EPTIt's what pisses us off but it's also the most rewarding thing.. when you see you did your job and can pull 100 suply out of nowhere!
Zerg is the most fun race to play because of this!
The Curious Case of soO's Macro Mechanics - Page 10
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
shell
Portugal2722 Posts
It's what pisses us off but it's also the most rewarding thing.. when you see you did your job and can pull 100 suply out of nowhere! Zerg is the most fun race to play because of this! | ||
|
FueledUpAndReadyToGo
Netherlands30548 Posts
Once you master stutterstep, it is also mindless clicking. A-click backwards, move-click forwards, repeat. Do you think marines should auto stutterstep when retreating? Watching stalker healthbars and blinking them back when red is mindless too. There's no decision making. You either blink back or you are too slow the unit dies and you lose a possible advantage. None of these mechanics make the game less interesting. It really doesn't matter if a click is 'mindless' or not. In the end it's about two players battling eachother at the best of their abilties. Macro is a part of that too. If you have the power of thought to be able to inject better, chrono better, constantly mule better, than that should very well give you a large advantage to win the game. | ||
|
Blargh
United States2101 Posts
I think you're ignoring how much of an impact macro mechanics have in strategy. While removing macro mechanics could allow players to focus more on strategic play, it would remove much of the early-game strategy. And by doing so, it would lower the overall strategic skill cap. In 5 years, I bet players would be able to perform just as strategic of builds, and still be able to perform the macro necessary. Broodwar took years to develop to its late-2000's state. | ||
|
Endymion
United States3701 Posts
| ||
|
Foudzing
France181 Posts
I don't think they are doing it perfectly tho. They're talking about strategic choice, well: - Send a mule or scan (or emergency supply if you're noob like me) is a strategic choice - Inject or put a creep tumor or keep the nergy for transfuse is a strategic choice - Chronoboost your Probes, your units or your upgrades is a strategicall choice. The problem I think is this: You don't inject, properly, you lose, you don't mule properly, you lose you don't chornoboost properly you lose. No matter how awesome your strategicall choices are, no matter how on point your micro is, at a casual level, if your opponent as better macro mecanics, even by a small margin, he'll destroy you. This is a big problem and I agree with Blizzard that this should be solved. In my opinion the economics abilities are just too strong, this is what makes them impossible to miss, they should nerf the inject, nerf the mule and nerf the chronoboost. But not delete them, because they offer strategicall choice. I don't know Nexus, Orbitals and Queens can stack up until 200 energy but that's useless because if you don't use your energy constantly you lose anyway. You start to lose potential in army size as long as your queen is at 26/200 in energy, whereas you should start to lose potential when your queen is 200/200 in my opinion. So that's my opinion as a casual player that don't want to spend 500 hours on a game to start to having fun, and honestly this is where SC2 is at the moment. I believe all the people who think the opposite are BW nerds who don't want sc2 to be popular. Yes SC BW was more popular than what SC2 is and yes it was more difficult, but it was 10 years ago, times has changed, people have changed, people have now a ton of games to choose from, and if they find a game funnier at first glance, they'll choose it over SC2. Now my opinion as sc2 esport viewer, I like to watch SC2 because I know how the hell the things they are doing are freakin difficult, and requires a ton of dedication, more than any other esport game in my opinion. So if sc2 becomes easier yes it's will be less exciting. BUT I think even if they makes the game A LOT easier, it will still be A LOT more difficult than the others esports games right now, so they have room to make changes. And nothing said that the game we'll be more easier for pros, macros will be easier, but if each units has 3 abilities, and you've to take new bases every 3 minutes, well that's not easier for pros lol. | ||
|
Parcelleus
Australia1662 Posts
Leave macro alone ! I dont want it made easier, it works leave it, dont mess with it. If you want to cut 'a few clicks' , remove some new units and/or their actions. | ||
|
YyapSsap
New Zealand1511 Posts
On August 04 2015 18:59 Foudzing wrote: I completely with agree with Blizzard, the game has no success because it is too difficult, and not fun at low level, that's totally the reason why I quit the game. I don't think they are doing it perfectly tho. They're talking about strategic choice, well: - Send a mule or scan (or emergency supply if you're noob like me) is a strategic choice - Inject or put a creep tumor or keep the nergy for transfuse is a strategic choice - Chronoboost your Probes, your units or your upgrades is a strategicall choice. The problem I think is this: You don't inject, properly, you lose, you don't mule properly, you lose you don't chornoboost properly you lose. No matter how awesome your strategicall choices are, no matter how on point your micro is, at a casual level, if your opponent as better macro mecanics, even by a small margin, he'll destroy you. This is a big problem and I agree with Blizzard that this should be solved. In my opinion the economics abilities are just too strong, this is what makes them impossible to miss, they should nerf the inject, nerf the mule and nerf the chronoboost. But not delete them, because they offer strategicall choice. I don't know Nexus, Orbitals and Queens can stack up until 200 energy but that's useless because if you don't use your energy