|
@DomeGetta, have you seen LaLush's post(s) on economy asymmetry? It explains something about the design problems facing mech.
some links: 1 2 3
|
On August 24 2016 03:57 Grumbels wrote:@DomeGetta, have you seen LaLush's post(s) on economy asymmetry? It explains something about the design problems facing mech. some links: 1 2 3
thx for posting sir.
|
On August 24 2016 03:57 Grumbels wrote:@DomeGetta, have you seen LaLush's post(s) on economy asymmetry? It explains something about the design problems facing mech. some links: 1 2 3
Hadn't seen it - particularly liked the Morrow post.
I'm hoping that Blizz puts some real thought into how they are going to keep the skill cap high and create a way that a better player "mechanically" can still create tiny advantages though the game - the eco scaling would definitely help create more fights earlier on - but it still seems like it would come down literally to who got their army there first (relative to expanding). Meta would evolve that creates cookie-cutter builds for taking your expansions at exact timings while still being safe etc...meta plays like being greedier / safer would still exist but imo there needs to be a way that one mech player can reach a higher skill than the other - and not have it just be "took bases sooner / positioned his armies smarter" because again - I love chess - but sc2's not a turn based game - I really don't for-see mech hit squads or mech harass because the strength of the unit comp is massing in numbers - if you decided to split ur army up for attacking on multiple fronts your opponent can just steamroll ur smaller army and hold his production with defenders advantage.. everything just points towards a meta evolving that is split map max skyterran vs max skyterran which is atrocious to watch and play (imo)
|
On August 24 2016 00:19 DomeGetta wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2016 12:04 ihatevideogames wrote:On August 23 2016 11:49 DomeGetta wrote:On August 23 2016 11:14 ihatevideogames wrote:On August 23 2016 10:23 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On August 23 2016 09:30 ihatevideogames wrote:On August 23 2016 08:55 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On August 23 2016 07:48 ihatevideogames wrote:
Mech simply takes a different kind of skill than bio. While bio is arguably pure APM, mech is about positioning, composition and timing. It's so easy to die with mech, you get caught out of position and you're dead. It's also pretty hard to defend bases and expand. The wrong composition can also cost you the game.
In my opinion, a player who can defend his bases properly with the slow mech units, not get caught out unsieged and have the right composition to fight the lategame P/Z armies is not less skillfull than someone who shift-clicks medivacs all over the map.
due to the fog of war and watching my replays of my own Mech Games i'd say not getting caught unsieged has a significant component of luck to it. like more than 10% luck but less than 50% luck. some place in that range. Also, your "time to move out" decision can fubar your army whether or not its Mech if your luck is bad. At play levels below Masters there is no real "optimal move out time". Disclaimer: 60% Random. 40% Terran Diamond player. I'd like to see Mech and ground units get stronger with this big new off-season patch. Even with Mech getting stronger...I think pure Mech should be weaker than Bio and weaker than Bio/Mech. How much weaker? Dunno. To take it to an extreme .. it takes a lot more skill to manage 80 Marines than 12 Thors... and that skill should be rewarded. It takes more skill to manage 80 marines than to amove 12 Ultras. See how much of a fallacy that statement is? There's a certain amount of skill involved to getting to those 12 ultras, thors, whatever. I made it to Diamond on NA and EU playing mech in 80% of my games and I have to say not getting caught unsieged has nothing to do with luck, it's carelessness. This is the different kind of skill I was talking about, a good mech player will always spread out cheaper units to scout ahead for his army so he has time to siege, use smart scans, and always keep half of hits tanks sieged when his army is stopped, etc etc. And to be honest, playing bio feels easier to me. It's especially infuriating when I play a 50 min turtle mech game on New Gettys because I can never attack with mech in TvZ and the next game I win in 5 minutes because my stim 16 marine drop killed 12 drones and then the next I get another easy win by shift-clicking medivacs all over the map. If anything, I feel like bio is much more luck based than mech. yep , it takes skill to play Mech. it takes more skill to play Bio and Bio/Mech. and i'm not talking about A-moving.. which is only 1 thing out of 5,000 things you can do with 80 marines. you could place 8 marines in 10 different places on the map. and have them all having different responsibilities. Managing that process is more difficult than managing 12 Thors. You missed my point completely. I wasn't talking about amoving 80 marines, I was talking about managing them, vs managing 12 ultras. There are only a few things you can do with 12 ultras, 90% of the time you amove them. But that's fine and skillfull, but 12 thors is not apparently. You also completely ignored the whole point of getting to 12 3/3 thors or 12 8 armor ultras etc etc. What I'm trying to say is, microing bio and shitft-clicking drops are not the only indicators of skill in this game. But they've been the ones on the spotlight for terran for far too long. You know, there are certain communities that were making fun of SC2 for being a 'asian clicking simulator'. It's like alot of people really want it to be just that, instead of having more strategic options. LOL @ the racist and ignorant comment above. You are totally missing his point. What he's saying is that bio has a higher skill cap - which is what separates the Korean Terrans from the rest of the world. There's a reason that Korean Terrans in the history of SC2 have mostly chosen bio - and it's because it allows them to use their mechanics to gain an advantage that they wouldn't have otherwise (multitask and micro). If they go through with this patch - they are taking that away - which in my opinion is a shame. They say they want the Terran to have "options" but everything in this patch makes it pretty clear that mech will be the only viable option in all 3 match-ups. Foreign Terrans have always shown a much higher percentage of mech because it allows you to rely more on your positioning and macro than on your ability to out-maneuver your opponent and defeat them with constant pressure through multi-tasking. This will definitely level the playing field - but in my opinion lowering the skill cap of the game is moving in the wrong direction - I would really like to hear someone from Blizzard address this concern - please do not set the meta so that the correct way to play is to turtle to super late game tech every game - you have already made it that way for zerg in ZvT and it's bad enough with 1 race - if you go through with all of these patches every TvT is going to be a split map mech bore-fest and we're going to see this same thing in TvZ and more than likely TvP. How the heck is that racist, get some thicker skin. I was just saying how certain communities called the game (they used a trully racist word btw, i changed it) and how I find it funny that it sort of became true. Or are you denying the fact that LOTV shifted the game towards more micro and multitasking and less strategy and tactics? That's what I was trying to point out. The fact that mech is bad and bio is the only viable terran comp is a testament to that. And I don't think bio will be as weak as you say. Baneling buff aside, it will make it how it's supossed to be, the bio terran won't be able to just a-move into a tank line and win. You need to realise that turtle mech became a thing because you can NEVER attack with mech. If these changes go through, attacking with mech will be much, much more viable. I might be a scrub, but I can understand that much. Also, relying more on positioning, macro and unit composition instead of pure multitasking and APM is somehow reducing the skill cap of the game? What? Do you understand my 'racist' comment now? Everyone goes nuts over APM and multitasking, there's more to this game than how many medivacs you can shift-click across the map. lol let me get this straight - you've expressed confusion about how what you said is racist - followed immediately by sourcing the original comment as being "truly racist"? I hope I'm not troll feeding here. Moving on to relevancy - I may have missed the part of the buffs that eliminate the tremendous defenders advantage of mech? Less mobile siege tank with more damage? Stronger BC's that can't be produced in volume without a huge late game economy? I can clarify further on the skill gap concern - imagine post design changes - 2 players both have pro level skill related to positioning their units and macro - who wins the game? Everything that I've seen playing this game at high master level for the last few years related to mech says that the player who decides he'd rather hang himself than continue sitting on his split map sensor towers and decides to attack loses. This leads to the turtle-fest which in my opinion will kill viewership and active players (just an opinion). Anyone who was around for wol and hots (pre PDD nerf) knows that horror-show that late game skyterran vs skyterran is (who is better at pdding / seekering and then running their ravens away?) Unless there is something I'm missing about the new mech comp that would allow for attacking on multiple fronts and some sort of harass that doesn't get completely shut down by turrets I don't see a way that one player separates himself from the other relative to his skill in the game - effectively lowering the skill cap. You won't get to see a player dominating the scene because of his insane mechanics - you'll see a much more level foreigner vs Korean playing field (same reason you see successful foreign zergs and protoss but not Terrans (outside of uthermal who is a beast - but has relied on gimmicky reaper builds to some extent). Z and P can position / macro / defend and still win the game late - T in the current meta really cannot (although TY might beg to disagree based on that ridiculous and incredible game vs. rogue in code S - inspiring shit right there if you haven't seen it - tho I will say this is the only game I can site in all of LOTV where a Terran won a super-late game vs. Z where the Z didn't make a blaring error). Edit: What I really think Blizzard needs to do is to create multiple modes that you can play the game on - one for pro level play and one that's more like game being shouted for by so many players (easier). This way everybody gets what they want? Blizz? Pls?
