12 worker Start makes the game unnecessary fast in the early game, which makes it extremely difficult and frustrating for new players to get into the game. New players get overwhelmed. + Show Spoiler +
You can read this :
I wanted to make you a youtube video on this subject but my English is so bad...
12 harvester is really bad for new player. If you discover the game on a ESL competition for example and you buy the game to try it. You will have a lot of trouble just to perform a 1 1 1 in Terran for example.
I made the test with a simple Bo : Gas First - Rax - Gas - Facto - Spatio and you produce marines / 2 widow mines and 1 drop ship.
In this test, i don't allowed me to use shortcut cause it's my first game (no keyboard), and i follow a build order that I wrote on a notepad.
On LOTV i cannot perform the build order well : Replay (i finish the build with 1k mineral 500 gas) On HOTS i can perform the build order well and i drop my 2 widow mines : Replay. (i finish the build with 500 mineral 200 gas, and i have to pay my B2 so 100m 200g, i'm good)
If you go inside to understand why it works on HOTS and doesn't on LOTV, this is what you will found :
This is a summary table of how many macro action you have to do per minute to execute the build. As you can see, LOTV required an average of +35% of apm on 4 min.
+35% seems nothing when you play this game since several years, but if you try the game for the first time now, its way to difficult to build a 1 1 1, where in my time (Wol) it was easy to perform even with 35 apm.
I remembered when i started to play this game, it was easy to execute a 1 1 1 blue flame drop, the difficulties appeared when i had to micro my hellion and continue to macro in my basement. That's why i continued to play the game, that was fun to micro and fun to make a build, and i was thinking : I did some damage but with a better macro my damage would have been increased, so i want be a better player, i need to focus more on my macro when i attack my opponent.
Now a beginner player can't do nothing, time to search where is the Supply Button and you have already 170 mineral stack, you don't have any fun, any perception of what is Starcraft 2, if you micro your reaper, its worst so the game seems just very hard and you just played 4 min.. with no micro.. nothing just a build.
Add to this than unit come so fast now, Reaper comes 40 sec earlier on LOTV and required micro, so apm. You can build a spell unit like Oracle or Liberator at 4.30. On Hots time's at 4.30 you could just see marines and zergling on the map.
So clearly the 12 harvester start cannot bring new player on this game, LOTV is made for the Wol/Hots player, who have the knowledge of the game, not for all the people who want try it now, cause you have no fun before 1 month of try harding which is a non sens for an E-sport game, who has to be : Easy to learn, hard to masteries.
And we all need to understand, than with no new player, we have no view on Twitch, no sponsor for competition so less competition, less pro player, and its impossible to make some good tutorial cause you need to explain so many thing before the players can take pleasure in playing that no one remains.
And what we gain ? 4 min for each game...
12 worker Start reduces the TIME window players have to scout and to react to scouting information. No topic on this but it's easy to see.
Less recover potential, harass is stronger, forced to expand every few minutes, Less TIME to focus on micro, etc..." + Show Spoiler +
Watch the game 4, Zerg make a real recover impossible on LOTV.
I made a Mod with VisionElf, where you can try to play on all the map pool with 6 harvesters Start on LOTV. It can help us to see if yes or not game was better with 6 harvesters.
Mineral was not change, it's just a change about the start, may be it's a discussion we need to have too, but yet this is not implemented.
I asked 2 low GM EU( ROM has a GM smurf) to play on it. Think there is no meta, they always play on 12, it was new for the player.
This is the game 4 : This is all the Best of 11 : + Show Spoiler +
Part 1 Part 2
As you can see, game is fun, we can see it's playable for all cause you don't need to have 150 apm to perform a build, player have time to read the opponent strategy to counter it, and all the stage are respected : we can see T1 aggression so early game is there, mid game aggression, and late game with Broodlord.
If you watch the entire Bo11 you willl see than the Zerg player used a lot of different start : 10 pool, 14 pool, hatch first with gas and no gas. Also the Protoss with Nexus first, Gate Nexus, Core Nexus. All is there, and there is no meta yet. This is in my opinion what Starcraft 2 should be.
If you want try this mod, to give us your feedback, choose any map and click on : "Create with a mod" On the search bar type : Ogaming ( entire name is : Ogaming 6 collecteurs Start) Play. Channel IG : 6 START ( EU/NA)
My native language is not English, I apologize for all the mistakes that can be made.
I think we have to objectively think about LotV economy. What does it achieve, is it improving the actual gameplay?
What's healthy and what's not ? What is good for a RTS game ?
This "I'm master player with 200 apm, i can deal with the faster pace, git gud" mentality won't get us anywhere.
With 12 worker start, the game transitions into midgame a lot faster and the combat/harass units enter the battlefield faster.
This leads to more action, more early on in the game. Action in terms of either harass or timing attacks.
So there is basically less time each game where nothing combat related is happening.
I wouldn't even say that's something good, but it's the only pro 12 worker start argument i could think of.
... But at what cost ?
