|
On May 22 2007 23:16 pyrogenetix wrote:
lol all this talk makes me rethink what someone proposed a few months back... was it hot-bid? anyway it was that they make TWO versions of starcraft 2.
1) Starcraft 2 CHOBO
2) Starcraft 2 GOSU
in the first version you have everything like auto-cast spells, multiple building selection, rallied workers automine, upkeep etc.
then in the second version you keep everything badass.
problem solved! kinda like diablo where there was a hardcore option where you'd really die after you got killed and start over, it was for the really hardcore players. everybody wins!
NO upkeep in my precious Casual version >.>
On May 22 2007 23:16 Lx_Rogue wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2007 16:33 Zironic wrote:
What exactly about making the game more friendly to beginners is a bad thing? Don't we all want Starcraft 2 to become the best and most popular game ever created? From page 1... By noob friendly, i mean that makes the difference between a beginner and a skilled player smaller. The skill level won't be as varied and this goes along with things like auto-spell casting and mass unit selection. I don't think this will make the game less popular, but honestly i wouldn't care if it does. So what if the game is the best selling ever when most of the people who buy it won't play competitively. And its not like they can't still enjoy the game.
Blizzard have already stated they want to raise the difference between pros and newbies. However I don't think building selection is the right place to do so.
From Blizzards gameplay discussion it seems they want to put the skill level differences in how you exploit the terrain to your advantage and other nuisances. Also every single unit shown so far in the Gameplay video needs heavy micromanagement to make sure it is fireing at the correct kind of target. Siege tanks attacking immortals for example is just pure waste.
Also the protoss won't even be able to queue up units at all anymore.
|
Maybe that's one of those new features in bnet that they're talking about. One server for every flavor of starcraft.
|
The thing people need to realize about auto-cast is that the types of spells in SC aren't 'meant' to be auto-cast...
Aren't designed for it
In War3, autocast things like slow, bloodlust, etc., you want them to be on all your opponents, so there's no need to manually target. In SC, I wouldn't want to waste precious mana on say lockdown hitting a goliath instead of a BC or something.
Basically, all of war3's auto-cast spells were designed to be spammable, SC's clearly aren't, except heal... emp, d-matrix, parasite, broodlings, ensare... etc... no one, even a "war3 noob" would want those spells autocast
Also why the fuck would anyone want upkeep in any game? War3 players don't 'like' it at all. It's designed to allow people who are getting owned to bounce back a bit easier. Like people have said units in war3 are very expensive and if you can kill a shit load of the other persons they are usually fucked... with upkeep this is lessened a bit. Still, it doesn't belong in sc2
|
On May 22 2007 23:24 SoleSteeler wrote:
The thing people need to realize about auto-cast is that the types of spells in SC aren't 'meant' to be auto-cast...
Aren't designed for it
In War3, autocast things like slow, bloodlust, etc., you want them to be on all your opponents, so there's no need to manually target. In SC, I wouldn't want to waste precious mana on say lockdown hitting a goliath instead of a BC or something.
Basically, all of war3's auto-cast spells were designed to be spammable, SC's clearly aren't, except heal... emp, d-matrix, parasite, broodlings, ensare... etc... no one, even a "war3 noob" would want those spells autocast
Also why the fuck would anyone want upkeep in any game? War3 players don't 'like' it at all. It's designed to allow people who are getting owned to bounce back a bit easier. Like people have said units in war3 are very expensive and if you can kill a shit load of the other persons they are usually fucked... with upkeep this is lessened a bit. Still, it doesn't belong in sc2
I think we might be confusing them by not rabidly defending everything WC3 like they defend everything SC1 ^^.
