|
On November 01 2013 23:20 RampancyTW wrote:Show nested quote +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.
Why are you so agressive? People have been really tollerant for your bulshit troghout this thread, keeping things civil and trying to explain their views and why this would be a good thing for the game. And you on the other hand go on and on attacking people, argumenting how this would turn the game upside down (which it would and which is a good thing and i would adress this at LotV beta), how we are BW fanboys, how we are stupid and cant put two and two together.
Ok so you want the game intact is that it? You think the game is perfect as it is? Thats fine, you made your point and if you infact have anything new to say, say it. Otherwise stop posting and pissing people off for the sake of it.
|
Russian Federation40190 Posts
Thanks to Lalush to making that hilarious unit tester.
Mutas(apparently vikings, oracles and phoenix too lol) that are perma stacked. Worst thing ever against thors. Yes, Rabiator, auto-max of DPS is bad if your whole army gets raped by couple of shots.
Banshees that can kite marines without stim even with lag spike every second. But suddenly are not stacked from beginning.
Hilarious.
|
These features simply give players more control over what their units do, and more incentive to spend their time and energy doing cool and skillful things. There is no downside to them.
Might some balancing have to occur? Perhaps, but the entire game is going to be rebalanced in LotV anyway, so what's the big deal?
|
On November 02 2013 00:51 lolfail9001 wrote:
Thanks to Lalush to making that hilarious unit tester.
Mutas(apparently vikings, oracles and phoenix too lol) that are perma stacked. Worst thing ever against thors. Yes, Rabiator, auto-max of DPS is bad if your whole army gets raped by couple of shots.
Banshees that can kite marines without stim even with lag spike every second. But suddenly are not stacked from beginning.
Hilarious.
To have found my unit tester in the first place you must have actually visited the reddit topics and comment threads that mention it.
In every single one of those I write that my unit tester is not supposed to look good. That I'm not knowledgeable enough to implement a custom separation mechanic. That those who want to see how stacking works with a functioning custom separation mechanic should try Starbow Unit Tester. There is no way you can miss this if you went through the trouble of finding my unit tester.
I published a unit tester map: "Depth of Micro (Air)". Available on US and EU.
My map has no custom seperation mechanic. So air units stay really tightly clumped. Also no tracking turret on tanks. But the oracle with projectile attack might be worth a try.
I recommend trying the Starbow Unit Tester. There's tracking turrets on tanks. It also has a variety of air units that all are responsive and microable (viking, banshee, muta, corsair, scout). Also they have a custom made separation/spreading mechanic that doesn't interfere with gliding.
I'm not knowledgeable enough to create/implement my own separation mechanic. Decemberscalm could have shown me, but I didn't think it was relevant to have on my test map.
You can try the Starbow Unit Tester to see what a custom separation/spreading mechanic looks like.
I'll publish my modified unit tester map tomorrow morning when I wake up. I'll post another topic about it. Most of my changes are not meant to be balanced or "look good" (for example, 0.001 separation radius looks ridiculously compact and absurd when you stack units). They're mostly just meant to help understand and detect bugs, as well as show the possibilities of micro without these bugs.
But then again. It's hard to make 6000 posts in 3 months by actually reading and considering the arguments of the comments you respond to.
This is the last time I ever respond to a comment of yours. Even this response is completely pointless since all you're doing is talking and responding to yourself. If you're not an intentional troll then there's something seriously wrong with the way you argue.
|
Argument for why these changes are just good for SC2 even without Broodwar context:
To address this topic, we first have to examine why people watch sports ie. other people playing games, in the first place. The fans want the thrill of seeing somebody else do what they themselves cannot do. Now this does not necessarily mean the score screen. Fans do not get excited over team X beating team Y if they don't see the action that takes place.
In starcraft 2, there surely is a large skill gap between the professional players that we watch, and the fans sitting at home. However, I would say this inequality presents itself through the course of the game as a whole whether it be by better macro, decision making, or unit composition. Very rarely is it through a "move" or a skill shot.
Similarly in sports, the game becomes way more involved for the fans when their favorite player performs exceptional athletic movements that no ordinary human can do. Although it is satisfying for your team to win, it's only time and time again exciting if we see what the skill gap is, which in my opinion is best demonstrated through brief moments of micro.
I'm not saying SC2 doesn't have micro. It does. However, the micro tricks you can do in SC2 are too easy to execute. The fact that many diamond and masters players can do all the micro steps that the pros do within a custom map shows that it's not the micro itself that is a reflection of the skill gap, but the overall picture, which has more to do with things that we cannot see as viewers.
