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.
How is a corruptor ever going to get near those vikings? He won't. And in general the anti-kiting micro isn't improved, it would only be that kiting would be much easier.
You are imagining these changes in light of the current state of the game. If changes like the ones proposed in this thread get implemented, there will be balance changes to compliment these as well.
Taking it at face value in the current state and using that as an argument against testing and possibly implementing these suggestions (if they turn out to add value to the game for both players and spectators), is not productive.
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.
How is a corruptor ever going to get near those vikings? He won't. And in general the anti-kiting micro isn't improved, it would only be that kiting would be much easier.
How is a Brood War mutalisk ever going to get near a wraith? How is an SC2 mutalisk ever going to get near a phoenix?
The relative range difference between a wraith and a mutalisk on the one hand, and a corruptor/viking on the other hand, is practically the same.
Stop talking with yourself and try actually reading the comments you are responding to.
On November 01 2013 23:15 Masayume wrote: You are imagining these changes in light of the current state of the game. If changes like the ones proposed in this thread get implemented, there will be balance changes to compliment these as well.
Taking it at face value in the current state and using that as an argument against testing and possibly implementing these suggestions (if they turn out to add value to the game for both players and spectators), is not productive.
...Which would then lead to other issues, which would lead to further rebalancings, which we lead to other issues, etc...
You'd pretty much turn the game upside down. Unique features of the Viking (like its long range) would have to be eliminated. You'd change a lot of early game interactions with regards to tech and whatnot.
For what purpose? More "depth"? A higher skill ceiling? There's no valid way to just assume a game will be deeper because you make a few units more microable. And the skill ceiling still hasn't been reached, so we have no way of knowing how high or low it is.
What I DO know is people have been claiming that we've been at the skill ceiling since early 2011, and players still somehow manage to keep getting better.
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.
Top players as of now can easily macro behind essentially 3-pronged banshee harass. Now you suggest to make kiting with multiple units easier, but slightly more mechanically demanding.
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.
How is a corruptor ever going to get near those vikings? He won't. And in general the anti-kiting micro isn't improved, it would only be that kiting would be much easier.
How is a Brood War mutalisk ever going to get near a wraith? How is an SC2 mutalisk ever going to get near a phoenix?
The relative range difference between a wraith and a mutalisk on the one hand, and a corruptor/viking on the other hand, is practically the same.
Stop talking with yourself and try actually reading the comments you are responding to.
Vikings are not supposed to hard hard counter corruptors though in the design of the game, while phoenixes are to mutas (I won't comment on BW units since I didn't play much of it and don't understand it like you guys do). This change to vikings would obviously be extremely over powered, I'm not sure how someone as knowledgeable as you can't see that, although I'm also assuming you know further changes/nerfs/buffs would certainly have to accompany these types of changes.
Others, like the turret, are flat out great changes. We need to meet somewhere in the middle between waht's there now and you rvideo. I think that's all he's trying to say
On November 01 2013 23:15 Masayume wrote: You are imagining these changes in light of the current state of the game. If changes like the ones proposed in this thread get implemented, there will be balance changes to compliment these as well.
Taking it at face value in the current state and using that as an argument against testing and possibly implementing these suggestions (if they turn out to add value to the game for both players and spectators), is not productive.
...Which would then lead to other issues, which would lead to further rebalancings, which we lead to other issues, etc...
You'd pretty much turn the game upside down. Unique features of the Viking (like its long range) would have to be eliminated. You'd change a lot of early game interactions with regards to tech and whatnot.
For what purpose? More "depth"? A higher skill ceiling? There's no valid way to just assume a game will be deeper because you make a few units more microable. And the skill ceiling still hasn't been reached, so we have no way of knowing how high or low it is.
What I DO know is people have been claiming that we've been at the skill ceiling since early 2011, and players still somehow manage to keep getting better.
And this is why it should be tested extensively if the suggested alterations are considered. Furthermore a good timing to test more extreme things, even if it turns out to be non-functional for the game, is a beta phase of an expansion. Be it inhouse or open beta.
It often helps to test some extremes from time to time in order to figure out if something will add or detract value from the game. If new units will be added in LotV which will reset the strategy, the same process you just described will occur as well, just in a milder fashion.
If you worry about the end result before even evaluating if it would work, and how big of an impact it really has on the game design, you might as well never test changes or new units, maps.