|
WC3 is ruined because its basically like an old school micro war in sc where both players don't want to lose so they just run around the area and eventually one of the players gets bored and loses. At high level warcraft 3 your primary agenda is just to harass the enemies army never to fully engage. I don't think the multiple building selection took anything out of it, it does make macro harder in a sense because if you mis-rally 8 gateways and then go into a battle and your 8 freshbies are slaughtered or just not in the right area of the map your going to lose, so you will constantly have to be changing your rally and that would be more of the macro then just spending half your energy running around your base clicking each building. Lets face it warcraft 3 was not as good as starcraft because of many reasons, the 'macro' didn't have anything to do with it, I for one found the idea of heroes and creeps kind of stupid for an rts. When it was first announced I thought like every unit would level up and then it was just heroes and it was kind of lame.
|
On May 22 2007 23:24 SoleSteeler wrote:
The thing people need to realize about auto-cast is that the types of spells in SC aren't 'meant' to be auto-cast...
Aren't designed for it
In War3, autocast things like slow, bloodlust, etc., you want them to be on all your opponents, so there's no need to manually target. In SC, I wouldn't want to waste precious mana on say lockdown hitting a goliath instead of a BC or something.
Basically, all of war3's auto-cast spells were designed to be spammable, SC's clearly aren't, except heal... emp, d-matrix, parasite, broodlings, ensare... etc... no one, even a "war3 noob" would want those spells autocast
Also why the fuck would anyone want upkeep in any game? War3 players don't 'like' it at all. It's designed to allow people who are getting owned to bounce back a bit easier. Like people have said units in war3 are very expensive and if you can kill a shit load of the other persons they are usually fucked... with upkeep this is lessened a bit. Still, it doesn't belong in sc2
I think you meant "would NOT want" 
I say listen to SoleSteeler for he speaks the truth!
Fuu
And people coming from War3, as it seems they are legion in these threads (coming from S&G, general forums, new accounts...), please skip your turn on this one and keep your marvelous ideas to ruin or 'revolutionize' progaming on the next one game. War4 will be even more friendly, don't worry. I can understand you feel quite an urge to change the game you play, thats not a reason, cause as its said above you ll probably do the same in some months.
i can agree with some ideas here and there
Coming from TL.net forums and being here for several years, some even being staff members.
You can agree with good or bad ideas here and there?
|
Restoration is a good example of a spell in bw you'd like (theoretically can) cast on lots of different targets in no time flat. Same way that I can stim 36 marines in less than a second, I'd like to heal my 8 vessels from plague in less than a second. The only reason I can't do that is because the UI is crippled, lol!
Oh oh I forgot -- it's all part of the game's balance, ROFLOLZOR
Wait wait, that's not the real reason!! The reason is that I have to train 14 hours a day to DESERVE to be able to do that.
[/sarcasm]
Actually my last sentence was wrong. Even the pros don't do it.
They don't do it because it's too hard for them. Because it's not humanly possible to do that with BW's current interface.
|
I support the option to choose from different UI's (i.e. different levels of automation) . Competitive games would enforce use of the same UI for all participating players. All of you 400APM machines could even play sc2 with war1 level interface, just for extra pimpin' and to push your mashing abilities to the 500-600APM area.
|
On May 23 2007 11:26 EmS.Radagast wrote:
Restoration is a good example of a spell in bw you'd like (theoretically can) cast on lots of different targets in no time flat. Same way that I can stim 36 marines in less than a second, I'd like to heal my 8 vessels from plague in less than a second. The only reason I can't do that is because the UI is crippled, lol!
Oh oh I forgot -- it's all part of the game's balance, ROFLOLZOR
If you don't see why autocast would suck in this situation from several perspectives, you should just stick to WC3 
|
If you don't see why autocast would suck in this situation from several perspectives, you should just stick to WC3
If the UI is worth anything you will be able to TOGGLE autocasting. All you will need to do is move the vessel group into range and toggle the autocast on, then back off. You could also implement a combination of smart-cast and multiple target selection to achieve the same effect.