So in conclusion, although I believe Lalush's proposed changes will make the game more dynamic, we need to be sure that if they do enter the game (which I doubt given blizzards track record), that these new features of units can only be exploited given extreme dexterity and apm, which will highlight the gap between pro players and casuals or even lesser pro players.
|
On November 02 2013 01:16 fighter2_40 wrote:
Argument for why these changes are just good for SC2 even without Broodwar context:
To address this topic, we first have to examine why people watch sports ie. other people playing games, in the first place. The fans want the thrill of seeing somebody else do what they themselves cannot do. Now this does not necessarily mean the score screen. Fans do not get excited over team X beating team Y if they don't see the action that takes place.
In starcraft 2, there surely is a large skill gap between the professional players that we watch, and the fans sitting at home. However, I would say this inequality presents itself through the course of the game as a whole whether it be by better macro, decision making, or unit composition. Very rarely is it through a "move" or a skill shot.
Similarly in sports, the game becomes way more involved for the fans when their favorite player performs exceptional athletic movements that no ordinary human can do. Although it is satisfying for your team to win, it's only time and time again exciting if we see what the skill gap is, which in my opinion is best demonstrated through brief moments of micro.
I'm not saying SC2 doesn't have micro. It does. However, the micro tricks you can do in SC2 are too easy to execute. The fact that many diamond and masters players can do all the micro steps that the pros do within a custom map shows that it's not the micro itself that is a reflection of the skill gap, but the overall picture, which has more to do with things that we cannot see as viewers.
So in conclusion, although I believe Lalush's proposed changes will make the game more dynamic, we need to be sure that if they do enter the game (which I doubt given blizzards track record), that these new features of units can only be exploited given extreme dexterity and apm, which will highlight the gap between pro players and casuals or even lesser pro players.
The real argument is that blinksalker micro, stutter step micro, and fast responsive splitting micro is very impressive in SC2 and it would be great to add these changes to it because it would give us more of the stuff we already like in Starcraft 2.
|
^ yes exactly, thank you.
|
a possible argument in favour of a high priority unit separation mechanic could be "ease of spectator readability". Blizz wants the spectators to see exactly how many units are fighting with ease.
|
On November 02 2013 01:24 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2013 01:16 fighter2_40 wrote:
Argument for why these changes are just good for SC2 even without Broodwar context:
To address this topic, we first have to examine why people watch sports ie. other people playing games, in the first place. The fans want the thrill of seeing somebody else do what they themselves cannot do. Now this does not necessarily mean the score screen. Fans do not get excited over team X beating team Y if they don't see the action that takes place.
In starcraft 2, there surely is a large skill gap between the professional players that we watch, and the fans sitting at home. However, I would say this inequality presents itself through the course of the game as a whole whether it be by better macro, decision making, or unit composition. Very rarely is it through a "move" or a skill shot.
Similarly in sports, the game becomes way more involved for the fans when their favorite player performs exceptional athletic movements that no ordinary human can do. Although it is satisfying for your team to win, it's only time and time again exciting if we see what the skill gap is, which in my opinion is best demonstrated through brief moments of micro.
I'm not saying SC2 doesn't have micro. It does. However, the micro tricks you can do in SC2 are too easy to execute. The fact that many diamond and masters players can do all the micro steps that the pros do within a custom map shows that it's not the micro itself that is a reflection of the skill gap, but the overall picture, which has more to do with things that we cannot see as viewers.
So in conclusion, although I believe Lalush's proposed changes will make the game more dynamic, we need to be sure that if they do enter the game (which I doubt given blizzards track record), that these new features of units can only be exploited given extreme dexterity and apm, which will highlight the gap between pro players and casuals or even lesser pro players. The real argument is that blinksalker micro, stutter step micro, and fast responsive splitting micro is very impressive in SC2 and it would be great to add these changes to it because it would give us more of the stuff we already like in Starcraft 2.
Sure you can put it that way simply as well. However, one thing that is disconcerting is that there is no signature of pro players anymore. Many players were in the past defined by their mechanics in micro and macro and now that the game design has made these functions easier, players are having a harder time differentiating among themselves within the gameplay itself.
|
I understand that people get irritated with BW comparisons, but I really don't see why people go so far as to say these changes are bad. Anything that helps micro in SC2 should be seriously considered to be added into the game. I would gladly take a temporary hit on balance if it meant making the game deeper overall.