What's the downside ?
With 12 worker start, openings lose their impact.
What's the gain in going for a 1rax FE ? One of the iconic terran openings. If you started playing SC2 with lotv you probably don't even know what i'm talking about, because you never saw anyone going for that opening.
The reason for that is that you basically gain nothing from it. The combination of 12 starting workers and nerfed macro mechanics leads to an imbalance of mineral and gas income in the early game. If you go for 1rax FE, you will have slightly more income earlier, but way too little to compensate for the extremely delayed tech. Which means you actually hurt yourself if you go for this kind of economic opening. You have no harass, no tech (therefore also more vulnerable to opponents timings/harass) and you basically don't gain any economy lead for compensation.
We lose a lot of strategic variety, just so that we can build our first building a few seconds earlier.
Is it worth it ? I really don't think so.
You rarely see players these days having their own unique styles and being known for it. That's something i really miss in SC2. The 12 worker start is obviously not the only reason for that, but its still clearly an impactful one.
I'm convinced that LotV would be a better game with hots economy.
On April 08 2017 08:42 StraKo wrote: Great Job AnossSC2 and VisionElf.
I think we have to objectively think about LotV economy. What does it achieve, is it improving the actual gameplay?
What's healthy and what's not ? What is good for a RTS game ?
This "I'm master player with 200 apm, i can deal with the faster pace, git gud" mentality won't get us anywhere.
With 12 worker start, the game transitions into midgame a lot faster and the combat/harass units enter the battlefield faster.
This leads to more action, more early on in the game. Action in terms of either harass or timing attacks.
So there is basically less time each game where nothing combat related is happening.
I wouldn't even say that's something good, but it's the only pro 12 worker start argument i could think of.
... But at what cost ?
What's the downside ?
With 12 worker start, openings lose their impact.
What's the gain in going for a 1rax FE ? One of the iconic terran openings. If you started playing SC2 with lotv you probably don't even know what i'm talking about, because you never saw anyone going for that opening.
The reason for that is that you basically gain nothing from it. The combination of 12 starting workers and nerfed macro mechanics leads to an imbalance of mineral and gas income in the early game. If you go for 1rax FE, you will have slightly more income earlier, but way too little to compensate for the extremely delayed tech. Which means you actually hurt yourself if you go for this kind of economic opening. You have no harass, no tech (therefore also more vulnerable to opponents timings/harass) and you basically don't gain any economy lead for compensation.
We lose a lot of strategic variety, just so that we can build our first building a few seconds earlier.
Is it worth it ? I really don't think so.
You rarely see players these days having their own unique styles and being known for it. That's something i really miss in SC2. The 12 worker start is obviously not the only reason for that, but its still clearly an impactful one.
I'm convinced that LotV would be a better game with hots economy.
Sorry for bad english
I totally agree. The point we never mentioned is : 12 worker totally destroyed the ratio between mineral and gas gathered, this is why one year ago i tried to make LOTV with one gas per mineral line, but an enriched gas ( X1,5).
But it doesn't really work, cause you regulated the gas and mineral gathered but you don't have the choice to spend your opening on a gas technologie, or full mineral ( Gas first or CC first) like with Hots economy. (If you are interesting to watch the game on one gas it's here : Dayshi Vs Bly)
If you think about that, i think the only way to go back to the real starcraft 2 is to come back on 6, and continue the balance update, and see what's happen.
If we check what we gain.
- Will beginner can try the game ? Sur at 100%, Starcraft will be accessible again. - Will the Paper Scissor Rocs, and all the variety on opening come back ? Sur at 100%, cause we have 6 years on 6 harvesters, we know it works. - Will player have more time to understand and react opponent strategy? Sur at 100%, cause we know it was clear on HOTS, new unit will not change that point. - Will Starcraft 2 come back on top Twitch game ? We can't answer, but with 6 harvesters, a lot of tutorial will come back, and imo i'm sur Starcraft 2 will have a second life and come back on top tier game.
All is good, and it's the come back of some classic build like the 6 pool, the double rax 11, 4 gate. It's awesome for everybody, old and persistent player know this game.
Now let's see what we lose ?
- Average of game time will be increased. - What else ?
I know some people think, than DK goes on 12 harvesters cause Hots was boring at the end, and i agree, HOTS was a little boring at the end, i would say more was repetitive on each match up. But i'm sure this was cause we had no new unit to change the meta. Protoss was obliged to play Colossus each game again Terran, Zerg was obliged to play zegling/muta/ban against Terran, PvZ was always Stalker/Sentry... etc Now Adept/Disruptor open some new way on PvT, Ravager/Fungal some new way on ZvT, Adept/Prism some new way on PvZ.
So i think there is no trouble here, and with some good balance update, this game can be more awesome than it never was.
On April 09 2017 22:20 SC2Toastie wrote: It looks extremely interesting and I am down for all testing of new economic models because the current one quite frankly doesn't work.
On the other hand, I'm not the right player to test this kinda stuff, I'm just getting back into actually playing !