+ Show Spoiler +
+ Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uq3FzRclqLc
+ Show Spoiler +
Yes, that low-apm sitting turtling to lategame no skill fest, I saw so many foreigners playing like that because it was so easy.
|
Prediction: Mech becomes OP, but not because things can't beat it head on, but rather because powerful harassment at the same time as powerful defense and space control breaks so many backs. In such a case, they should nerf harassment (remove afterburners, and more, hopefully nerf all harassment options by all races across the board. Game ending harassment is not fun) and not mech.
|
Prediction: you're correct lol
|
I tried to come back to this game. These changes all sound awesome, but this game is still crap compared to wc3.
|
i dont care about most of these changes, but i hope that tankivac pickup is safe to be gone. and also the siege tank buff im really looking forward to. finally the siege tank buff that the community asked for like 5 years...
|
|
|
On August 24 2016 22:50 Barrin wrote:Show nested quote +Prediction: Mech becomes OP, but not because things can't beat it head on, but rather because powerful harassment at the same time as powerful defense and space control breaks so many backs. What does "breaks so many backs" even mean?
That it breaks your opponent. Nice that you are asking the hard hitting questions 
|
On August 24 2016 08:41 Lexender wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2016 00:19 DomeGetta wrote:On August 23 2016 12:04 ihatevideogames wrote:On August 23 2016 11:49 DomeGetta wrote:On August 23 2016 11:14 ihatevideogames wrote:On August 23 2016 10:23 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On August 23 2016 09:30 ihatevideogames wrote:On August 23 2016 08:55 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On August 23 2016 07:48 ihatevideogames wrote:
Mech simply takes a different kind of skill than bio. While bio is arguably pure APM, mech is about positioning, composition and timing. It's so easy to die with mech, you get caught out of position and you're dead. It's also pretty hard to defend bases and expand. The wrong composition can also cost you the game.
In my opinion, a player who can defend his bases properly with the slow mech units, not get caught out unsieged and have the right composition to fight the lategame P/Z armies is not less skillfull than someone who shift-clicks medivacs all over the map.
due to the fog of war and watching my replays of my own Mech Games i'd say not getting caught unsieged has a significant component of luck to it. like more than 10% luck but less than 50% luck. some place in that range. Also, your "time to move out" decision can fubar your army whether or not its Mech if your luck is bad. At play levels below Masters there is no real "optimal move out time". Disclaimer: 60% Random. 40% Terran Diamond player. I'd like to see Mech and ground units get stronger with this big new off-season patch. Even with Mech getting stronger...I think pure Mech should be weaker than Bio and weaker than Bio/Mech. How much weaker? Dunno. To take it to an extreme .. it takes a lot more skill to manage 80 Marines than 12 Thors... and that skill should be rewarded. It takes more skill to manage 80 marines than to amove 12 Ultras. See how much of a fallacy that statement is? There's a certain amount of skill involved to getting to those 12 ultras, thors, whatever. I made it to Diamond on NA and EU playing mech in 80% of my games and I have to say not getting caught unsieged has nothing to do with luck, it's carelessness. This is the different kind of skill I was talking about, a good mech player will always spread out cheaper units to scout ahead for his army so he has time to siege, use smart scans, and always keep half of hits tanks sieged when his army is stopped, etc etc. And to be honest, playing bio feels easier to me. It's especially infuriating when I play a 50 min turtle mech game on New Gettys because I can never attack with mech in TvZ and the next game I win in 5 minutes because my stim 16 marine drop killed 12 drones and then the next I get another easy win by shift-clicking medivacs all over the map. If anything, I feel like bio is much more luck based than mech. yep , it takes skill to play Mech. it takes more skill to play Bio and Bio/Mech. and i'm not talking about A-moving.. which is only 1 thing out of 5,000 things you can do with 80 marines. you could place 8 marines in 10 different places on the map. and have them all having different responsibilities. Managing that process is more difficult than managing 12 Thors. You missed my point completely. I wasn't talking about amoving 80 marines, I was talking about managing them, vs managing 12 ultras. There are only a few things you can do with 12 ultras, 90% of the time you amove them. But that's fine and skillfull, but 12 thors is not apparently. You also completely ignored the whole point of getting to 12 3/3 thors or 12 8 armor ultras etc etc. What I'm trying to say is, microing bio and shitft-clicking drops are not the only indicators of skill in this game. But they've been the ones on the spotlight for terran for far too long. You know, there are certain communities that were making fun of SC2 for being a 'asian clicking simulator'. It's like alot of people really want it to be just that, instead of having more strategic options. LOL @ the racist and ignorant comment above. You are totally missing his point. What he's saying is that bio has a higher skill cap - which is what separates the Korean Terrans from the rest of the world. There's a reason that Korean Terrans in the history of SC2 have mostly chosen bio - and it's because it allows them to use their mechanics to gain an advantage that they wouldn't have otherwise (multitask and micro). If they go through with this patch - they are taking that away - which in my opinion is a shame. They say they want the Terran to have "options" but everything in this patch makes it pretty clear that mech will be the only viable option in all 3 match-ups. Foreign Terrans have always shown a much higher percentage of mech because it allows you to rely more on your positioning and macro than on your ability to out-maneuver your opponent and defeat them with constant pressure through multi-tasking. This will definitely level the playing field - but in my opinion lowering the skill cap of the game is moving in the wrong direction - I would really like to hear someone from Blizzard address this concern - please do not set the meta so that the correct way to play is to turtle to super late game tech every game - you have already made it that way for zerg in ZvT and it's bad enough with 1 race - if you go through with all of these patches every TvT is going to be a split map mech bore-fest and we're going to see this same thing in TvZ and more than likely TvP. How the heck is that racist, get some thicker skin. I was just saying how certain communities called the game (they used a trully racist word btw, i changed it) and how I find it funny that it sort of became true. Or are you denying the fact that LOTV shifted the game towards more