|
The worker count in UI :
OK, but remove the counts on the base for mineral and gaz, it would be redundant (and these counters always been ugly imho)
Maps :
Remove Dusk Towers, it's been there for too long, and such an easy to macro and slow maps is not needed anymore because LotV is much more figured out. We can cope with usual base layout now.
If you have to keep frozen temple, go for it, but I have the impression ruins of endion would deserve more to stay, games seems more fun on this one, both when watching pros and when laddering.
|
On June 04 2016 21:02 Gwavajuice wrote:
The worker count in UI :
OK, but remove the counts on the base for mineral and gaz, it would be redundant (and these counters always been ugly imho)
Maps :
Remove Dusk Towers, it's been there for too long, and such an easy to macro and slow maps is not needed anymore because LotV is much more figured out. We can cope with usual base layout now.
If you have to keep frozen temple, go for it, but I have the impression ruins of endion would deserve more to stay, games seems more fun on this one, both when watching pros and when laddering.
You can remove the counts on bases for minerals and gas (I do because as you say they don't look pretty and I can still check my saturation by passing the cursor on the base/assim).
|
By giving too much information, at some point you steal people from the thrill of learning. The satisfaction to have your instinct telling you "hm i got 160 population but my army looks tiny... I should stop SCVing/droning/probing". And then watching the replay after you win and say to yourself : "i'm happy because i had a good instinct that came from learning and work".
Learning SC2 is about overcoming difficult things, and each time you do it you enjoy it, because you feel like you're learning to master yet a little more of the game. If you just have everything on the UI, what's the point. Of course it's a small thing, and probably won't change much since you already have the workers per base displayed, but it's a step in the wrong direction. It's yet another attempt from blizzard to attract people may not be overly fond of the RTS genre, but we're way past that point.
|
On June 04 2016 21:08 JackONeill wrote:
By giving too much information, at some point you steal people from the thrill of learning. The satisfaction to have your instinct telling you "hm i got 160 population but my army looks tiny... I should stop SCVing/droning/probing". And then watching the replay after you win and say to yourself : "i'm happy because i had a good instinct that came from learning and work".
Learning SC2 is about overcoming difficult things, and each time you do it you enjoy it, because you feel like you're learning to master yet a little more of the game. If you just have everything on the UI, what's the point. Of course it's a small thing, and probably won't change much since you already have the workers per base displayed, but it's a step in the wrong direction. It's yet another attempt from blizzard to attract people may not be overly fond of the RTS genre, but we're way past that point.
OK, so that's your view. I am fully in favour of having the option to hide whatever you please (even though Blizzard is probably not gonna do that, because they think the players are dumb as sticks, but that's another point). But why do you feel like showing this down everyone else's throat? Why we should not be given those things just because you enjoy not having them?
|
For God sake please no more Dusk Towers. And among all the great maps we saw in the TLMC, New Gettysburg was literally the worst one, nice accuracy from blizzard again.
|
Dont include the worker count please
|
On June 04 2016 21:08 JackONeill wrote:
By giving too much information, at some point you steal people from the thrill of learning. The satisfaction to have your instinct telling you "hm i got 160 population but my army looks tiny... I should stop SCVing/droning/probing". And then watching the replay after you win and say to yourself : "i'm happy because i had a good instinct that came from learning and work".
this situation doesn't happen except maybe for zerg because every player stops at 66 workers (optimal 3 base saturation) anyway.
it's not an "instinct" telling you to stop producing workers it's the worker counter above each base showing 16 + 6 in gas.
|
Personally, I'd be glad to see the worker count added to the UI. Make it an option that you can toggle on/off (like health bars) so that those who think it would "look ugly" can simply turn it off. Now that I mention it, the health bars seems like a pretty good comparison. Some people turn them off because they think it clutters up the screen too much. But most people find that the information provided is worth a bit of screen clutter.
I really don't see any good reason to oppose having this additional information about worker counts. Since we are all playing opponents of more or less equal skill on ladder, who is threatened by this minor change? It seems to me that the main difference this change would create is that lower level players will be more directly/obviously confronted with their lower worker counts from game to game and might realize that they need to improve this area of their gameplay. So, if a few more bronze leaguers finally graduate to silver does that make SC2 worse? I don't think so. Above bronze/silver/gold/platinum, I don't see the additional UI information making any significant difference.
|
On June 04 2016 22:25 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 21:08 JackONeill wrote:
By giving too much information, at some point you steal people from the thrill of learning. The satisfaction to have your instinct telling you "hm i got 160 population but my army looks tiny... I should stop SCVing/droning/probing". And then watching the replay after you win and say to yourself : "i'm happy because i had a good instinct that came from learning and work". this situation doesn't happen except maybe for zerg because every player stops at 66 workers (optimal 3 base saturation) anyway. it's not an "instinct" telling you to stop producing workers it's the worker counter above each base showing 16 + 6 in gas.