I think all the feedback are good ! Pro feedback like Silver/Gold. If a good game is a game : easy to learn hard to masteries. All points of view are welcome
Give yours please and may be with enough report we will be able to do some stat per level ( Bronze/Silver like or not, Gold/Plat etc..)
I think this would make LotV better but I don't hane any hope of it happening because Blizzard does jack shit except for small number tweak every 4 months and the community is so divided and unproductive.
You seem to be aiming to find way make SC2 spark up in numbers again, so I will throw this out there for you to think about. If you want to make the game easier and make more "rock paper scissors game" as you stated. You think this will make SC2 pick up more? You do see that Brood War's regular streamers sustain higher viewership than SC2 regular streamers do currently? It's been like this for almost a year and remastered isn't even out yet, It will boost it even more with blizzard supporting it more than they have.
Anyone who's played StarCraft: Brood War will be quick to tell you it's a much harder game to for a new player to pick up on and play. I think this alone throws this theory of it helping SC2 become popular again by making it easier or more gimmick openings. The viewership is undeniably more for Brood War currently for regular streamers than SC2.
I support SC2 more than Brood War (although I enjoyed broodwar more in my past), but If you're looking to bring life back into StarCraft 2. The first step in my eyes, would be to stop having so many crazy balance updates over people complaining or wanting something different. It seem StarCraft 2 releases more gameplay changes in 6 months to a year than any game's lifetime. You have people who are pro or attempting to go pro, But you totally change how the game is being played. It makes it less stable for them, they have to totally throw away what all they practice and learned (their time basically). They basically have to start over again. I mean of course mechanics carry over, but understanding the timings and transitions vs each strategy and race takes a lot of work. They also have to fit it into their play style to work. The scene of SC2 in my opinion didn't decline because of being too hard to play or the speed of the game. It declined because of the constant patch changes that would change entire strategies for each race. Blizzard based their balance off of all leagues, instead of focusing on the higher level. They listen to people instead of basing the balance off of statistics instead.
However, I know this is matter of opinion, but I feel this is what slowly happen over time in SC2. The start of the scene was really big. An RTS hasn't even released to give it a run for it's money. It wasn't declined by another RTS, which makes it even more depressing to me.
Who knows, maybe I'm wrong and SC2 should continue making these changes, and it spark back up SC2? I sure hope it does.
So this is the ultra mega feedback test you was shouting in the other post? 976 viewers on random youtube.. that's the kind of feedback Blizzard really needed...
On April 09 2017 23:07 -StrifeX- wrote: You seem to be aiming to find way make SC2 spark up in numbers again, so I will throw this out there for you to think about. If you want to make the game easier and make more "rock paper scissors game" as you stated. You think this will make SC2 pick up more? You do see that Brood War's regular streamers sustain higher viewership than SC2 regular streamers do currently? It's been like this for almost a year and remastered isn't even out yet, It will boost it even more with blizzard supporting it more than they have.
Anyone who's played StarCraft: Brood War will be quick to tell you it's a much harder game to for a new player to pick up on and play. I think this alone throws this theory of it helping SC2 become popular again by making it easier or more gimmick openings. The viewership is undeniably more for Brood War currently for regular streamers than SC2.
I support SC2 more than Brood War (although I enjoyed broodwar more in my past), but If you're looking to bring life back into StarCraft 2. The first step in my eyes, would be to stop having so many crazy balance updates over people complaining or wanting something different. It seem StarCraft 2 releases more gameplay changes in 6 months to a year than any game's lifetime. You have people who are pro or attempting to go pro, But you totally change how the game is being played. It makes it less stable for them, they have to totally throw away what all they practice and learned (their time basically). They basically have to start over again. I mean of course mechanics carry over, but understanding the timings and transitions vs each strategy and race takes a lot of work. They also have to fit it into their play style to work. The scene of SC2 in my opinion didn't decline because of being too hard to play or the speed of the game. It declined because of the constant patch changes that would change entire strategies for each race. Blizzard based their balance off of all leagues, instead of focusing on the higher level. They listen to people instead of basing the balance off of statistics instead.
However, I know this is matter of opinion, but I feel this is what slowly happen over time in SC2. The start of the scene was really big. An RTS hasn't even released to give it a run for it's money. It wasn't declined by another RTS, which makes it even more depressing to me.
Who knows, maybe I'm wrong and SC2 should continue making these changes, and it spark back up SC2? I sure hope it does.
Famous Korean Brood War players have high viewer count. That is it. New streamers for Brood War get less than 30 viewers. New Brood War streamers in Korea barely crack 1000.
Also, SC2's balance changes are more frequent than say, DOTA or CSGO, but much less frequent than the most popular game in the world, League of Legends.
The start of SC2 was huge, it was one of the first truly massive esports, if not the first globally recognized esport. But, SC2 had no foundation. Everyone was shoveling money into the scene hoping for great returns. After 2 years (in 2012) people started pulling out left and right because their investments in the scene (which had no foundation) were not paying off. Hell, NASL went bankrupt.