I don't play WC3 at all, I tried doing that for a couple of months and moved back to bw because I don't like heros, I really don't like "creeping" and I outright despise upkeep, which is in my opinion the worst feature for an RTS ever concieved. I enjoy bw alot more, despite its flaws. The fact that it's the RTS game I enjoy most doesn't automatically mean I also think it's the embodiment of perfection like you do.
|
On May 23 2007 12:10 EmS.Radagast wrote:
You newbie, if the UI is worth anything you will be able to TOGGLE autocasting. All you will need to do is move the vessel group into range and toggle the autocast on, then back off. You could also implement a combination of smart-cast and multiple target selection to achieve the same effect.
LoL, I'm not sure whether laugh or cry after being called a newbie by someone who's calling me a newbie because he cant do something as simple as manually restore a few vessels...
|
Yes, it's that simple that not even the pros do it in a real game. Way of totally not getting what I was trying to explain to you in very simple terms. Don't even try to argue about it because it's a fact. Please show me a pro level TvZ where the T does this to avoid getting his vessel cloud health down to 2 from a plague by Z.
|
Don't even try arguing it makes no difference if their health goes to 2. The pros apparently can't even manage to repair their vessels, they just die in mass to a bunch of hyds that happen to stand or move in their way 5 minutes later. You know this as well as I do so please cut the bullshit
|
On May 21 2007 20:31 DenariusJay wrote:
You can still overpower someone in mouse speed with multi selection though. I can't figure out why some don't see this point.
The newb will select 200 units and A click. The pro will do the same, but will 300APM his ass when the battle actually happens. 300 apm devoted to the actual battle will be far more entertaining then seeing it split between battle and building, IMO. Plus, with multi selection we will see bigger battles more common thus forcing the player to have to micro each big battle in order to come out the victor.
Multi selection will not hinder craft2 in any way shape or form... it only Hinders SC1 cuz its wasn't designed for it. SC2 will be.
huh? multi selection would be allot better in SC1 because on the speed of the gameplay.
|
I said in another thread, i think the unlimited select cap thread, i think there should be an options screen when you host the game allowing you to turn certain things on and off, like the Number of units to cap selections to, or Buildings Etc. and god forbid blizzard putting minimap Pings in sc2 have that an option as well.
It will basically get put into a norm as to whats acceptable in pro matches like you dont see Pro matches being played on maps like BGH. The pros will work out a system putting together the best most practical way to do things and allowing the noobies to beat their shit with 8 gates at once and all of their units.
Anybody agree or disagree with this idea?
i think its relatively good.
|
hehehe, i think i wont like this new comunity...sc2 will be full of "kids". yeah, I know that is a good thing for the game, but not for me..
I hate those retards from wc3.
back to the topic: SC will have multiple building selection, so I will stop whinning..
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On May 23 2007 11:26 EmS.Radagast wrote:
Restoration is a good example of a spell in bw you'd like (theoretically can) cast on lots of different targets in no time flat. Same way that I can stim 36 marines in less than a second, I'd like to heal my 8 vessels from plague in less than a second. The only reason I can't do that is because the UI is crippled, lol!
Oh oh I forgot -- it's all part of the game's balance, ROFLOLZOR
Wait wait, that's not the real reason!! The reason is that I have to train 14 hours a day to DESERVE to be able to do that.
[/sarcasm]
Actually my last sentence was wrong. Even the pros don't do it.
They don't do it because it's too hard for them. Because it's not humanly possible to do that with BW's current interface.
No, I don't want my medics to waste all their mana de-plaguing my marines while my BCs life is quickly draining away.
I feel it's likely there'll be a smartcast in SC2 (ie all units dont use the spell when several of them are selected) so I dont see the need for autocast on an ability like this.
|
In all honesty, I seriously hope that by the time the beta rolls around multiple building selection will be gone. I like pretty much everything about this that Blizzard has shown us so far, but without some astounding revamps MBS is just a bad idea.