This thread really illustrates that what made BW micro possible wasn't just bugs and glitches, but rather intentional design decisions in how the units moved and interacted with each other, and it also shows that SC2 is actually distinctly worse in some aspects. Things like this shouldn't be brushed under the rug.
|
On November 01 2013 18:35 Sissors wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2013 18:22 dutchfriese wrote:On November 01 2013 18:10 Sissors wrote:On November 01 2013 17:55 dutchfriese wrote:On November 01 2013 17:45 Sissors wrote:On November 01 2013 17:40 dutchfriese wrote:On November 01 2013 17:28 ejozl wrote:
So can anyone tell me already, how this adds depth to the micro in the game?
It's basically all just kiting, with same speed, isn't there more depth, when units act differently from each other and when in different numbers?
Also turret thing is just an idea, something that Hellions already have and Phoenix do automatically. It's not kiting with the same speed. Did you watch the video? He edited every unit with his/its own game "speeds". The entire point of the video was that one cannot currently "kite" nearly as effectively with certain units such as vikings, as one could could effectively kite with said unit under brood war mechanics. Point is, brood war offered all(and mainly professional) players the ability to beat their opponent with superior micro management. Sc2 on the other hand does not. And thats simply not true. Micro management is very important in SC2. But then why should kiting with vikings be made so much easier? Earlier you said SC2 should be a game where the player with superior macro, micro and mechanics should win. Yet all this does is making clicking fast more important at the cost of other aspects of the game, such as positioning. I guess I just don't think fast clicking is important enough as it is. Huh? You do realize that macro was much, much, much..... much harder in brood war vs sc2... right? There was no auto mine in sc2, players had to manually select each and every worker and tell them to mine minerals. That alone equals much more "clicking" vs sc2. The problem with your premise is "i guess i just don't think fast clicking is important enough as it is". Fast clicking is what separated the champions of brood war from the pack. In brood war, if you didn't have 300+ apm you were literally nothing. Starcraft 2 on the other hand... this is not the case. And I guess that is where we disagree. Because I consider this EXTREMELY good. I don't want a game where your click speed is what seperates you from worse players. Sure micro should have a role, and does have a role. But I rather have it also important how you manage your economy (no that is not the same as how fast you had to click in BW just to mine), which units you decide to make (Yes I know there has been alot of bitching by BW players that that would be too important in SC2, I disagree), where you engage, how you engage, etc. Now by making it alot easier to properly kite with vikings for example, you imo only make the winner depend more on who can click faster. That might sound like a paradox, easier kiting yet you have to spend more clicks on it. The problem is that what is ignored is balance. If you make vikings a lolol kiting into eternity unit then you have to hit it quite hard with the nerf hammer on its stats. That means for the same effectiveness you have to spend more time clicking it. Those clicks aren't exactly the hardest one, definately easier than kiting now. But you do have to click a shitton. At the same time this comes at the cost of important of stuff like positioning your vikings. In the end you are just raising the required amount of clicks to play well, but does that mean there is more depth in the game? I don't think so. Well, clearly you didn't read my original post on the topic, i said the game needs to be rebalanced if this were to take effect. But what you don't understand is that makes it automatically required you spend alot more time clicking, and makes positioning, strategy, tactics, etc less important. Show nested quote +You underestimate the amount of management involved with economy in sc2 vs brood war. Sc2 is a JOKE compared to brood war. Managing economy in sc2 is like petting a dog. You have to click morei n BW yes. If you consider that managing an economy we can agree that you have to do more of it in BW. Show nested quote +Honestly, you strike me as a person who has played very little brood war, and I don't think you understand the amount of APM that takes place to win a brood war match. It's not even about the amount of clicks. It's about the amount of necessary clicks AFTER macro, which currently in sc2 is relatively nonexistent, at least compared to brood war... it isn't even close. 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. Also I didn't play very little BW. I didn't play it at all. I used to play AOE games. Then a friend asked me if I would switch to SC2. (Who was on another continent than me so blizzard for a long time decided I wasn't allowed to play games with him). I pretty much laughed at him. Why would I want to play a click fest like BW was? But he told me it wasn't the case anymore in SC2, and gave me a guest code thingie (which promptly ruined my battle.net account since it was from another continent, and customer service EU told me to go to SEA, and other way around, in the end I just started copy pasting their mails to each other since apparantly directly talkign with each other was out of the question). I saw SC2 wasn't the clickfest BW was, and went to play it, and thats the story how you got stuck with me. Show nested quote +I understand the person that wins in sc2 is the one that has the the best map presence and "best micro"... so what? it's easy mode compared to a game like brood war; and that is precisely the reason why the winners are incredibly volatile. If it is easy because I don't have to do 500 clicks to get an SCV to mine I still consider it a good thing. 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.