Consider > test if interested > evaluate > possibly implement in the current form, or in an altered form.
Wow. This has gone downhill in the last few pages. This sort of micro gives players more tools and gives units greater functionality. Why are we against units that respond better and are more maneuverable. Why should players "fight against the computer."
Why this is good for an RTS is because the most successful RTS's as competitive games and as spectator sports were ones that married Strategy and Tactics from RTS's and twitch response unit control from Fighting Games. Probably not intentionally, but that's the best description I can give. Day9's so-called frisbee analogy comes exactly into play here.
It's not just a click fest and he that has the higher apm spam wins. It is creating these little unit combo moves that allows players to gain advantages beyond simply positioning and unit composition. In addition to. Not in place of. That's why it creates more depth the gameplay. You take the fundamentals of a strategy game with unit positioning, composition decisions, tech choices and add in rapid response unit maneuvers.
Yes some of that already exists. My fallback example is Marines vs Banelings. We like that stuff. This adds more. Or enhances what already exists. It makes the micro smoother, more snappy, more crisp. Rather than making it feel like you are microing through mud. You can do it, but without the crisp, clean feel it doesn't feel nearly as fun to perform. You always feel like you are waiting for the computer to do its thing before performing the next action. Like playing in a high latency environment. Doable, but not as fun.
Marines vs Banelings is visual, it requires skill, and it is about rapid response and both players microing back and forth. Why would we sniff our noses at getting rid of engine limitations that choke unit functionality, that grinds unit movement to a halt and forces them to pause before firing. Maybe some units should keep that pause. But should all? Just because it's status quo and it might shake up the game. Delving down to these fundamentals and making smart changes can only be a good thing for the game for competitors and spectators alike.
(Oh and by the way, most of these maneuvers can be performed by low level players. I'm only 1700 D on iccup now, but the vast majority of the micro tricks I can do and could do when I was hovering between D/D-. Just not consistently and while macroing. It's fun for low level player as well as high level players. Even my brother (LordBryon of my BW is for Newbs blogs) has started trying Vulture patrol micro. It looks cool even for new players with 40 APM and they want to try it out.)
I just watched the video. I definitely think the tracking turret on the immortal and tanks can be a good start to add some more micro mechanic back into the game. How often do we see a Protoss/terran players lose all their support units for immortal and tanks. And their expensive units are just left there to die. It would be cool if the progamers is given the tools to micro the shit out of them and save them.
The air collision seems like a problem and should be fixed by Blizzard immediately.
But I am not too sure about reducing all damage point to 0. This will simply make all long range units untouchable. No corruptors will ever touch a viking again.
On November 01 2013 23:49 Falling wrote: Wow. This has gone downhill in the last few pages. This sort of micro gives players more tools and gives units greater functionality. Why are we against units that respond better and are more maneuverable. Why should players "fight against the computer."
Why this is good for an RTS is because the most successful RTS's as competitive games and as spectator sports were ones that married Strategy and Tactics from RTS's and twitch response unit control from Fighting Games. Probably not intentionally, but that's the best description I can give. Day9's so-called frisbee analogy comes exactly into play here.
It's not just a click fest and he that has the higher apm spam wins. It is creating these little unit combo moves that allows players to gain advantages beyond simply positioning and unit composition. In addition to. Not in place of. That's why it creates more depth the gameplay. You take the fundamentals of a strategy game with unit positioning, composition decisions, tech choices and add in rapid response unit maneuvers.
Yes some of that already exists. My fallback example is Marines vs Banelings. We like that stuff. This adds more. Or enhances what already exists. It makes the micro smoother, more snappy, more crisp. Rather than making it feel like you are microing through mud. You can do it, but without the crisp, clean feel it doesn't feel nearly as fun to perform. You always feel like you are waiting for the computer to do its thing before performing the next action. Like playing in a high latency environment. Doable, but not as fun.
Marines vs Banelings is visual, it requires skill, and it is about rapid response and both players microing back and forth. Why would we sniff our noses at getting rid of engine limitations that choke unit functionality, that grinds unit movement to a halt and forces them to pause before firing. Maybe some units should keep that pause. But should all? Just because it's status quo and it might shake up the game. Delving down to these fundamentals and making smart changes can only be a good thing for the game for competitors and spectators alike.