You're very optimistic if you think that just seeing optimal saturation will stop someone's fingers to go for their usual worker production routine, it actually takes time to discipline yourself to not go up to 70+ workers simply because in the heat of the battle your fingers went for <cc hotkey>+S just because your neurons have "plastified" around this routine.
|
Russian Federation421 Posts
On June 04 2016 21:26 Aegwynn wrote:
For God sake please no more Dusk Towers. And among all the great maps we saw in the TLMC, New Gettysburg was literally the worst one, nice accuracy from blizzard again.
Please stop stating your opinions as facts. I, for one, loved New Gettysburg.
|
On June 04 2016 22:25 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 21:08 JackONeill wrote:
By giving too much information, at some point you steal people from the thrill of learning. The satisfaction to have your instinct telling you "hm i got 160 population but my army looks tiny... I should stop SCVing/droning/probing". And then watching the replay after you win and say to yourself : "i'm happy because i had a good instinct that came from learning and work". this situation doesn't happen except maybe for zerg because every player stops at 66 workers (optimal 3 base saturation) anyway. it's not an "instinct" telling you to stop producing workers it's the worker counter above each base showing 16 + 6 in gas.
If you play macro, even at high masters, you're gonna have situations where you forget you have 15 scvs on 1 mineral patch in your base, and keep producing scvs to saturate your fourth. And yeah, it happens to zergs a lot, if I had a coin for every zerg i've beaten or seen loose because they produced 90 drones on 4 bases, I'd be scrooge mcduck. It's about cases where you do mistakes because you fail to go look for the information, not because you're not able to get it. And having the idea to look for this kind of information is what i'd call instinct, instead of being spoonfed what you're supposed to learn to look for.
On June 04 2016 21:18 opisska wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 21:08 JackONeill wrote:
By giving too much information, at some point you steal people from the thrill of learning. The satisfaction to have your instinct telling you "hm i got 160 population but my army looks tiny... I should stop SCVing/droning/probing". And then watching the replay after you win and say to yourself : "i'm happy because i had a good instinct that came from learning and work".
Learning SC2 is about overcoming difficult things, and each time you do it you enjoy it, because you feel like you're learning to master yet a little more of the game. If you just have everything on the UI, what's the point. Of course it's a small thing, and probably won't change much since you already have the workers per base displayed, but it's a step in the wrong direction. It's yet another attempt from blizzard to attract people may not be overly fond of the RTS genre, but we're way past that point. OK, so that's your view. I am fully in favour of having the option to hide whatever you please (even though Blizzard is probably not gonna do that, because they think the players are dumb as sticks, but that's another point). But why do you feel like showing this down everyone else's throat? Why we should not be given those things just because you enjoy not having them?
Dude I don't even know what you're doing here. If your only answer to "i don't agree with this and here's why" is "why should your opinion matter", I think you fail to grasp the very basic and fundamental purpose of a forum.
|
On June 05 2016 00:26 JackONeill wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 22:25 Charoisaur wrote:On June 04 2016 21:08 JackONeill wrote:
By giving too much information, at some point you steal people from the thrill of learning. The satisfaction to have your instinct telling you "hm i got 160 population but my army looks tiny... I should stop SCVing/droning/probing". And then watching the replay after you win and say to yourself : "i'm happy because i had a good instinct that came from learning and work". this situation doesn't happen except maybe for zerg because every player stops at 66 workers (optimal 3 base saturation) anyway. it's not an "instinct" telling you to stop producing workers it's the worker counter above each base showing 16 + 6 in gas. If you play macro, even at high masters, you're gonna have situations where you forget you have 15 scvs on 1 mineral patch in your base, and keep producing scvs to saturate your fourth. And yeah, it happens to zergs a lot, if I had a coin for every zerg i've beaten or seen loose because they produced 90 drones on 4 bases, I'd be scrooge mcduck. It's about cases where you do mistakes because you fail to go look for the information, not because you're not able to get it. And having the idea to look for this kind of information is what i'd call instinct, instead of being spoonfed what you're supposed to learn to look for. Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 21:18 opisska wrote:On June 04 2016 21:08 JackONeill wrote:
By giving too much information, at some point you steal people from the thrill of learning. The satisfaction to have your instinct telling you "hm i got 160 population but my army looks tiny... I should stop SCVing/droning/probing". And then watching the replay after you win and say to yourself : "i'm happy because i had a good instinct that came from learning and work".