micro and multitasking and less strategy and tactics? That's what I was trying to point out. The fact that mech is bad and bio is the only viable terran comp is a testament to that. And I don't think bio will be as weak as you say. Baneling buff aside, it will make it how it's supossed to be, the bio terran won't be able to just a-move into a tank line and win. You need to realise that turtle mech became a thing because you can NEVER attack with mech. If these changes go through, attacking with mech will be much, much more viable. I might be a scrub, but I can understand that much. Also, relying more on positioning, macro and unit composition instead of pure multitasking and APM is somehow reducing the skill cap of the game? What? Do you understand my 'racist' comment now? Everyone goes nuts over APM and multitasking, there's more to this game than how many medivacs you can shift-click across the map. lol let me get this straight - you've expressed confusion about how what you said is racist - followed immediately by sourcing the original comment as being "truly racist"? I hope I'm not troll feeding here. Moving on to relevancy - I may have missed the part of the buffs that eliminate the tremendous defenders advantage of mech? Less mobile siege tank with more damage? Stronger BC's that can't be produced in volume without a huge late game economy? I can clarify further on the skill gap concern - imagine post design changes - 2 players both have pro level skill related to positioning their units and macro - who wins the game? Everything that I've seen playing this game at high master level for the last few years related to mech says that the player who decides he'd rather hang himself than continue sitting on his split map sensor towers and decides to attack loses. This leads to the turtle-fest which in my opinion will kill viewership and active players (just an opinion). Anyone who was around for wol and hots (pre PDD nerf) knows that horror-show that late game skyterran vs skyterran is (who is better at pdding / seekering and then running their ravens away?) Unless there is something I'm missing about the new mech comp that would allow for attacking on multiple fronts and some sort of harass that doesn't get completely shut down by turrets I don't see a way that one player separates himself from the other relative to his skill in the game - effectively lowering the skill cap. You won't get to see a player dominating the scene because of his insane mechanics - you'll see a much more level foreigner vs Korean playing field (same reason you see successful foreign zergs and protoss but not Terrans (outside of uthermal who is a beast - but has relied on gimmicky reaper builds to some extent). Z and P can position / macro / defend and still win the game late - T in the current meta really cannot (although TY might beg to disagree based on that ridiculous and incredible game vs. rogue in code S - inspiring shit right there if you haven't seen it - tho I will say this is the only game I can site in all of LOTV where a Terran won a super-late game vs. Z where the Z didn't make a blaring error). Edit: What I really think Blizzard needs to do is to create multiple modes that you can play the game on - one for pro level play and one that's more like game being shouted for by so many players (easier). This way everybody gets what they want? Blizz? Pls? + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uR18zkO4ijU#t=55m0s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uq3FzRclqLc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PinAQK599M#t=32m0s Yes, that low-apm sitting turtling to lategame no skill fest, I saw so many foreigners playing like that because it was so easy.
lol ok hold on - so your retort here is to site 1 mech vs bio game (which was awesome) and 2 tvz mech games?
Mech vs. Bio won't be a thing anymore.. so not really sure how that's relevant (mech vs bio is exciting, mech vs mech is not).
I'm not really sure what you were trying to convey with the 2 TvZ's though.
Are you actually trying to say that what evolved at the end of HOTS in TvZ was a good thing for viewership and fun to play? Sure initially there were some OK games to watch like the one's you sited - but the final meta of that matchup was disgusting.. yeah there was helion banshee harass early game OK.. but the majority of the games still ended in a max vs max split map situation waiting for one player to get impatient - one big fight after 45 minutes or worse a couple of those until the map was mined out and the terran took air control flew his buildings to the corners of the maps and protected them rofl.
This is why I'm saying there needs to be multiple versions of the game.. you are more than entitled to your opinion - if you actually enjoyed the end of HOTS and look forward to all mech vs mech TvT's I'm not saying you shouldn't get to live your dream..but none of the bullshit you linked actually addresses any of the concerns that were raised in previous posts - nice attempt at sarcasm though - but you might want to try counter-arguments or providing solutions to the seemingly impending issues vs. linking a few games from the end of hots rofl- makes for more constructive discussion imo.
|
Maybe off topic, but I must mention that Archon`s graphic sucks; that crappy lightning..
|
On August 24 2016 22:50 Barrin wrote:Show nested quote +Prediction: Mech becomes OP, but not because things can't beat it head on, but rather because powerful harassment at the same time as powerful defense and space control breaks so many backs. What does "breaks so many backs" even mean?
Je! What RaFox said.
I mean, the natural / organic counter to mech / heavy positional space control play is out-expanding an opponent. If harassment is too powerful, it becomes non-viable and mech will rule over all.
|
On August 23 2016 07:03 a_flayer wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2016 00:12 Blackfeather wrote:On August 22 2016 23:22 a_flayer wrote:On August 22 2016 22:43 JCoto wrote:On August 22 2016 22:16 Blackfeather wrote:On August 21 2016 19:21 Turb0Sw4g wrote:On August 20 2016 19:50 a_flayer wrote:
I'm just going to throw some shit out there. I don't know what my icon says, but I've only been playing random on those rare occasions that I've played SC2 in the past 5 years or so. I started out as a Zerg player in WoL when I borderlined as a low-level master player (I've been in and out of masters during the first season).
Personally, I'm still upset that they didn't remove the macro mechanics. I just feel like it's detrimental to my enjoyment of the game. I never played as much SC2 as I did in that short time period where they reduced the need for macro mechanics. In addition to that, I feel like units such as the Queen and MSC detract from my freedom to pick and choose my strategies, both in offence (playing against those units) and defence (where they are basically 100% necessary to be built). Add to that the economic "defence" of the MULE (which allows Terran to sustain worker damage and recover from it), and we've covered all three races somewhat in this respect, I think.