If these changes went into effect, you would have to click 0 amount more times in a match. These changes are for the PROFESSIONALS, not diamond heroes playing at 90 apm.
I'm honestly not even sure why you are trying to debate this because you clearly do not even understand the implications these changes would bring.
|
Really, really great video, didn't knw you had that in you Lalush, awesome work, would be a dream if Blizzard cared. Maybe they will consider some changes with LotV. If they aren't gonna add new units anyway they could at least have a look at the existing game. LotV could be the finish touch to make sc2 the best game ever then.
|
On November 02 2013 01:30 fighter2_40 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2013 01:24 Thieving Magpie wrote:On November 02 2013 01:16 fighter2_40 wrote:
Argument for why these changes are just good for SC2 even without Broodwar context:
To address this topic, we first have to examine why people watch sports ie. other people playing games, in the first place. The fans want the thrill of seeing somebody else do what they themselves cannot do. Now this does not necessarily mean the score screen. Fans do not get excited over team X beating team Y if they don't see the action that takes place.
In starcraft 2, there surely is a large skill gap between the professional players that we watch, and the fans sitting at home. However, I would say this inequality presents itself through the course of the game as a whole whether it be by better macro, decision making, or unit composition. Very rarely is it through a "move" or a skill shot.
Similarly in sports, the game becomes way more involved for the fans when their favorite player performs exceptional athletic movements that no ordinary human can do. Although it is satisfying for your team to win, it's only time and time again exciting if we see what the skill gap is, which in my opinion is best demonstrated through brief moments of micro.
I'm not saying SC2 doesn't have micro. It does. However, the micro tricks you can do in SC2 are too easy to execute. The fact that many diamond and masters players can do all the micro steps that the pros do within a custom map shows that it's not the micro itself that is a reflection of the skill gap, but the overall picture, which has more to do with things that we cannot see as viewers.
So in conclusion, although I believe Lalush's proposed changes will make the game more dynamic, we need to be sure that if they do enter the game (which I doubt given blizzards track record), that these new features of units can only be exploited given extreme dexterity and apm, which will highlight the gap between pro players and casuals or even lesser pro players. The real argument is that blinksalker micro, stutter step micro, and fast responsive splitting micro is very impressive in SC2 and it would be great to add these changes to it because it would give us more of the stuff we already like in Starcraft 2. Sure you can put it that way simply as well. However, one thing that is disconcerting is that there is no signature of pro players anymore. Many players were in the past defined by their mechanics in micro and macro and now that the game design has made these functions easier, players are having a harder time differentiating among themselves within the gameplay itself.
Which is why I agree with Lalush's video...
|
On November 01 2013 19:12 vOdToasT wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2013 17:55 dutchfriese wrote:On November 01 2013 17:45 Sissors wrote:On November 01 2013 17:40 dutchfriese wrote:On November 01 2013 17:28 ejozl wrote:
So can anyone tell me already, how this adds depth to the micro in the game?
It's basically all just kiting, with same speed, isn't there more depth, when units act differently from each other and when in different numbers?
Also turret thing is just an idea, something that Hellions already have and Phoenix do automatically. It's not kiting with the same speed. Did you watch the video? He edited every unit with his/its own game "speeds". The entire point of the video was that one cannot currently "kite" nearly as effectively with certain units such as vikings, as one could could effectively kite with said unit under brood war mechanics. Point is, brood war offered all(and mainly professional) players the ability to beat their opponent with superior micro management. Sc2 on the other hand does not. And thats simply not true. Micro management is very important in SC2. But then why should kiting with vikings be made so much easier? Earlier you said SC2 should be a game where the player with superior macro, micro and mechanics should win. Yet all this does is making clicking fast more important at the cost of other aspects of the game, such as positioning. I guess I just don't think fast clicking is important enough as it is. Huh? You do realize that macro was much, much, much..... much harder in brood war vs sc2... right? There was no auto mine in sc2, players had to manually select each and every worker and tell them to mine minerals. That alone equals much more "clicking" vs sc2. The problem with your premise is "i guess i just don't think fast clicking is important enough as it is". Fast clicking is what separated the champions of brood war from the pack. In brood war, if you didn't have 300+ apm you were literally nothing. Starcraft 2 on the other hand... this is not the case. Why? Because the skill ceiling is DRAMATICALLY lower. 300 apm brood war =/= 300 apm sc2, and that's the entire point of lalush's video... Sc2 could be better than brood war, but it will not be better until the micro mechanics are addressed. It's really as simple as that. APM is not what separated the best players from the second best. At high level Brood War, every one had really high apm. They were all pretty close to the human limit for eapm, so it wasn't about who had more apm, it was about who used the amount of apm that everyone had the best. For example, Hyuk had insane apm, but was a mediocre player by progamer standards. Flash, on the other hand, had average apm (by progamer standards), but was the best player of all time. What separated the men from the boys in progaming the most was by far strategy and decision making. Having more things to do than you have apm makes Brood War more strategically deep than it would be otherwise. It turns apm in to a resource that you must spend wisely, and that you can harass and limit access to for your opponent.