SC2's decline would have been the same even if the game had never received more than 1 balance update per year.
I'm assuming SC2 new streamers crack better? I'm be honest I see only 1 or 2 people break 1,000 on sc2 that are very popular here lately. If new brood war streams barely crack a 1000 that is pretty good. Considering that their bigger streamers that would equal to lets say Innovation or stats currently. They're range into 5k - 8k currently. This is a rather big difference. The overall scene gap is getting bigger in favor of Brood War.
No one can change investments into SC2, it happens when people run into business without any kind of plan. I expected NASL to actually go under. They had the worse structure imo. It was ran well, but I mean...where was all the money coming from? How was they going to profit after putting the money into it? They kept this quiet. I mean their system didn't seem very well planned to me at all. It's what happens when money gets thrown without a plan and hoping for the best.
I know several great players, left simply because of constantly balance updates. I also said it was opinion, as you, or anyone else, can provide solid proof to what really cause the decline. I just find this to be the current blizzard trend, It killed D3 quickly the same way honestly.
On April 09 2017 23:21 PharaphobiaSC wrote: So this is the ultra mega feedback test you was shouting in the other post? 976 viewers on random youtube.. that's the kind of feedback Blizzard really needed...
You're right, your toxic shitposts are obviously the feedback blizzard really needs.
Seriously, if you have nothing to say, then let it be.
On April 10 2017 00:23 -StrifeX- wrote: I'm assuming SC2 new streamers crack better? I'm be honest I see only 1 or 2 people break 1,000 on sc2 that are very popular here lately. If new brood war streams barely crack a 1000 that is pretty good. Considering that their bigger streamers that would equal to lets say Innovation or stats currently. They're range into 5k - 8k currently. This is a rather big difference. The overall scene gap is getting bigger in favor of Brood War.
No one can change investments into SC2, it happens when people run into business without any kind of plan. I expected NASL to actually go under. They had the worse structure imo. It was ran well, but I mean...where was all the money coming from? How was they going to profit after putting the money into it? They kept this quiet. I mean their system didn't seem very well planned to me at all. It's what happens when money gets thrown without a plan and hoping for the best.
I know several great players, left simply because of constantly balance updates. I also said it was opinion, as you, or anyone else, can provide solid proof to what really cause the decline. I just find this to be the current blizzard trend, It killed D3 quickly the same way honestly.
On April 09 2017 23:07 -StrifeX- wrote: You seem to be aiming to find way make SC2 spark up in numbers again, so I will throw this out there for you to think about. If you want to make the game easier and make more "rock paper scissors game" as you stated. You think this will make SC2 pick up more? You do see that Brood War's regular streamers sustain higher viewership than SC2 regular streamers do currently? It's been like this for almost a year and remastered isn't even out yet, It will boost it even more with blizzard supporting it more than they have.
Anyone who's played StarCraft: Brood War will be quick to tell you it's a much harder game to for a new player to pick up on and play. I think this alone throws this theory of it helping SC2 become popular again by making it easier or more gimmick openings. The viewership is undeniably more for Brood War currently for regular streamers than SC2.
I support SC2 more than Brood War (although I enjoyed broodwar more in my past), but If you're looking to bring life back into StarCraft 2. The first step in my eyes, would be to stop having so many crazy balance updates over people complaining or wanting something different. It seem StarCraft 2 releases more gameplay changes in 6 months to a year than any game's lifetime. You have people who are pro or attempting to go pro, But you totally change how the game is being played. It makes it less stable for them, they have to totally throw away what all they practice and learned (their time basically). They basically have to start over again. I mean of course mechanics carry over, but understanding the timings and transitions vs each strategy and race takes a lot of work. They also have to fit it into their play style to work. The scene of SC2 in my opinion didn't decline because of being too hard to play or the speed of the game. It declined because of the constant patch changes that would change entire strategies for each race. Blizzard based their balance off of all leagues, instead of focusing on the higher level. They listen to people instead of basing the balance off of statistics instead.
However, I know this is matter of opinion, but I feel this is what slowly happen over time in SC2. The start of the scene was really big. An RTS hasn't even released to give it a run for it's money. It wasn't declined by another RTS, which makes it even more depressing to me.
Who knows, maybe I'm wrong and SC2 should continue making these changes, and it spark back up SC2? I sure hope it does.
I don't agree with you on BroodWar. First i don't think BWHD will attract a lot of people, the only people who watched some BW stream are the BW fan's and the SC2 Fan's who want understand what was this game so adulated. On Twitch (Twitch represent NA/EU viewers) even with 1.18, BW is much less watched than SC2. On Afreeca ( Which is represent KR viewers) it's different. But Kr has an history than EU/NA has not with BW. So BWHD will not make some view unless the KR scene provide us some mad tournament and awesome game.
But it's not the point of this topic, you compare SC2 and BW. You know BW is harder than SC2 so you conclude : problem is not than the game is too hard or too fast. But you miss one point.