Me too. I really hope they will at some point re-evaluate the macro mechanics removal. IMO, one of the major reasons of why they didn't keep this change was that it tipped balance against Terran. With the buffs to mech it may have played out otherwise. From my experience, without macro mechanics your micro in battles became way more important if you played Protoss or Terran (inject was just toned down, so not much of a change for Zerg). I really enjoyed that. On August 20 2016 19:50 a_flayer wrote:
I would like to see a SC2 where these units just aren't absolutely necessary in order to play the game and at the same time deal with my dislike for the macro mechanics.
Maybe increase the natural larvae spawn of hatcheries to the point where queens aren't necessary, or at least not quite as prolific. Remove the spawn larvae ability of queens or reduce it to 1 larva per inject to make it an optional boost if you want more zerglings for your strategy of choice and increase the cost of the queen (maybe 200/50?) and her abilities (50 energy?) so that maybe you'll just have one or two if you really want to spread creep fast or something.
Change the MULE into something where it can provide a boost to the Terran economy without making it necessary to be dropped constantly. Perhaps allow it to be dropped and convert into a building at a faster rate than normal SCVs build them instead of the harvest-resources-at-an-increased-rate ability.
I'm not sure how to handle the MSC at all. It just seems like such an incredible mess of a unit, as you absolutely 100% cannot go around this unit in any shape way or form when you are playing Protoss. I basically hated sentries throughout WoL and HotS for the same reason. Stuff like that just disgusts me as someone who likes to get a choice in where I invest my resources.
It's bad enough that we have to make all these workers all the time (joke!).
Ah well, it's never gonna happen, I guess. I agree with this completely. Why are there units (other than workers) you basically must build regardless of your strategy? Queens, MULEs and Chrono Boost just add a mechanical barrier but very little strategic-wise. While I agree and always thought that sc2 had too many inflexible elements that take the focus away from actual strategy (yay, macro apm, so interesting...), blizzard made clear that they want the game to be mechanical taxing and they want to keep their dog trainer parts in the game. They reemphasized this again @fundamental changes. I doubt we are going to see any macro changes that aren't +/-costs. So I guess talking about it really serves no purpose  I think that what I prosposed above is not a bad solution. I think I've read your proposed solutions before and I found them terribly vague and incomplete. And I still think that. Much like mine, except in different ways. I was really just venting with my original post because I can't be arsed to play the game in the way Blizzard seems to want the game to be played. I wasn't trying to start a discussion or even expecting people to agree with me, lel. Can totally relate to that, was a random plat/diamond player in wol and feel the same about macro mechanics (although I couldn't test it cause I got no beta key). One of the reasons I stopped playing was because Sc2 was for me too much RT and too little S. But the macro mechanics resolution made pretty clear that Blizz wants to keep it that way, or at least keep APM a major factor. I feel that, if you remove artificial macro mechanics, the excessive APM will simply be dedicated to more multi-pronged harassments & engaging the other player in combat instead of macroing. But maybe I'm crazy like that and people will still go for the 1a deathball while APM drops down to next to nothing cause its so easy in SC2 to do that.
You need to completely redesign the game then. Macro mechanics balanced each races economy to roughly equal rates despite the differences between them and when blizzard just flat out half heartedly removed macro mechanic back in beta, it was a big imbalanced mess that was nowhere near remotely balanced. Terran w/o mule couldn't even 1/1/1 off one base without significant gaps and asking blizzard to modify every single units cost in relative to eco is too much for a major balance patch.
By the way, zerg kept inject on autocast while other races got theirs flat out removed during that patch so other races were significantly nered that time in beta.
It isn't a major game design patch you know.
|
On August 25 2016 04:08 jinjin5000 wrote:You need you completely redisgn the game then. Macro mechanics balanced each races economy to roughly equal rates despite the differences between them and when blizzard just flat out half heartedly removed macro mechanic back in beta, it was a big imbalanced mess that was nowhere near remotely balanced. Terran w/o mule couldn't even 1/1/1 off one base without significant gaps and asking blizzard to modify every single units cost in relative to eco is too much for a major balance patch.
By the way, zerg kept inject on autocast while other races got theirs flat out removed during that patch so other races were significantly nered that time in beta.
It isn't a major game design patch you know.
I disagree. We cannot tell the degree to which the game would need re-balancing (though, I admit we did get a hint during the beta) once macro BOOSTERS (they are not mechanics when properly distinguished, lest we wish to say that harvesting in general should be removed or not) would be removed. I also think you mistake balance with design, when they're properly distinguished. I personally don't think that the game would have to have much more re-balancing if those deplorable boosters were removed. And, even if so, it would be well worth the cost as the result would be a game of superior design.
|
On August 25 2016 00:16 DomeGetta wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2016 08:41 Lexender wrote:On August 24 2016 00:19 DomeGetta wrote:On August 23 2016 12:04 ihatevideogames wrote:On August 23 2016 11:49 DomeGetta wrote:On August 23 2016 11:14 ihatevideogames wrote:On August 23 2016 10:23 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On August 23 2016 09:30 ihatevideogames wrote:On August 23 2016 08:55 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On August 23 2016 07:48 ihatevideogames wrote:
Mech simply takes a different kind of skill than bio. While bio is arguably pure APM, mech is about positioning, composition and timing. It's so easy to die with mech, you get caught out of position and you're dead. It's also pretty hard to defend bases and expand. The wrong composition can also cost you the game.
In my opinion, a player who can defend his bases properly with the slow mech units, not get caught out unsieged and have the right composition to fight the lategame P/Z armies is not less skillfull than someone who shift-clicks medivacs all over the map.