Learning SC2 is about overcoming difficult things, and each time you do it you enjoy it, because you feel like you're learning to master yet a little more of the game. If you just have everything on the UI, what's the point. Of course it's a small thing, and probably won't change much since you already have the workers per base displayed, but it's a step in the wrong direction. It's yet another attempt from blizzard to attract people may not be overly fond of the RTS genre, but we're way past that point. OK, so that's your view. I am fully in favour of having the option to hide whatever you please (even though Blizzard is probably not gonna do that, because they think the players are dumb as sticks, but that's another point). But why do you feel like showing this down everyone else's throat? Why we should not be given those things just because you enjoy not having them? Dude I don't even know what you're doing here. If your only answer to "i don't agree with this and here's why" is "why should your opinion matter", I think you fail to grasp the very basic and fundamental purpose of a forum.
No, you don't understand my point at all. You consider not having the information important for your experience of the game. I do not. So what is the problem in having the option to have this information shown? I do not want this information withdrawn from me just because you think it's better for me.
|
On June 05 2016 00:31 opisska wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2016 00:26 JackONeill wrote:On June 04 2016 22:25 Charoisaur wrote:On June 04 2016 21:08 JackONeill wrote:
By giving too much information, at some point you steal people from the thrill of learning. The satisfaction to have your instinct telling you "hm i got 160 population but my army looks tiny... I should stop SCVing/droning/probing". And then watching the replay after you win and say to yourself : "i'm happy because i had a good instinct that came from learning and work". this situation doesn't happen except maybe for zerg because every player stops at 66 workers (optimal 3 base saturation) anyway. it's not an "instinct" telling you to stop producing workers it's the worker counter above each base showing 16 + 6 in gas. If you play macro, even at high masters, you're gonna have situations where you forget you have 15 scvs on 1 mineral patch in your base, and keep producing scvs to saturate your fourth. And yeah, it happens to zergs a lot, if I had a coin for every zerg i've beaten or seen loose because they produced 90 drones on 4 bases, I'd be scrooge mcduck. It's about cases where you do mistakes because you fail to go look for the information, not because you're not able to get it. And having the idea to look for this kind of information is what i'd call instinct, instead of being spoonfed what you're supposed to learn to look for. On June 04 2016 21:18 opisska wrote:On June 04 2016 21:08 JackONeill wrote:
By giving too much information, at some point you steal people from the thrill of learning. The satisfaction to have your instinct telling you "hm i got 160 population but my army looks tiny... I should stop SCVing/droning/probing". And then watching the replay after you win and say to yourself : "i'm happy because i had a good instinct that came from learning and work".
Learning SC2 is about overcoming difficult things, and each time you do it you enjoy it, because you feel like you're learning to master yet a little more of the game. If you just have everything on the UI, what's the point. Of course it's a small thing, and probably won't change much since you already have the workers per base displayed, but it's a step in the wrong direction. It's yet another attempt from blizzard to attract people may not be overly fond of the RTS genre, but we're way past that point. OK, so that's your view. I am fully in favour of having the option to hide whatever you please (even though Blizzard is probably not gonna do that, because they think the players are dumb as sticks, but that's another point). But why do you feel like showing this down everyone else's throat? Why we should not be given those things just because you enjoy not having them? Dude I don't even know what you're doing here. If your only answer to "i don't agree with this and here's why" is "why should your opinion matter", I think you fail to grasp the very basic and fundamental purpose of a forum. No, you don't understand my point at all. You consider not having the information important for your experience of the game. I do not. So what is the problem in having the option to have this information shown? I do not want this information withdrawn from me just because you think it's better for me.
Well then, why shouldn't you have the option to auto build units? Some people would enjoy it. And if you don't, you should have the option to auto build or not. That's the same logic.
When you make the game simpler competitively it impacts everyone. It makes some skills required to play the game go down the drain, which is effectively dumbing it down.
|
Autobuild changes the fundamental nature of the game by the actions undertaken by hand. Showing worker count does not. They are incomparable. I don't have a worker count problem, so personally I don't care, so long as I have the option to hide worker count, but I don't see a good reason coming from jackoneill to deny such a change, other than a strange unhappiness that what is probably a hard earned skill for him would be made less relevant.
|
Well then, why shouldn't you have the option to auto build units? Some people would enjoy it. And if you don't, you should have the option to auto build or not. That's the same logic. But, but, imagine how much more strategic the game will be if we do that! Imagine what possibilities the pros will have, since they can free up the APM and use it to create more fantastic plays for us to enjoy! ;]
|
Dusk Towers and Ulrena are by far the best of the current maps.