Like i said previously, SC2 Lotv need 12 macro action the first minute of the game, even if BW it's harder, he just required 9. The second minute Lotv required 23 macro action, BW only 19. So yes BW is harder than SC2 but it's more accessible than LOTV. LOTV is the extension the most difficult at the beginning of the game, cause the game is fast from the beginning.
And Broodwar with 6 marines you can have fun, cause you will never see at the 4.30 min mark an Oracle who can destroy 15 harvester with no micro, just staying above your base. In BW when you have 10 marines, your opponent may just have some zerglings or Zealot or 2 Dragoon. So the game is way easy to understand when you begin it.
So Lotv is the game where you need to have a lot of apm from the beginning, and a lot of knowledge, cause nobody fight with 1 Zealot like Stork Vs Jaedong last game, or 6 zergling. In Lotv you first attack always engage gas unit, like Medivac, Oracle, Adept. This is why you cannot say : BW is harder than Lotv so the problem is not here. No, the problem is here, cause you need to think like a beginner, not like a guy who spend 1k hours on the game.
On April 09 2017 23:07 -StrifeX- wrote: You seem to be aiming to find way make SC2 spark up in numbers again, so I will throw this out there for you to think about. If you want to make the game easier and make more "rock paper scissors game" as you stated. You think this will make SC2 pick up more? You do see that Brood War's regular streamers sustain higher viewership than SC2 regular streamers do currently? It's been like this for almost a year and remastered isn't even out yet, It will boost it even more with blizzard supporting it more than they have.
Anyone who's played StarCraft: Brood War will be quick to tell you it's a much harder game to for a new player to pick up on and play. I think this alone throws this theory of it helping SC2 become popular again by making it easier or more gimmick openings. The viewership is undeniably more for Brood War currently for regular streamers than SC2.
I support SC2 more than Brood War (although I enjoyed broodwar more in my past), but If you're looking to bring life back into StarCraft 2. The first step in my eyes, would be to stop having so many crazy balance updates over people complaining or wanting something different. It seem StarCraft 2 releases more gameplay changes in 6 months to a year than any game's lifetime. You have people who are pro or attempting to go pro, But you totally change how the game is being played. It makes it less stable for them, they have to totally throw away what all they practice and learned (their time basically). They basically have to start over again. I mean of course mechanics carry over, but understanding the timings and transitions vs each strategy and race takes a lot of work. They also have to fit it into their play style to work. The scene of SC2 in my opinion didn't decline because of being too hard to play or the speed of the game. It declined because of the constant patch changes that would change entire strategies for each race. Blizzard based their balance off of all leagues, instead of focusing on the higher level. They listen to people instead of basing the balance off of statistics instead.
However, I know this is matter of opinion, but I feel this is what slowly happen over time in SC2. The start of the scene was really big. An RTS hasn't even released to give it a run for it's money. It wasn't declined by another RTS, which makes it even more depressing to me.
Who knows, maybe I'm wrong and SC2 should continue making these changes, and it spark back up SC2? I sure hope it does.
I don't agree with you on BroodWar. First i don't think BWHD will attract a lot of people, the only people who watched some BW stream are the BW fan's and the SC2 Fan's who want understand what was this game so adulated. On Twitch (Twitch represent NA/EU viewers) even with 1.18, BW is much less watched than SC2. On Afreeca ( Which is represent KR viewers) it's different. But Kr has an history than EU/NA has not with BW. So BWHD will not make some view unless the KR scene provide us some mad tournament and awesome game.
But it's not the point of this topic, you compare SC2 and BW. You know BW is harder than SC2 so you conclude : problem is not than the game is too hard or too fast. But you miss one point.
Like i said previously, SC2 Lotv need 12 macro action the first minute of the game, even if BW it's harder, he just required 9. The second minute Lotv required 23 macro action, BW only 19. So yes BW is harder than SC2 but it's more accessible than LOTV. LOTV is the extension the most difficult at the beginning of the game, cause the game is fast from the beginning.
And Broodwar with 6 marines you can have fun, cause you will never see at the 4.30 min mark an Oracle who can destroy 15 harvester with no micro, just staying above your base. In BW when you have 10 marines, your opponent may just have some zerglings or Zealot or 2 Dragoon. So the game is way easy to understand when you begin it.
So Lotv is the game where you need to have a lot of apm from the beginning, and a lot of knowledge, cause nobody fight with 1 Zealot like Stork Vs Jaedong last game, or 6 zergling. In Lotv you first attack always engage gas unit, like Medivac, Oracle, Adept. This is why you cannot say : BW is harder than Lotv so the problem is not here. No, the problem is here, cause you need to think like a beginner, not like a guy who spend 1k hours on the game.
I agree. I actually think that i never would've sticked to SC2, if i only started in lotv. I can't imagine how beginners are supposed to handle even the early game.