due to the fog of war and watching my replays of my own Mech Games i'd say not getting caught unsieged has a significant component of luck to it. like more than 10% luck but less than 50% luck. some place in that range. Also, your "time to move out" decision can fubar your army whether or not its Mech if your luck is bad. At play levels below Masters there is no real "optimal move out time". Disclaimer: 60% Random. 40% Terran Diamond player. I'd like to see Mech and ground units get stronger with this big new off-season patch. Even with Mech getting stronger...I think pure Mech should be weaker than Bio and weaker than Bio/Mech. How much weaker? Dunno. To take it to an extreme .. it takes a lot more skill to manage 80 Marines than 12 Thors... and that skill should be rewarded. It takes more skill to manage 80 marines than to amove 12 Ultras. See how much of a fallacy that statement is? There's a certain amount of skill involved to getting to those 12 ultras, thors, whatever. I made it to Diamond on NA and EU playing mech in 80% of my games and I have to say not getting caught unsieged has nothing to do with luck, it's carelessness. This is the different kind of skill I was talking about, a good mech player will always spread out cheaper units to scout ahead for his army so he has time to siege, use smart scans, and always keep half of hits tanks sieged when his army is stopped, etc etc. And to be honest, playing bio feels easier to me. It's especially infuriating when I play a 50 min turtle mech game on New Gettys because I can never attack with mech in TvZ and the next game I win in 5 minutes because my stim 16 marine drop killed 12 drones and then the next I get another easy win by shift-clicking medivacs all over the map. If anything, I feel like bio is much more luck based than mech. yep , it takes skill to play Mech. it takes more skill to play Bio and Bio/Mech. and i'm not talking about A-moving.. which is only 1 thing out of 5,000 things you can do with 80 marines. you could place 8 marines in 10 different places on the map. and have them all having different responsibilities. Managing that process is more difficult than managing 12 Thors. You missed my point completely. I wasn't talking about amoving 80 marines, I was talking about managing them, vs managing 12 ultras. There are only a few things you can do with 12 ultras, 90% of the time you amove them. But that's fine and skillfull, but 12 thors is not apparently. You also completely ignored the whole point of getting to 12 3/3 thors or 12 8 armor ultras etc etc. What I'm trying to say is, microing bio and shitft-clicking drops are not the only indicators of skill in this game. But they've been the ones on the spotlight for terran for far too long. You know, there are certain communities that were making fun of SC2 for being a 'asian clicking simulator'. It's like alot of people really want it to be just that, instead of having more strategic options. LOL @ the racist and ignorant comment above. You are totally missing his point. What he's saying is that bio has a higher skill cap - which is what separates the Korean Terrans from the rest of the world. There's a reason that Korean Terrans in the history of SC2 have mostly chosen bio - and it's because it allows them to use their mechanics to gain an advantage that they wouldn't have otherwise (multitask and micro). If they go through with this patch - they are taking that away - which in my opinion is a shame. They say they want the Terran to have "options" but everything in this patch makes it pretty clear that mech will be the only viable option in all 3 match-ups. Foreign Terrans have always shown a much higher percentage of mech because it allows you to rely more on your positioning and macro than on your ability to out-maneuver your opponent and defeat them with constant pressure through multi-tasking. This will definitely level the playing field - but in my opinion lowering the skill cap of the game is moving in the wrong direction - I would really like to hear someone from Blizzard address this concern - please do not set the meta so that the correct way to play is to turtle to super late game tech every game - you have already made it that way for zerg in ZvT and it's bad enough with 1 race - if you go through with all of these patches every TvT is going to be a split map mech bore-fest and we're going to see this same thing in TvZ and more than likely TvP. How the heck is that racist, get some thicker skin. I was just saying how certain communities called the game (they used a trully racist word btw, i changed it) and how I find it funny that it sort of became true. Or are you denying the fact that LOTV shifted the game towards more micro and multitasking and less strategy and tactics? That's what I was trying to point out. The fact that mech is bad and bio is the only viable terran comp is a testament to that. And I don't think bio will be as weak as you say. Baneling buff aside, it will make it how it's supossed to be, the bio terran won't be able to just a-move into a tank line and win. You need to realise that turtle mech became a thing because you can NEVER attack with mech. If these changes go through, attacking with mech will be much, much more viable. I might be a scrub, but I can understand that much. Also, relying more on positioning, macro and unit composition instead of pure multitasking and APM is somehow reducing the skill cap of the game? What? Do you understand my 'racist' comment now? Everyone goes nuts over APM and multitasking, there's more to this game than how many medivacs you can shift-click across the map. lol let me get this straight - you've expressed confusion about how what you said is racist - followed immediately by sourcing the original comment as being "truly racist"? I hope I'm not troll feeding here. Moving on to relevancy - I may have missed the part of the buffs that eliminate the tremendous defenders advantage of mech? Less mobile siege tank with more damage? Stronger BC's that can't be produced in volume without a huge late game economy? I can clarify further on the skill gap concern - imagine post design changes - 2 players both have pro level skill related to positioning their units and macro - who wins the game? Everything that I've seen playing this game at high master level for the last few years related to mech says that the player who decides he'd rather hang himself than continue sitting on his split map sensor towers and decides to attack loses. This leads to the turtle-fest which in my opinion will kill viewership and active players (just an opinion). Anyone who was around for wol and hots (pre PDD nerf) knows that horror-show that late game skyterran vs skyterran is (who is better at pdding / seekering and then running their ravens away?) Unless there is something I'm missing about the new mech comp that would allow for attacking on multiple fronts and some sort of harass that doesn't get completely shut down by turrets I don't see a way that one player separates himself from the other relative to his skill in the game - effectively lowering the skill cap. You won't get to see a player dominating the scene because of his insane mechanics - you'll see a much more level foreigner vs Korean playing field (same reason you see successful foreign zergs and protoss but not Terrans (outside of uthermal who is a beast - but has relied on gimmicky reaper builds to some extent). Z and P can position / macro / defend and still win the game late - T in the current meta really cannot (although TY might beg to disagree based on that ridiculous and incredible game vs. rogue in code S - inspiring shit right there if you haven't seen it - tho I will say this is the only game I can site in all of LOTV where a Terran won a super-late game vs. Z where the Z didn't make a blaring error). Edit: What I really think Blizzard needs to do is to create multiple modes that you can play the game on - one for pro level play and one that's more like game being shouted for by so many players (easier). This way everybody gets what they want? Blizz? Pls? + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uR18zkO4ijU#t=55m0s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uq3FzRclqLc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PinAQK599M#t=32m0s Yes, that low-apm sitting turtling to lategame no skill fest, I saw so many foreigners playing like that because it was so easy. lol ok hold on - so your retort here is to site 1 mech vs bio game (which was awesome) and 2 tvz mech games? Mech vs. Bio won't be a thing anymore.. so not really sure how that's relevant (mech vs bio is exciting, mech vs mech is not). I'm not really sure what you were trying to convey with the 2 TvZ's though. Are you actually trying to say that what evolved at the end of HOTS in TvZ was a good thing for viewership and fun to play? Sure initially there were some OK games to watch like the one's you sited - but the final meta of that matchup was disgusting.. yeah there was helion banshee harass early game OK.. but the majority of the games still ended in a max vs max split map situation waiting for one player to get impatient - one big fight after 45 minutes or worse a couple of those until the map was mined out and the terran took air control flew his buildings to the corners of the maps and protected them rofl. This is why I'm saying there needs to be multiple versions of the game.. you are more than entitled to your opinion - if you actually enjoyed the end of HOTS and look forward to all mech vs mech TvT's I'm not saying you shouldn't get to live your dream..but none of the bullshit you linked actually addresses any of the concerns that were raised in previous posts - nice attempt at sarcasm though - but you might want to try counter-arguments or providing solutions to the seemingly impending issues vs. linking a few games from the end of hots rofl- makes for more constructive discussion imo.
Maybe be so, but neither anything you listed is as you say in the test map (and thats considering we can expect quite a few changes to it before it goes live).