(Oh and by the way, most of these maneuvers can be performed by low level players. I'm only 1700 D on iccup now, but the vast majority of the micro tricks I can do and could do when I was hovering between D/D-. Just not consistently and while macroing. It's fun for low level player as well as high level players. Even my brother (LordBryon of my BW is for Newbs blogs) has started trying Vulture patrol micro. It looks cool even for new players and they want to try it out.)
Micro also changes the incentives and makes things worthwhile that otherwise might not be unless they were made too strong. Taking a pack of wraiths and flying them over the enemy mineral line repeatedly even while being chased by mutas and hydras is worth it because those wraiths can move shot to pick off scvs while flying. Because of that the incentive to try and do that is increased and that tactical gameplay has a ton of interesting decisions around positioning and control to keep those units alive (or on the otherside to hunt them down) we get better gameplay.
On November 01 2013 23:59 bhfberserk wrote: I just watched the video. I definitely think the tracking turret on the immortal and tanks can be a good start to add some more micro mechanic back into the game. How often do we see a Protoss/terran players lose all their support units for immortal and tanks. And their expensive units are just left there to die. It would be cool if the progamers is given the tools to micro the shit out of them and save them.
The air collision seems like a problem and should be fixed by Blizzard immediately.
But I am not too sure about reducing all damage point to 0. This will simply make all long range units untouchable. No corruptors will ever touch a viking again.
And when corruptor get in range of the vikings then they will never survive ever again. Corruptors are faster by 0.2:ish movement speed.
On November 01 2013 23:59 bhfberserk wrote: I just watched the video. I definitely think the tracking turret on the immortal and tanks can be a good start to add some more micro mechanic back into the game. How often do we see a Protoss/terran players lose all their support units for immortal and tanks. And their expensive units are just left there to die. It would be cool if the progamers is given the tools to micro the shit out of them and save them.
The air collision seems like a problem and should be fixed by Blizzard immediately.
But I am not too sure about reducing all damage point to 0. This will simply make all long range units untouchable. No corruptors will ever touch a viking again.
And when corruptor get in range of the vikings then they will never survive ever again. Corruptors are faster by 0.2:ish movement speed.
If nessesary Corrupters can just get a small speed buff...
This creates simple but satisfying micro for both sides.
Vikings will try to kite their distance because they have longer range and can do moving shots. Corruptors will want to get in close and keep in range with THEIR moving shots. Because Corruptors are faster, they will win this battle, but since the fight is moving constantly, the Vikings might get to safety before they are killed.
In other words, moving shots on both sides will give a very dynamic battle with roughly the same balance, as long as both sides has an advantage to use.
Okay guys, let's put it short. Where is the mod with that stuff implemented. Under mod i mean current SC2 with those changes implemented. Just to see how hilarious/OP/whatever it is.
On November 01 2013 23:59 bhfberserk wrote: I just watched the video. I definitely think the tracking turret on the immortal and tanks can be a good start to add some more micro mechanic back into the game. How often do we see a Protoss/terran players lose all their support units for immortal and tanks. And their expensive units are just left there to die. It would be cool if the progamers is given the tools to micro the shit out of them and save them.
The air collision seems like a problem and should be fixed by Blizzard immediately.
But I am not too sure about reducing all damage point to 0. This will simply make all long range units untouchable. No corruptors will ever touch a viking again.
And when corruptor get in range of the vikings then they will never survive ever again. Corruptors are faster by 0.2:ish movement speed.
If nessesary Corrupters can just get a small speed buff...
This creates simple but satisfying micro for both sides.
Vikings will try to kite their distance because they have longer range and can do moving shots. Corruptors will want to get in close and keep in range with THEIR moving shots. Because Corruptors are faster, they will win this battle, but since the fight is moving constantly, the Vikings might get to safety before they are killed.
In other words, moving shots on both sides will give a very dynamic battle with roughly the same balance, as long as both sides has an advantage to use.
it's more than just vikings and corruptors. TvP for example, due to low dps from toss stalker and storm becomes more dodgable, vikings can snipe off obs/colossus so easily that terran can just snipes all day without any drawbacks. Right now toss and terran is at a fine line that if the vikings try to snipe, the stalkers and storm will scare them off.
But are you going to buff stalkers and storm just so that vikings won't get close so easily?
I watched the starbow tournaments and honestly they didn't look anything better than what we have for diamond players game now and that is after the micro tricks already utilized and developed
On November 01 2013 23:49 Falling wrote: Wow. This has gone downhill in the last few pages. This sort of micro gives players more tools and gives units greater functionality. Why are we against units that respond better and are more maneuverable. Why should players "fight against the computer."