The increased difficulty for beginners is obviously not the only problem as you mentioned. The changed economy in lotv caused a huge decrease in early game variety and strategic options. Some of this also comes from new added units, but the economy still plays a big role.
Sorry for bringing alive 2 weeks old thread, but I've just found it and some ideas came across my mind here:
While we can discuss (and test) the difference between 6 workers start and 12 workers start, potential return to 6 worker start will simply not bring in a huge wave of new players. From my point of view, RTS is just not "hot" ("in", "trendy"...) game genre anymore (if it ever was outside of Europe). Sure, SC2 had its big boom way back in 2010 and 2011, but like was already said in comments above - SC2 didn't have any serious competiton on the field of e-sports back then. Nowadays it is a lot different.
You said that we should think as a begginer player. Well, as a begginer player I would ask myself: "Hey, what game do my friends/schoolmates/colleagues play, so I can join them and have some fun with them?" The answer would be "League of Legends", "Overwatch", "CS:GO" and of course "Hearthstone". As a begginer player I would go to twitch.tv to watch some popular games, what am I going to find there? Yep, same story - on the front page there will be League of Legends, Overwatch, CS:GO and Hearthstone (if it's not Power Rangers marathon time). My point here is that new players tend to play either a game that their friends play or a game they can watch online. And SC2 simply doesn't fulfill those requirements nowadays.
And it's understandable (from a casual gamer's point of view) - why would I lose my time with learning this absurdly difficult strategy game (that non of my friends play) just to get rekt on ladder again and again and again until after maybe a month of grinding it I would start to see some results? I can play LoL with my friends and got carried from them as we play like a team (plus the game itself is telling me what should I buy for my character), or I can start to play Hearthstone which could be done on a phone while I'm having a bath. SC2 is (for nowadays kids and new players) just so hard to learn that it's not appealing anymore. And 6 worker start won't change this since you are just comparing SC2 to SC2 (6 workers vs 12 workers), but the problem is in comparsion of SC2 to any other (now) popular game.
Btw, I have three friends that never played SC2 before LotV (and never played SC:BW either) and they were all able to learn basics of SC2 even with 12 worker start (one of them is in Dia, two are high Plats). So I wouldn't say that 12 worker start is so much more difficult for newbies as 6 worker start (while I agree that 6 worker start is easier, but just not THAT MUCH easier). What's really interesting here is the background story for all three of them - it's just the same. They all started to play SC2 because there were friends around them who were already playing it and tell them about the game. Before they played... wait for it... League of Legends (surprise!).
Bottom line - I do appreciate any effort to make SC2 better game as I am a big fan of it and I am playing it since WoL beta, and maybe the 6 start would be a positive change for LotV, so I certainly keep my eye on your work, guys. But I sincerely believe that 6 worker start is not the change that would bring SC2 back into spotlights of e-sport.
I like 12 worker since it forces expansions HOTS often suffered from the problem that once you hit 3 bases fully saturated you had no incentive to do anything else with your Econ. The fact that you mine out fast In lotv is a good thing and makes expanding consistently important. This creates more mid/late game openings since it's harder to position and you can't just camp your deathball between base 2 and 3 while putting some guys in the main to deflect harassment.
On April 28 2017 19:22 maitiky wrote: Sorry for bringing alive 2 weeks old thread, but I've just found it and some ideas came across my mind here:
While we can discuss (and test) the difference between 6 workers start and 12 workers start, potential return to 6 worker start will simply not bring in a huge wave of new players. From my point of view, RTS is just not "hot" ("in", "trendy"...) game genre anymore (if it ever was outside of Europe). Sure, SC2 had its big boom way back in 2010 and 2011, but like was already said in comments above - SC2 didn't have any serious competiton on the field of e-sports back then. Nowadays it is a lot different.
You said that we should think as a begginer player. Well, as a begginer player I would ask myself: "Hey, what game do my friends/schoolmates/colleagues play, so I can join them and have some fun with them?" The answer would be "League of Legends", "Overwatch", "CS:GO" and of course "Hearthstone". As a begginer player I would go to twitch.tv to watch some popular games, what am I going to find there? Yep, same story - on the front page there will be League of Legends, Overwatch, CS:GO and Hearthstone (if it's not Power Rangers marathon time). My point here is that new players tend to play either a game that their friends play or a game they can watch online. And SC2 simply doesn't fulfill those requirements nowadays.
And it's understandable (from a casual gamer's point of view) - why would I lose my time with learning this absurdly difficult strategy game (that non of my friends play) just to get rekt on ladder again and again and again until after maybe a month of grinding it I would start to see some results? I can play LoL with my friends and got carried from them as we play like a team (plus the game itself is telling me what should I buy for my character), or I can start to play Hearthstone which could be done on a phone while I'm having a bath. SC2 is (for nowadays kids and new players) just so hard to learn that it's not appealing anymore. And 6 worker start won't change this since you are just comparing SC2 to SC2 (6 workers vs 12 workers), but the problem is in comparsion of SC2 to any other (now) popular game.