constantly you lose anyway. You start to lose potential in army size as long as your queen is at 26/200 in energy, whereas you should start to lose potential when your queen is 200/200 in my opinion. So that's my opinion as a casual player that don't want to spend 500 hours on a game to start to having fun, and honestly this is where SC2 is at the moment. Now my opinion as sc2 esport viewer, I like to watch SC2 because I know how the hell the things they are doing are freakin difficult, and requires a ton of dedication, more than any other esport game in my opinion. So if sc2 becomes easier yes it's will be less exciting. BUT I think even if they makes the game A LOT easier, it will still be A LOT more difficult than the others esports games right now, so they have room to make changes. And nothing said that the game we'll be more easier for pros, macros will be easier, but if each units has 3 abilities, and you've to take new bases every 3 minutes, well that's not easier for pros lol. This game died on the casual front because of that BNET 0.2 anti social interface that they royally ****ed up. Still to this day, I dont understand why they had to reinvent something that was functioning so well (only required a few changes..). | ||
|
Yiome
China1687 Posts
On August 04 2015 06:30 Existor wrote: Please don't make shadows like that next time ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/y1auTjl.png) Wait a sec, is that a dragon's fang? ( Wheel of Time reference?) | ||
|
Quineotio
Australia128 Posts
On August 04 2015 18:49 Endymion wrote: sc2 needs more ways of being a better player not less.. Forcing the players to arbitrarily click on something every 30 seconds seems like a bad way to allow players to differentiate themselves. apm allocation and scarcity is a huge part of what makes SC such a special and unique game I disagree that "apm allocation and scarcity" makes SC special or unique. APM is a part of all RTS games, not just SC2. Regardless, it's not like players will ever be able to control the game at maximum potential. Better players will always be able to do more. Removing macro mechanics will not effect apm scarcity. removing (macro) just makes the game easier at a high level, making it more stale and less fun to get to the very very top Removing macro mechanics does not necessarily make the game easier. Remember, both players will have more time, and therefore both players will spend time on other things (like moving units around). It would however make the game easier to control at a basic level, which I think is a good thing. | ||
|
Foudzing
France181 Posts
On August 04 2015 19:03 Parcelleus wrote: Leave macro alone ! I dont want it made easier, it works leave it, dont mess with it. It works for people who are already good at the game, for casual it doesn't work, at all and the game will have less and less players. At casual level, macro is more important than anything. A player who will scout, think about strategicall choices and try to micro will lose to a player who do none of that but just play like a robot eyes 100% on his base and constantly making units. Honestly at a casual level, playing the game feels like a punishment, you have to constantly reapeat the same actions, constantly checks, it's like you're doing your groceries or something. And if you want to have fun, well you lose. Now tell me how is this fun? | ||
|
Parcelleus
Australia1662 Posts
| ||
|
Parcelleus
Australia1662 Posts
On August 04 2015 19:14 Foudzing wrote: It works for people who are already good at the game, for casual it don't works, and the game will have less and less players. At casual level, macro is more important than anything. A player who will scout, think about strategicall choices and try to micro will lose to a player who do none of that but just play like a robot eyes 100% on his base and constantly making units. Now tell me how is this fun? 99% of games these days are 'hold your hand' type of games. Im sick of it, and one of the reasons I love SC2 is because it requires patience and practice to get better, this makes the game very rewarding. I dont want to play 'another' un-rewarding game. | ||
|
Foudzing
France181 Posts
On August 04 2015 19:17 Parcelleus wrote: 99% of games these days are 'hold your hand' type of games. Im sick of it, and one of the reasons I love SC2 is because it requires patience and practice to get better, this makes the game very rewarding. I dont want to play 'another' un-rewarding game. Man even if they make macro way easier there will still be a WORLD of differences between you and soO. Even if they make macro way easier you'll still has to train your ass off to get better, don't freak about it... I don't want a game where it's easy to climb, I don't care, I am casual, I just want a game fun to play at casual level. Right now sc2 feels like you're not allowed to micro, or even thinking, before you don't macro properly. So you want a game that where you have to play 100 hours before having any kind of fun? Are you masochist or something? Do you know what "game" means? | ||
|
Parcelleus
Australia1662 Posts
On August 04 2015 19:24 Foudzing wrote: Man even if they make macro way easier there will still be a WORLD of differences between you and soO. Even if they make macro way easier you'll still has to train your ass off to get better, don't freak about it... I don't want a game where it's easy to climb, I don't care, I am casual, I just want a game fun to play at casual level. Right now sc2 feels like you're not allowed to micro, or even thinking, before you don't macro properly. So you want a game that where you have to play 100 hours before having any kind of fun? Are you masochist or something? Do you know what "game" means? If you dont find SC2 fun, find a game that you do find fun. I am saying macro is part of SC2 strategy, if you cant cope with that then there are other games you may find more fun. Not many games are like SC2, so trying to make it more casual doesnt make sense from what SC is all about imho. Its not a casual game, well it is once you reach a certain level, but it does have a steep learning curve which can do with some attention. Messing with a gameplay foundation like macro is not the answer, that is like saying, in basketball you dont have to bounce the ball anymore you can freely run with it. Then its just not basketball is it ? SC and macro cannot be seperated. | ||