So keep those but change the rest.
|
On June 05 2016 01:25 MockHamill wrote:
Dusk Towers and Ulrena are by far the best of the current maps.
So keep those but change the rest.
Ulrena ???
|
On June 05 2016 00:44 JackONeill wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2016 00:31 opisska wrote:On June 05 2016 00:26 JackONeill wrote:On June 04 2016 22:25 Charoisaur wrote:On June 04 2016 21:08 JackONeill wrote:
By giving too much information, at some point you steal people from the thrill of learning. The satisfaction to have your instinct telling you "hm i got 160 population but my army looks tiny... I should stop SCVing/droning/probing". And then watching the replay after you win and say to yourself : "i'm happy because i had a good instinct that came from learning and work". this situation doesn't happen except maybe for zerg because every player stops at 66 workers (optimal 3 base saturation) anyway. it's not an "instinct" telling you to stop producing workers it's the worker counter above each base showing 16 + 6 in gas. If you play macro, even at high masters, you're gonna have situations where you forget you have 15 scvs on 1 mineral patch in your base, and keep producing scvs to saturate your fourth. And yeah, it happens to zergs a lot, if I had a coin for every zerg i've beaten or seen loose because they produced 90 drones on 4 bases, I'd be scrooge mcduck. It's about cases where you do mistakes because you fail to go look for the information, not because you're not able to get it. And having the idea to look for this kind of information is what i'd call instinct, instead of being spoonfed what you're supposed to learn to look for. On June 04 2016 21:18 opisska wrote:On June 04 2016 21:08 JackONeill wrote:
By giving too much information, at some point you steal people from the thrill of learning. The satisfaction to have your instinct telling you "hm i got 160 population but my army looks tiny... I should stop SCVing/droning/probing". And then watching the replay after you win and say to yourself : "i'm happy because i had a good instinct that came from learning and work".
Learning SC2 is about overcoming difficult things, and each time you do it you enjoy it, because you feel like you're learning to master yet a little more of the game. If you just have everything on the UI, what's the point. Of course it's a small thing, and probably won't change much since you already have the workers per base displayed, but it's a step in the wrong direction. It's yet another attempt from blizzard to attract people may not be overly fond of the RTS genre, but we're way past that point. OK, so that's your view. I am fully in favour of having the option to hide whatever you please (even though Blizzard is probably not gonna do that, because they think the players are dumb as sticks, but that's another point). But why do you feel like showing this down everyone else's throat? Why we should not be given those things just because you enjoy not having them? Dude I don't even know what you're doing here. If your only answer to "i don't agree with this and here's why" is "why should your opinion matter", I think you fail to grasp the very basic and fundamental purpose of a forum. No, you don't understand my point at all. You consider not having the information important for your experience of the game. I do not. So what is the problem in having the option to have this information shown? I do not want this information withdrawn from me just because you think it's better for me. Well then, why shouldn't you have the option to auto build units? Some people would enjoy it. And if you don't, you should have the option to auto build or not. That's the same logic. When you make the game simpler competitively it impacts everyone. It makes some skills required to play the game go down the drain, which is effectively dumbing it down.
But that's not how you argued. You posited that showing additional information hurts the players because it damages their experience of the game. All that I am saying is that this is easily solvable by making it optional, instead of making not having it compulsory because some people don't want to see it. You have made an argument, but consistently refuse to face any counter-arguments to it. I wonder who is the one who doesn't want to discuss.
As for your actual reply, I insist on my observation that the game is already competitive enough, as evidenced by the fact that people who put in a significant focus effort (a.k.a. the Koreans) are able to vastly overplay everyone else. Do you have any arguments against this simple observation?
|
On June 05 2016 01:28 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2016 01:25 MockHamill wrote:
Dusk Towers and Ulrena are by far the best of the current maps.
So keep those but change the rest. Ulrena ???
When Blizzard goes so far Ulrena becomes good
|
Being constantly concious about your approximate total worker count and being fast enough to toggle through your bases to queue new workers are both skills.
One is mental, one is mechanical.
Both have to be earned/learned.
Bringing up the constant "here's your worker count!" or an option to auto-build workers takes those skills away.
One of those skills is vastly more significant then the other (people would uproar if auto-build gone through).
But the fact is, both of those skills, and taking those away will always dumb down the game to a certain degree.
People already say that the game requires too much mechanics but there is not enough strategy. Knowing how many workers you have and need is a mental skill, and mental skills contribute to "strategy".
So why be against one of the changes, and not both?
I think Jack is not really against the worker counter per se. But he is probably worried that the game he loves because of its demanding nature, is getting casualized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