Btw, I have three friends that never played SC2 before LotV (and never played SC:BW either) and they were all able to learn basics of SC2 even with 12 worker start (one of them is in Dia, two are high Plats). So I wouldn't say that 12 worker start is so much more difficult for newbies as 6 worker start (while I agree that 6 worker start is easier, but just not THAT MUCH easier). What's really interesting here is the background story for all three of them - it's just the same. They all started to play SC2 because there were friends around them who were already playing it and tell them about the game. Before they played... wait for it... League of Legends (surprise!).
Bottom line - I do appreciate any effort to make SC2 better game as I am a big fan of it and I am playing it since WoL beta, and maybe the 6 start would be a positive change for LotV, so I certainly keep my eye on your work, guys. But I sincerely believe that 6 worker start is not the change that would bring SC2 back into spotlights of e-sport.
The answer to your whole wall of text is 1 word: DOTA.
You can have a game that's really deep and hard to play, really hard and punishing for new players, but still be immensely popular, because it's still FUN.
12 worker start killed alot of strategic options and builds, shoehorning every race into the same few openings. And that's literally anti-fun. SC2 tried too hard to be an esport and forgot to be a fun to play game.
On April 28 2017 19:22 maitiky wrote: Sorry for bringing alive 2 weeks old thread, but I've just found it and some ideas came across my mind here:
While we can discuss (and test) the difference between 6 workers start and 12 workers start, potential return to 6 worker start will simply not bring in a huge wave of new players. From my point of view, RTS is just not "hot" ("in", "trendy"...) game genre anymore (if it ever was outside of Europe). Sure, SC2 had its big boom way back in 2010 and 2011, but like was already said in comments above - SC2 didn't have any serious competiton on the field of e-sports back then. Nowadays it is a lot different.
You said that we should think as a begginer player. Well, as a begginer player I would ask myself: "Hey, what game do my friends/schoolmates/colleagues play, so I can join them and have some fun with them?" The answer would be "League of Legends", "Overwatch", "CS:GO" and of course "Hearthstone". As a begginer player I would go to twitch.tv to watch some popular games, what am I going to find there? Yep, same story - on the front page there will be League of Legends, Overwatch, CS:GO and Hearthstone (if it's not Power Rangers marathon time). My point here is that new players tend to play either a game that their friends play or a game they can watch online. And SC2 simply doesn't fulfill those requirements nowadays.
And it's understandable (from a casual gamer's point of view) - why would I lose my time with learning this absurdly difficult strategy game (that non of my friends play) just to get rekt on ladder again and again and again until after maybe a month of grinding it I would start to see some results? I can play LoL with my friends and got carried from them as we play like a team (plus the game itself is telling me what should I buy for my character), or I can start to play Hearthstone which could be done on a phone while I'm having a bath. SC2 is (for nowadays kids and new players) just so hard to learn that it's not appealing anymore. And 6 worker start won't change this since you are just comparing SC2 to SC2 (6 workers vs 12 workers), but the problem is in comparsion of SC2 to any other (now) popular game.
Btw, I have three friends that never played SC2 before LotV (and never played SC:BW either) and they were all able to learn basics of SC2 even with 12 worker start (one of them is in Dia, two are high Plats). So I wouldn't say that 12 worker start is so much more difficult for newbies as 6 worker start (while I agree that 6 worker start is easier, but just not THAT MUCH easier). What's really interesting here is the background story for all three of them - it's just the same. They all started to play SC2 because there were friends around them who were already playing it and tell them about the game. Before they played... wait for it... League of Legends (surprise!).
Bottom line - I do appreciate any effort to make SC2 better game as I am a big fan of it and I am playing it since WoL beta, and maybe the 6 start would be a positive change for LotV, so I certainly keep my eye on your work, guys. But I sincerely believe that 6 worker start is not the change that would bring SC2 back into spotlights of e-sport.
The answer to your whole wall of text is 1 word: DOTA.
You can have a game that's really deep and hard to play, really hard and punishing for new players, but still be immensely popular, because it's still FUN.
12 worker start killed alot of strategic options and builds, shoehorning every race into the same few openings. And that's literally anti-fun. SC2 tried too hard to be an esport and forgot to be a fun to play game.
I have to say that I can't imagine going back to six workers again. Even now the early game feels incredibly slow and dull just playing it and watching it isn't much better. I don't long back to the time when we had to listen to casters fill out broadcasts with five minute long off topic discussions every single game.
I can say that I agree that I miss the suspense of all-ins like the six pool but LotV is a game which is far less about hitting one timing than HotS and WoL was, the game is more fluid in how things shape up between early, mid and late game and the amount of workers somehow ties into that. I can sacrifice the fun of early pools for the far better and more fast paced game that the twelve workers give us.