Most people in this thread have been saying it's just mechanical and that removing it will simply add more room for strategy, but I really doubt that. It's important to realize that macroing through all of your buildings is not merely a clicksink or timesink, but a concentration sink. What's more, it's the best concentration sink I think I've ever seen in a game. And frankly, its presence is helping to contribute to Starcraft's strategy, not detracting from it.
Take a peek at Bisu's now famed PvZ style. Fast expo forces the zerg to expand, causing overextension, then the protoss sends in tons and tons of harassment to keep the zerg as slow as possible. Ask yourself: will this strategy really work as macro gets easier? Sure, it'll always work as long as your opponent cannot multitask well, but it becomes so much easier to counter a strategy like this as a concentration sink like macro is simplified. Having macro not just exist, but be such an important aspect of Starcraft allows for these strategies of concentration denial. Every step taken to reduce the importance of macro, such as MBS, is simply reducing the power of these strategies. And it's not just Beesuit, it's every strategy that tries to catch the opponent off guard. Drops, invisible units, attacking from multiple sides, they all work and are interesting because they tax a player's ability to multitask in addition to the tangible damage they do in game.
Furthermore, as a few people have pointed out, who really benefits? Casual players are going to want cool graphics, cool units, and a good story. Blizzard will no doubt deliver on all three. Do you really think these casual players would ever make good use of MBS in their play? I've rarely ever seen a new or casual player who didn't make 2 or less unit production facilities and fill them with queues. Is being able to select 12 buildings at once going to really alter their gameplay? And right now, we have a system that works very well for competitive play, so why change it if it's unlikely that MBS will actually benefit newer players? It may seem archaic, but as I've pointed out, Starcraft needs concentration sinks.
Several people have said that MBS would free up more time to create new strategies and tricks on the battlefield, but do you really expect that? In the early game, where micro counts for a lot, macro is so much less time consuming that players can get away with doing impressive micro strategies. I sincerely doubt early game play would change much. When you approach late game, micro strategies tend to be less valuable than your overall unit placement, map control, army movement, etc etc. It's the big things that count and fortunately, even with the more time-consuming macro these things can still be accomplished very well. I honestly think that PvT, for example, would be downright boring late game if macro was simplified by the addition of MBS.
Furthermore, what's so wrong with having physical demands to a game? Basketball, baseball, soccer, football, etc etc all demand an incredible amount of physical ability to be played at the high level. Being able to dribble a basketball is a very mechanical thing. Pros will do it infinitely better than low level players, but does that really bother the low level players? Hell no. Those sports can be fun without the immense levels of physical ability, just like Starcraft can be enjoyable without incredible dexterity. You can't deny that those newbies playing 3V3 BGH are probably having a damn good time, because they keep doing it, even without all the physical, mechanical abilities that more experienced players have.
I honestly don't think that freeing up this extra time is going to create more strategies than it hurts, and I also don't think casual players would appreciate such an ability so much in the first place. Despite the UI being archaic, the last LAN party I attended had tons of SC matches going on between casual players despite all the new RTSes they could bust out. Casual players are looking to have a fun time, and they can get it without MBS.
|
I think difficulty in the game should lie in strategy, not clicking fast. I like being able to control as many units as I want at once and selecting multiple buildings. Anything else seems archaic to me, an old gameplay mechanic. Making control harder simply for the sake of making control harder as a purpose in itself is something I don't agree with.
|
On May 23 2007 21:31 Vi)Chris wrote:
I think difficulty in the game should lie in strategy, not clicking fast. I like being able to control as many units as I want at once and selecting multiple buildings. Anything else seems archaic to me, an old gameplay mechanic. Making control harder simply for the sake of making control harder as a purpose in itself is something I don't agree with.
OMG once again we have a champion here.
The guy above wrote a very nice 100 lines post explaining to people like you why we desire it stays so and why its not "making control harder simply for the sake of making control harder as a purpose in itself" and JUST AFTER, you come here, not trying to explain why you disagree his arguments but saying exactly the same bullshit he tried to clear up to help you.
Waw
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