And they do answer your question:
Can mech games be fun? Yes, answered with the videos.
Do they take skill to play at higher levels? Totally, same answer.
Will all games be like that? Maybe, maybe not, thats why need to test and do changes instead of going "OMG MECH SO BORING PEOPLE WHO PLAY MECH ARE ASSHOLES"
If so, how? Thats what games like this are important, what made those game fun and what make those games boring, take the first and enhanced, take the second and dimish it. Going forward with open mind instead of calling the end of the world.
You say most make mech games where boring and took no skill
I say the opposite.
Why should your opinion be more important or relevant than mine? Its not like you can objetively quantify it.
Thats what I and people who like mech like me ask is to give it a chance, see it evolve, try it, test it.
What you are saying is (with only 1 week with live patch, no match making que yet and very little high level material to watch) that NO MATTER WHAT, MECH WILL NEVER BE VIABLE AND SHOULD NOT BE TESTED!!
Tell me how is THAT more constructive discusion.
PS: I have way more mech games, great makes games, meh mech games, good mech games, mediocre mech games. Pretty much like anyother comp in the game.
|
On August 25 2016 07:20 Jaedrik wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2016 04:08 jinjin5000 wrote:You need you completely redisgn the game then. Macro mechanics balanced each races economy to roughly equal rates despite the differences between them and when blizzard just flat out half heartedly removed macro mechanic back in beta, it was a big imbalanced mess that was nowhere near remotely balanced. Terran w/o mule couldn't even 1/1/1 off one base without significant gaps and asking blizzard to modify every single units cost in relative to eco is too much for a major balance patch.
By the way, zerg kept inject on autocast while other races got theirs flat out removed during that patch so other races were significantly nered that time in beta.
It isn't a major game design patch you know. I disagree. We cannot tell the degree to which the game would need re-balancing (though, I admit we did get a hint during the beta) once macro BOOSTERS (they are not mechanics when properly distinguished, lest we wish to say that harvesting in general should be removed or not) would be removed. I also think you mistake balance with design, when they're properly distinguished. I personally don't think that the game would have to have much more re-balancing if those deplorable boosters were removed. And, even if so, it would be well worth the cost as the result would be a game of superior design.
uh, the game from ground up is kinda based on the macro mechanic. To remove something as integral as macro mechanics, you would need to heavily resign the game, and I don't agree with your points despite your condescending comment about my inability to understand between design and balance.
Lets look at bio for example: Bio is very heavy on mineral and is a playstyle heavily boosted by fact that command centers and mules boost the mineral income to beyond the current base count of terran to facilitate heavy aggression and swarm of micro-heavy, cost effective bio units with some factory support. If you remove mules, theres a LOT less bio units coming out and would no longer be able to pump out units to support the army making and trading.
You also have to remind yourself that fundemental reason of M.U.L.E. existing in sc2 is to make up for time scvs take to build their buildings. All races workers gather equal amount of minerals and terran naturally fall behind due to their worker being tied up to building (zergs offset it somewhat w/ reduced structure cost/hatchery cost/inject/ect) and mules were method to offset such thing, and thats how terran has been balanced around since the start of starcraft 2. To remove it whole isnt as simple as you think.
Yes, changing resource cost is part of the balance but you have to remember this would make terran army absurdly cost efficient if you were to do so and be even more cost efficient with their resource pool.
Since all the "macro mechanics" are not equal since the do different things (protoss boosting production/terran giving extra worker/zerg getting more production) you cannot balance it by taking it out since they are no tall equal in power. This is no simple task and the change came out too late in beta to even test it. Seemed like it was half-hearted change from blizzard to me since it came so late and they attempted 0 way to balance it.
|
please, no more macro suggestions, they aren't changing macro mechanics players have been using for years now
|
On August 25 2016 08:21 Lexender wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2016 00:16 DomeGetta wrote:On August 24 2016 08:41 Lexender wrote:On August 24 2016 00:19 DomeGetta wrote:On August 23 2016 12:04 ihatevideogames wrote:On August 23 2016 11:49 DomeGetta wrote:On August 23 2016 11:14 ihatevideogames wrote:On August 23 2016 10:23 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On August 23 2016 09:30 ihatevideogames wrote:On August 23 2016 08:55 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
[quote]
due to the fog of war and watching my replays of my own Mech Games i'd say not getting caught unsieged has a significant component of luck to it. like more than 10% luck but less than 50% luck. some place in that range.
Also, your "time to move out" decision can fubar your army whether or not its Mech if your luck is bad. At play levels below Masters there is no real "optimal move out time".
Disclaimer: 60% Random. 40% Terran Diamond player.
I'd like to see Mech and ground units get stronger with this big new off-season patch.
Even with Mech getting stronger...I think pure Mech should be weaker than Bio and weaker than Bio/Mech.
How much weaker? Dunno.