|
rockslave
Brazil318 Posts
But in the end, it's subjective and arbitrary. I wonder if people like me, who dislike them, are mostly Zerg. Chronoboost has some thought to be put on it (mostly build orders though), but injecting is simply compulsory. Mules are sort of dumb too. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
The game's difficulty should stem from your opponent's actions and strategies. A better opponent should make it hard or even impossible to win because he gets the better end of every interaction. But when there is no interaction - directly or strategically - there is no reason why you should fall behind. Even though I regularily disagree with the how, blizzard is finally getting that. More interaction, more room for interaction to shine, more ways to interact and more degrees of outcomes for interaction are the direction they want to go and that the game needs to take. Their ideas to change macro mechanics are double good from this perspective: 1) they directly interfere with the principle that you get massive advantages from doing a singleplayer-like action very well 2) it slows down the economical proponent of the game. Consequently an investment - say a harassment unit - has more time to interact with the opponent before it has to be retreated/dies due to reinforcements. | ||
|
StatixEx
United Kingdom779 Posts
| ||
|
Foudzing
France181 Posts
On August 04 2015 19:33 Parcelleus wrote: If you dont find SC2 fun, find a game that you do find fun. I am saying macro is part of SC2 strategy, if you cant cope with that then there are other games you may find more fun. Not many games are like SC2, so trying to make it more casual doesnt make sense from what SC is all about imho. Its not a casual game, well it is once you reach a certain level, but it does have a steep learning curve which can do with some attention. Messing with a gameplay foundation like macro is not the answer, that is like saying, in basketball you dont have to bounce the ball anymore you can freely run with it. Then its just not basketball is it ? SC and macro cannot be seperated. You're getting me wrong, I don't want macro to be deleted, I just want it to be less important, so that it's not the only factor in the games until freaking platinium. Yes that's what I did, I left SC2, because I had no fun with it (and I tried lol), but that's sad, because SC2 could be fun, for everyone, not only for an elite, who managed to went thought the struggle of annoying and boring games. SC2 could be fun, the reaction of 90% of the players when they discover SC2 is very positive like "wow there is freaking tanks, wow lasers, wow so many interactions, so many possibilities I want to play this game". Then they play the game, and after 10 to 20 games they realise the game is just about repeating annoying stuff, they realize that it's too difficult to control your units perfectly, and even if you do, controlling your units has close to no impact anyway. And finally Blizzard understand the problem and tries to fix it, there is a bunch of BW nerds going mad like "leave SC2 boring and impossible to play at low level pls", for no reason, just for the sake of not changing anything, not changing "SC foundations" lol. If foundations are bad, you have to change it, and they are bad, eveything shows that they are bad. Or maybe the reason is "hey I went thought 500 hours of boring and annoying games to finally be good I don't want newcomers to have 500 hours of funs games to do to be good" but you just don't want to admit it because that's really selfish. I don't know I feel all you want is SC2 to be as close as possible to BW, if you want BW, just play BW. | ||
|
Vanadiel
France961 Posts
On August 04 2015 19:14 Foudzing wrote: It works for people who are already good at the game, for casual it doesn't work, at all and the game will have less and less players. At casual level, macro is more important than anything. A player who will scout, think about strategicall choices and try to micro will lose to a player who do none of that but just play like a robot eyes 100% on his base and constantly making units. Honestly at a casual level, playing the game feels like a punishment, you have to constantly reapeat the same actions, constantly checks, it's like you're doing your groceries or something. And if you want to have fun, well you lose. Now tell me how is this fun? Casual play against other casuals, thus equally bad on macro mechanics so it's not an issue. Archon mod is there for those with bad mechanics, 1v1 does not have to be played by everyone for the game to be successful. | ||
|
Foudzing
France181 Posts
On August 04 2015 19:53 Vanadiel wrote: Casual play against other casuals, equally bad on macro mechanics so it's not an issue. Archon mod is there for those with bad mechanics, 1v1 does not have to be played by everyone for the game to be successful. Yes it's an issue, because if you want to win, you have to go full macro mode and not doing anything else. Therefore the game is boring as long as you want to win. Rofl Archon mode, let's talk about Archon mode. They were already customs Archon mode in SC2, and guess what? No one want to do the macro part, WHAT A SURPRISE. Macro is boring, just admit it. 1v1 is the most important part of the game, it should not be reserved to an elite. If you find the most important part of the game not fun, you quit the game, that's all. | ||
| ||