wasted apm isn't a variable i bothered including in my post. Notice how I said 300 apm and not 400 apm... I understand the person with the "highest apm" doesn't necessarily win, but that doesn't change the fact that brood war required an extremely high amount of apm to compete.
At the end of the day APM is merely how fast someone can perform what their brain is telling them to do. The difference between brood war and sc2 is that 1. brood war naturally requires more apm via macro and 2. sc2 lowers the amount of possible apm because of shitty game mechanics pointed out in this video.
|
The air unit changes seems pretty reasonable, though I guess unit's attack speed will have to be nerfed if the delay is removed. But won't it make mass muta way too strong with the regen and high flying speed? It's already really really good to mass them. And banshees which are immune to slow marines will fuck up TvT early game really bad.
The tank turret targeting seems fun to change as unsieged tanks are crap at the moment. Immortals will become really strong though, they can already take a beating and deal high damage if they can do that at full movespeed they are really scary
Making workers act as air units seems really stupid and unnessary to me. It just looks totally buggy and out of place and I didn't like any of the probe micro vids either. They are workers, not assault planes.
|
I think these changes are good. I played StarBow however, and that was trying too hard to emulate BW in other ways, such as unit removals, mechanic removals, etc. That is not realistic for Blizzard to do. I think it's more realistic that they will change the air/micro mechanics. I'd like to see a test map where we can actually test the micro changes in regular SC2, despite how imbalanced it might be.
|
|
|
Russian Federation40190 Posts
On a second thought, (not talking about that default stack behavior, after all what do you think separation radius variable was responsible for after all), kiting is actually like... easier now. Yes, this does not raise skill cap (it is infinite after all) in the slighest, it just makes game easier. That's funny, like really funny. On another thought, if Blizzard ever reacts to this video (i just pray they will not try to watch full video), they will just make attack command being more prioritized over separation, while keeping separation having higher priority over move and other comannds. Now that actually makes a BW-style muta micro possible, while keeping magic box and what not as it is.
|
On November 02 2013 02:02 lolfail9001 wrote:
On a second thought, (not talking about that default stack behavior, after all what do you think separation radius variable was responsible for after all), kiting is actually like... easier now. Yes, this does not raise skill cap (it is infinite after all) in the slighest, it just makes game easier. That's funny, like really funny. On another thought, if Blizzard ever reacts to this video (i just pray they will not try to watch full video), they will just make attack command being more prioritized over separation, while keeping separation having higher priority over move and other comannds. Now that actually makes a BW-style muta micro possible, while keeping magic box and what not as it is.
And you had this epiphany now? But I wouldn't say that it is easier, rather more repsponsive to your action and you can control them in the way that you want, not in the way the game wants so of course it feels easier.
|
Wow, very nice writeup. I think this would do very well for the game. Not only will it show us great matches in tournaments, but also for the casual player. Some players are good at micro, but wont be as good at macro/army composition, can still put out an impressive match. Obviously casuals wont be able to both macro and micro good, and this will turn into interesting games from a casual perspective. What skill would I as a casual player now want to improve on, while also being rewarded for it? It's a great choice that keeps our interest.
This will surely need a lot of rebalancing, but I think the game needs a real puff in that direction. I just hope Blizzard has the balls of steel to go through with something like this. I have the impression they dont want to touch the game so much cause of the esport scene. If it ends up lets say, zergs being massively underpowered, we're talking about peoples jobs and income.
In the end though, they will not have a job if this game dont attract a good solid playerbase and viewers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