To take it to an extreme .. it takes a lot more skill to manage 80 Marines than 12 Thors... and that skill should be rewarded. It takes more skill to manage 80 marines than to amove 12 Ultras. See how much of a fallacy that statement is? There's a certain amount of skill involved to getting to those 12 ultras, thors, whatever. I made it to Diamond on NA and EU playing mech in 80% of my games and I have to say not getting caught unsieged has nothing to do with luck, it's carelessness. This is the different kind of skill I was talking about, a good mech player will always spread out cheaper units to scout ahead for his army so he has time to siege, use smart scans, and always keep half of hits tanks sieged when his army is stopped, etc etc. And to be honest, playing bio feels easier to me. It's especially infuriating when I play a 50 min turtle mech game on New Gettys because I can never attack with mech in TvZ and the next game I win in 5 minutes because my stim 16 marine drop killed 12 drones and then the next I get another easy win by shift-clicking medivacs all over the map. If anything, I feel like bio is much more luck based than mech. yep , it takes skill to play Mech. it takes more skill to play Bio and Bio/Mech. and i'm not talking about A-moving.. which is only 1 thing out of 5,000 things you can do with 80 marines. you could place 8 marines in 10 different places on the map. and have them all having different responsibilities. Managing that process is more difficult than managing 12 Thors. You missed my point completely. I wasn't talking about amoving 80 marines, I was talking about managing them, vs managing 12 ultras. There are only a few things you can do with 12 ultras, 90% of the time you amove them. But that's fine and skillfull, but 12 thors is not apparently. You also completely ignored the whole point of getting to 12 3/3 thors or 12 8 armor ultras etc etc. What I'm trying to say is, microing bio and shitft-clicking drops are not the only indicators of skill in this game. But they've been the ones on the spotlight for terran for far too long. You know, there are certain communities that were making fun of SC2 for being a 'asian clicking simulator'. It's like alot of people really want it to be just that, instead of having more strategic options. LOL @ the racist and ignorant comment above. You are totally missing his point. What he's saying is that bio has a higher skill cap - which is what separates the Korean Terrans from the rest of the world. There's a reason that Korean Terrans in the history of SC2 have mostly chosen bio - and it's because it allows them to use their mechanics to gain an advantage that they wouldn't have otherwise (multitask and micro). If they go through with this patch - they are taking that away - which in my opinion is a shame. They say they want the Terran to have "options" but everything in this patch makes it pretty clear that mech will be the only viable option in all 3 match-ups. Foreign Terrans have always shown a much higher percentage of mech because it allows you to rely more on your positioning and macro than on your ability to out-maneuver your opponent and defeat them with constant pressure through multi-tasking. This will definitely level the playing field - but in my opinion lowering the skill cap of the game is moving in the wrong direction - I would really like to hear someone from Blizzard address this concern - please do not set the meta so that the correct way to play is to turtle to super late game tech every game - you have already made it that way for zerg in ZvT and it's bad enough with 1 race - if you go through with all of these patches every TvT is going to be a split map mech bore-fest and we're going to see this same thing in TvZ and more than likely TvP. How the heck is that racist, get some thicker skin. I was just saying how certain communities called the game (they used a trully racist word btw, i changed it) and how I find it funny that it sort of became true. Or are you denying the fact that LOTV shifted the game towards more micro and multitasking and less strategy and tactics? That's what I was trying to point out. The fact that mech is bad and bio is the only viable terran comp is a testament to that. And I don't think bio will be as weak as you say. Baneling buff aside, it will make it how it's supossed to be, the bio terran won't be able to just a-move into a tank line and win. You need to realise that turtle mech became a thing because you can NEVER attack with mech. If these changes go through, attacking with mech will be much, much more viable. I might be a scrub, but I can understand that much. Also, relying more on positioning, macro and unit composition instead of pure multitasking and APM is somehow reducing the skill cap of the game? What? Do you understand my 'racist' comment now? Everyone goes nuts over APM and multitasking, there's more to this game than how many medivacs you can shift-click across the map. lol let me get this straight - you've expressed confusion about how what you said is racist - followed immediately by sourcing the original comment as being "truly racist"? I hope I'm not troll feeding here. Moving on to relevancy - I may have missed the part of the buffs that eliminate the tremendous defenders advantage of mech? Less mobile siege tank with more damage? Stronger BC's that can't be produced in volume without a huge late game economy? I can clarify further on the skill gap concern - imagine post design changes - 2 players both have pro level skill related to positioning their units and macro - who wins the game? Everything that I've seen playing this game at high master level for the last few years related to mech says that the player who decides he'd rather hang himself than continue sitting on his split map sensor towers and decides to attack loses. This leads to the turtle-fest which in my opinion will kill viewership and active players (just an opinion). Anyone who was around for wol and hots (pre PDD nerf) knows that horror-show that late game skyterran vs skyterran is (who is better at pdding / seekering and then running their ravens away?) Unless there is something I'm missing about the new mech comp that would allow for attacking on multiple fronts and some sort of harass that doesn't get completely shut down by turrets I don't see a way that one player separates himself from the other relative to his skill in the game - effectively lowering the skill cap. You won't get to see a player dominating the scene because of his insane mechanics - you'll see a much more level foreigner vs Korean playing field (same reason you see successful foreign zergs and protoss but not Terrans (outside of uthermal who is a beast - but has relied on gimmicky reaper builds to some extent). Z and P can position / macro / defend and still win the game late - T in the current meta really cannot (although TY might beg to disagree based on that ridiculous and incredible game vs. rogue in code S - inspiring shit right there if you haven't seen it - tho I will say this is the only game I can site in all of LOTV where a Terran won a super-late game vs. Z where the Z didn't make a blaring error). Edit: What I really think Blizzard needs to do is to create multiple modes that you can play the game on - one for pro level play and one that's more like game being shouted for by so many players (easier). This way everybody gets what they want? Blizz? Pls? + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uR18zkO4ijU#t=55m0s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uq3FzRclqLc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PinAQK599M#t=32m0s Yes, that low-apm sitting turtling to lategame no skill fest, I saw so many foreigners playing like that because it was so easy. lol ok hold on - so your retort here is to site 1 mech vs bio game (which was awesome) and 2 tvz mech games? Mech vs. Bio won't be a thing anymore.. so not really sure how that's relevant (mech vs bio is exciting, mech vs mech is not). I'm not really sure what you were trying to convey with the 2 TvZ's though. Are you actually trying to say that what evolved at the end of HOTS in TvZ was a good thing for viewership and fun to play? Sure initially there were some OK games to watch like the one's you sited - but the final meta of that matchup was disgusting.. yeah there was helion banshee harass early game OK.. but the majority of the games still ended in a max vs max split map situation waiting for one player to get impatient - one big fight after 45 minutes or worse a couple of those until the map was mined out and the terran took air control flew his buildings to the corners of the maps and protected them rofl. This is why I'm saying there needs to be multiple versions of the game.. you are more than entitled to your opinion - if you actually enjoyed the end of HOTS and look forward to all mech vs mech TvT's I'm not saying you shouldn't get to live your dream..but none of the bullshit you linked actually addresses any of the concerns that were raised in previous posts - nice attempt at sarcasm though - but you might want to try counter-arguments or providing solutions to the seemingly impending issues vs. linking a few games from the end of hots rofl- makes for more constructive discussion imo. Maybe be so, but neither anything you listed is as you say in the test map (and thats considering we can expect quite a few changes to it before it goes live). And they do answer your question: Can mech games be fun? Yes, answered with the videos. Do they take skill to play at higher levels? Totally, same answer. Will all games be like that? Maybe, maybe not, thats why need to test and do changes instead of going "OMG MECH SO BORING PEOPLE WHO PLAY MECH ARE ASSHOLES" If so, how? Thats what games like this are important, what made those game fun and what make those games boring, take the first and enhanced, take the second and dimish it. Going forward with open mind instead of calling the end of the world. You say most make mech games where boring and took no skill I say the opposite. Why should your opinion be more important or relevant than mine? Its not like you can objetively quantify it. Thats what I and people who like mech like me ask is to give it a chance, see it evolve, try it, test it. What you are saying is (with only 1 week with live patch, no match making que yet and very little high level material to watch) that NO MATTER WHAT, MECH WILL NEVER BE VIABLE AND SHOULD NOT BE TESTED!! Tell me how is THAT more constructive discusion. PS: I have way more mech games, great makes games, meh mech games, good mech games, mediocre mech games. Pretty much like anyother comp in the game.
First off - I haven't said one time that I don't want mech to work or that I dislike mech units or am a mech racist or whatever you are insinuating.
I also haven't said that your opinion of enjoying mech is worth less than my opinion.
What I've done is raised concerns about what they currently proposing creating a turtle-fest.
