, these kinds of OP micro tricks would actually hurt the balance. There is no middle road. Either the game gets much more demanding micro and macro tricks, or none at all. If only a few things are implemented they would make certain things so OP that it would severely limit the viable strategies at higher levels of play.
I would love to see a lot of the ideas and mechanics tested in StarBow or Onegoal transferred to the real game, but half measures simply won't cut it. If these micro multipliers are implemented they need to be used together with other attention demanding features. Bingo. And I would point to how graveyard-dead StarBow and Onegoal are as a reason why those full measures shouldn't be implemented any more so than the half-measures.. If they were substantially better versions of the game, they would have a playerbase. Not a valid argument. The StarBow guys (me included) has been holding back on trying to make the mod more widely known due to not having it finished yet - and we don't want people to flock to it and get dissapointed with an unpolished experience. I suspect the onegoal guys have some of the same considerations. Noone knows about them outside of TL - whereas many of the popular mods have had great exposure from youtube celebreties or just being favored by the arcade filters. So the reason for StarBow and Onegoal not being played that much is mostly because they are unfinished at this point. Don't use assumed failed design as an argument please. I'm not assuming their design is "failed." What I AM saying is that if the core design were OMG SO MUCH BETTER THAN SC2, then your early adopters would still be playing the mods (which they aren't).
They are... well a lot of them anyways. But games are organized seperately from Blizzards game finding system, so its not visible in the arcade.
EDIT: Oh wait - you assumed the mods are dead just bacause you can't see them in the arcade? well they are actually being played quite a bit, but not in an immediately visible way.
|
On November 01 2013 22:50 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2013 22:27 RampancyTW wrote:On November 01 2013 22:24 StarStruck wrote:
He's still going. :V Hey there pot, I'm kettle. That's going to be your argument? lol There's no point continuing this discussion. I didn't think "HURR DURR LOOK AT THIS GUY" qualified as an argument in the first place..?
|
On November 01 2013 22:52 RampancyTW wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2013 22:50 StarStruck wrote:On November 01 2013 22:27 RampancyTW wrote:On November 01 2013 22:24 StarStruck wrote:
He's still going. :V Hey there pot, I'm kettle. That's going to be your argument? lol There's no point continuing this discussion. I didn't think "HURR DURR LOOK AT THIS GUY" qualified as an argument in the first place..?
That wasn't my argument to begin with. You sir are on a completely different wavelength altogether and all you say is the same thing over and over again when I think we've made it abundantly clear that what you say has very little weight but keep going.
|
On November 01 2013 22:39 RampancyTW wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2013 22:29 LaLuSh wrote:
I was microing against a fucking AI in the video. You think a human opponent would keep chasing indefinitely with units that are barely out of range of firing? Micro goes both ways.
If an opponent pulls back from my units' optimal range like any intelligent player would do, then I have to use an incredible amount of attention and APM to make sure I follow the "dancing" back-and-forth movements that will result as a consequence.
If units, on the other hand, just stop dead when I fire? Well then I just don't bother firing and keep running away instead. Why bother risking to attack when the opponent will catch up to me if I do?
Get this in your heads and you've understood the core of the argument. Get it through your head that this sort of micro doesn't require any more time attention (even if it requires a few more clicks) than the existing in-game micro already does. Get it also in your head that an opponent literally can't fight back against a player microing in this fashion. All they can do is pray the other person either stops or screws up. It's a one-sided interaction. This was okay in BW where a lot more time/attention/APM had to be spent just to build units and/or economy, but it would be frustrating as hell in SC2.
Lol so you don't understand that micro goes both ways. You are actually arguing that you don't get it rather having a valid point that his argument is wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