Why this is good for an RTS is because the most successful RTS's as competitive games and as spectator sports were ones that married Strategy and Tactics from RTS's and twitch response unit control from Fighting Games. Probably not intentionally, but that's the best description I can give. Day9's so-called frisbee analogy comes exactly into play here.
It's not just a click fest and he that has the higher apm spam wins. It is creating these little unit combo moves that allows players to gain advantages beyond simply positioning and unit composition. In addition to. Not in place of. That's why it creates more depth the gameplay. You take the fundamentals of a strategy game with unit positioning, composition decisions, tech choices and add in rapid response unit maneuvers.
Yes some of that already exists. My fallback example is Marines vs Banelings. We like that stuff. This adds more. Or enhances what already exists. It makes the micro smoother, more snappy, more crisp. Rather than making it feel like you are microing through mud. You can do it, but without the crisp, clean feel it doesn't feel nearly as fun to perform. You always feel like you are waiting for the computer to do its thing before performing the next action. Like playing in a high latency environment. Doable, but not as fun.
Marines vs Banelings is visual, it requires skill, and it is about rapid response and both players microing back and forth. Why would we sniff our noses at getting rid of engine limitations that choke unit functionality, that grinds unit movement to a halt and forces them to pause before firing. Maybe some units should keep that pause. But should all? Just because it's status quo and it might shake up the game. Delving down to these fundamentals and making smart changes can only be a good thing for the game for competitors and spectators alike.
(Oh and by the way, most of these maneuvers can be performed by low level players. I'm only 1700 D on iccup now, but the vast majority of the micro tricks I can do and could do when I was hovering between D/D-. Just not consistently and while macroing. It's fun for low level player as well as high level players. Even my brother (LordBryon of my BW is for Newbs blogs) has started trying Vulture patrol micro. It looks cool even for new players and they want to try it out.)
Micro also changes the incentives and makes things worthwhile that otherwise might not be unless they were made too strong. Taking a pack of wraiths and flying them over the enemy mineral line repeatedly even while being chased by mutas and hydras is worth it because those wraiths can move shot to pick off scvs while flying. Because of that the incentive to try and do that is increased and that tactical gameplay has a ton of interesting decisions around positioning and control to keep those units alive (or on the otherside to hunt them down) we get better gameplay.
I 100% agree. Incentive to micro is HUGE. That's why I don't buy the argument that players have not yet and will never reach the current skill ceiling so we need not add anything new. Skill ceilings will never be reached in that sense because we are not computer AI and do no play like robots.
Even though there might be this 'best practice' which requires micro, progamers will not generally do it if the incentive to do so is not sufficient. To unabashadly self-promote, the example I usedA-move by Design I argued that at some point in the game, every unit (except pure spellcasters), best practice can be to just A-move in win. Yes you could micro like crazy, but you have such an overwhelming advantage, normally microed units are just sent in to receive more damage, but to just roll them. Sometimes you just go and kill them.
The example I used was if Seige Tanks had their splash damage removed. It might be that 'best practice' would still be to set them up for that extra armour damage. However, progamers aren't there to be fancy, but to win. So for them, best practice is a less than ideal micro, slightly higher damage taken, but we'd rarely see them seiged up. No matter how often we harangue them for not playing perfectly and therefore there is still something to improve. The incentive is not there. And if progamers don't do it, beginners certainly won't. But you would probably get some middling players with a hardcore following preaching the merits of that extra micro on TL. Meanwhile, progamers would continue roll their tanks around, never touching siege mode.
The incentive needs to be sufficiently high for it to be a worthwhile investment for players to perform it. Even if there is a slight edge. Maybe one or two of the very top players would use it in specific situations. But the goal is to open it up for all. Incentivize the progamers and the lower players will follow suit because it looks so cool.
I watched the starbow tournaments and honestly they didn't look anything better than what we have for diamond players game now and that is after the micro tricks already utilized and developed
There have been so many changes around Starbow since the last tournament that you can barely even say it's the same mod atm, especially in terms of micro (macro as well, but that's a different topic).
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.
How is a corruptor ever going to get near those vikings? He won't. And in general the anti-kiting micro isn't improved, it would only be that kiting would be much easier.
Flanking? Fungals? Pulling away to re-engage later?
EPT