You haven't said anything in any of your replies to say why that won't be - or how that can be prevented.
All you've done is post 3 games (none of which are mech vs mech btw) and said "look these were fun!"
Fact is that end of hots TVZ was MOSTLY a turtle-fest and it wasn't fun to watch or play (for me - this is an opinion with equal worth to your own - so no feelings hurt).
TvT mech into sky terran was MOSTLY a turtle-fest.
Posting 1 or 2 games (which you haven't even done regarding mech v mech) isn't constructive because
1 - it's not relevant - that doesn't have the buffed siege tanks or any of the other buffs they are talking about.
2 - highlighting an exception to what most of the games looked like is misleading.
If you can answer any of my questions about what is going to separate 1 mecher from another in mech tvt that isnt who is better at turtling to split map and what is going to separate the mech terran vs the zerg turtle-fest to hive tech regarding how well they play the game mechanically - then you've said something constructive to the conversation.
I understand the test map isn't out - but if it comes out the way they have shown it will - I'll eat my words if both of these things don't happen - I don't even have an idea how TvP is going to look but I really doubt it will be much different - again some how they have to figure out a way where turtling is NOT the best way to play (which with mech how it is now - and even more so with how it is proposed - is the best way to play).
I never said it's impossible to make a mech game fun - I said that the way they've loaded these balance changes is not going to create the desired effect of providing a diverse style of play (if mech stays how they have it - it will be so much better that it will be the only style) and that making the siege tank less mobile with more damage only intensifies the turtle effect.
|
On August 25 2016 04:08 jinjin5000 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2016 07:03 a_flayer wrote:On August 23 2016 00:12 Blackfeather wrote:On August 22 2016 23:22 a_flayer wrote:On August 22 2016 22:43 JCoto wrote:On August 22 2016 22:16 Blackfeather wrote:On August 21 2016 19:21 Turb0Sw4g wrote:On August 20 2016 19:50 a_flayer wrote:
I'm just going to throw some shit out there. I don't know what my icon says, but I've only been playing random on those rare occasions that I've played SC2 in the past 5 years or so. I started out as a Zerg player in WoL when I borderlined as a low-level master player (I've been in and out of masters during the first season).
Personally, I'm still upset that they didn't remove the macro mechanics. I just feel like it's detrimental to my enjoyment of the game. I never played as much SC2 as I did in that short time period where they reduced the need for macro mechanics. In addition to that, I feel like units such as the Queen and MSC detract from my freedom to pick and choose my strategies, both in offence (playing against those units) and defence (where they are basically 100% necessary to be built). Add to that the economic "defence" of the MULE (which allows Terran to sustain worker damage and recover from it), and we've covered all three races somewhat in this respect, I think.
Me too. I really hope they will at some point re-evaluate the macro mechanics removal. IMO, one of the major reasons of why they didn't keep this change was that it tipped balance against Terran. With the buffs to mech it may have played out otherwise. From my experience, without macro mechanics your micro in battles became way more important if you played Protoss or Terran (inject was just toned down, so not much of a change for Zerg). I really enjoyed that. On August 20 2016 19:50 a_flayer wrote:
I would like to see a SC2 where these units just aren't absolutely necessary in order to play the game and at the same time deal with my dislike for the macro mechanics.
Maybe increase the natural larvae spawn of hatcheries to the point where queens aren't necessary, or at least not quite as prolific. Remove the spawn larvae ability of queens or reduce it to 1 larva per inject to make it an optional boost if you want more zerglings for your strategy of choice and increase the cost of the queen (maybe 200/50?) and her abilities (50 energy?) so that maybe you'll just have one or two if you really want to spread creep fast or something.
Change the MULE into something where it can provide a boost to the Terran economy without making it necessary to be dropped constantly. Perhaps allow it to be dropped and convert into a building at a faster rate than normal SCVs build them instead of the harvest-resources-at-an-increased-rate ability.
I'm not sure how to handle the MSC at all. It just seems like such an incredible mess of a unit, as you absolutely 100% cannot go around this unit in any shape way or form when you are playing Protoss. I basically hated sentries throughout WoL and HotS for the same reason. Stuff like that just disgusts me as someone who likes to get a choice in where I invest my resources.
It's bad enough that we have to make all these workers all the time (joke!).
Ah well, it's never gonna happen, I guess. I agree with this completely. Why are there units (other than workers) you basically must build regardless of your strategy? Queens, MULEs and Chrono Boost just add a mechanical barrier but very little strategic-wise. While I agree and always thought that sc2 had too many inflexible elements that take the focus away from actual strategy (yay, macro apm, so interesting...), blizzard made clear that they want the game to be mechanical taxing and they want to keep their dog trainer parts in the game. They reemphasized this again @fundamental changes. I doubt we are going to see any macro changes that aren't +/-costs. So I guess talking about it really serves no purpose I think that what I prosposed above is not a bad solution. I think I've read your proposed solutions before and I found them terribly vague and incomplete. And I still think that. Much like mine, except in different ways. I was really just venting with my original post because I can't be arsed to play the game in the way Blizzard seems to want the game to be played. I wasn't trying to start a discussion or even expecting people to agree with me, lel. Can totally relate to that, was a random plat/diamond player in wol and feel the same about macro mechanics (although I couldn't test it cause I got no beta key). One of the reasons I stopped playing was because Sc2 was for me too much RT and too little S. But the macro mechanics resolution made pretty clear that Blizz wants to keep it that way, or at least keep APM a major factor. I feel that, if you remove artificial macro mechanics, the excessive APM will simply be dedicated to more multi-pronged harassments & engaging the other player in combat instead of macroing. But maybe I'm crazy like that and people will still go for the 1a deathball while APM drops down to next to nothing cause its so easy in SC2 to do that. You need to completely redesign the game then. Macro mechanics balanced each races economy to roughly equal rates despite the differences between them and when blizzard just flat out half heartedly removed macro mechanic back in beta, it was a big imbalanced mess that was nowhere near remotely balanced. Terran w/o mule couldn't even 1/1/1 off one base without significant gaps and asking blizzard to modify every single units cost in relative to eco is too much for a major balance patch. By the way, zerg kept inject on autocast while other races got theirs flat out removed during that patch so other races were significantly nered that time in beta. It isn't a major game design patch you know.
Except for the fact that they could just build them in...
I mean how hard is it to double larvae production once you have a spawning pool, reduce protoss build times and either give orbitals an aoe that increases mining or just increase mining rates of terran workers nonconditionally?
I know that that wouldn't be exactly the same, but their current proposals aren't 100% linear either. Hell the worst approximation is chronoboost, which they could just leave in in it's current form since it doesn't take a lot of apm anyways.
Again I don't believe a second that Blizz is gonna do that, but seriously, it's half an hour of numbers crunching if they want it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