12 worker start killed alot of strategic options and builds
More than that it killed all those random insta lose early cheese or economic builds that you couldn't scout early enough to react. 12 workers is better, mineral layout is a different topic
On April 28 2017 19:22 maitiky wrote: Sorry for bringing alive 2 weeks old thread, but I've just found it and some ideas came across my mind here:
While we can discuss (and test) the difference between 6 workers start and 12 workers start, potential return to 6 worker start will simply not bring in a huge wave of new players. From my point of view, RTS is just not "hot" ("in", "trendy"...) game genre anymore (if it ever was outside of Europe). Sure, SC2 had its big boom way back in 2010 and 2011, but like was already said in comments above - SC2 didn't have any serious competiton on the field of e-sports back then. Nowadays it is a lot different.
You said that we should think as a begginer player. Well, as a begginer player I would ask myself: "Hey, what game do my friends/schoolmates/colleagues play, so I can join them and have some fun with them?" The answer would be "League of Legends", "Overwatch", "CS:GO" and of course "Hearthstone". As a begginer player I would go to twitch.tv to watch some popular games, what am I going to find there? Yep, same story - on the front page there will be League of Legends, Overwatch, CS:GO and Hearthstone (if it's not Power Rangers marathon time). My point here is that new players tend to play either a game that their friends play or a game they can watch online. And SC2 simply doesn't fulfill those requirements nowadays.
And it's understandable (from a casual gamer's point of view) - why would I lose my time with learning this absurdly difficult strategy game (that non of my friends play) just to get rekt on ladder again and again and again until after maybe a month of grinding it I would start to see some results? I can play LoL with my friends and got carried from them as we play like a team (plus the game itself is telling me what should I buy for my character), or I can start to play Hearthstone which could be done on a phone while I'm having a bath. SC2 is (for nowadays kids and new players) just so hard to learn that it's not appealing anymore. And 6 worker start won't change this since you are just comparing SC2 to SC2 (6 workers vs 12 workers), but the problem is in comparsion of SC2 to any other (now) popular game.
Btw, I have three friends that never played SC2 before LotV (and never played SC:BW either) and they were all able to learn basics of SC2 even with 12 worker start (one of them is in Dia, two are high Plats). So I wouldn't say that 12 worker start is so much more difficult for newbies as 6 worker start (while I agree that 6 worker start is easier, but just not THAT MUCH easier). What's really interesting here is the background story for all three of them - it's just the same. They all started to play SC2 because there were friends around them who were already playing it and tell them about the game. Before they played... wait for it... League of Legends (surprise!).
Bottom line - I do appreciate any effort to make SC2 better game as I am a big fan of it and I am playing it since WoL beta, and maybe the 6 start would be a positive change for LotV, so I certainly keep my eye on your work, guys. But I sincerely believe that 6 worker start is not the change that would bring SC2 back into spotlights of e-sport.
The answer to your whole wall of text is 1 word: DOTA.
You can have a game that's really deep and hard to play, really hard and punishing for new players, but still be immensely popular, because it's still FUN.
12 worker start killed alot of strategic options and builds, shoehorning every race into the same few openings. And that's literally anti-fun. SC2 tried too hard to be an esport and forgot to be a fun to play game.
I don't want to play a moba
I didn't mean to tell you go play it. I meant it as an example that a game can be begginer-unfriendly and still fun and very popular, if it focuses on the people who PLAY instead of the people who WATCH.
There is something very positive about the 12 worker start you overlook. It uncovers flaws in the general economy(three base soft cap) and game pacing (very little payoff with short, often one-sided battles following a rather dull 10 minute build up ). There is no option for different playstyles. In the end, all turtle up on 3 bases and there is one big army fight in the majority of games. The interactions that happen before are either worker harassment, which are no longer one of the coolest moments, since 5-6 of these moments are in every game or a specific timing-attack(which often will end the game early one way or the other). What a six worker start might do right now, is add a lot more timing options and distract from deeper issues, since games would look more diverse, maybe even diverse enough so noone ever figures out that sc2 might be more fundamentally flawed.
Both, Starbow and Heptacraft for me have shown that you can build a more rewarding RTS within the sc2 engine, by fixing unit-interactions and opening up different playstyles by removing the three base soft cap with diminishing returns when more than one worker mines a patch + patches with more minerals on them.
I'm confused. How is having more timing sitting around boxing your workers at the start of every game better for new players? Reaper is out at 3 min instead of 5 min, or whatever. How does that make a difference? Sitting waiting doesn't make you better.. It makes the game shorter, not harder. If anything that'll let you practice more games faster.
On April 29 2017 00:27 DrDenim wrote: I'm confused. How is having more timing sitting around boxing your workers at the start of every game better for new players? Reaper is out at 3 min instead of 5 min, or whatever. How does that make a difference? Sitting waiting doesn't make you better.. It makes the game shorter, not harder. If anything that'll let you practice more games faster.
Early game threats influence openers. The existence of a 6 pool influenced everyone's openers, and the entire meta game. With a 12 worker start, there's zero threat for early game pressure. Everyone gets a free natural.
But that's what the community wanted, so whatever.
EPT![[image loading]](http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/26443912collecteurs.png)
!
