EPTIs The Game Too Fast? - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
insitelol
845 Posts
| ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany16021 Posts
On October 13 2018 04:16 SHODAN wrote: game slowed down = importance of micro increased for all players = no difference to the importance of micro??? I don't see why lower game speed would increase the importance of micro. Players would be able to do more actions during a battle. That doesn't increase the importance of micro, just makes it easier / less punishing. | ||
|
SHODAN
United Kingdom1144 Posts
On October 13 2018 04:24 Charoisaur wrote: I don't see why lower game speed would increase the importance of micro. Players would be able to do more actions during a battle. That doesn't increase the importance of micro, just makes it easier / less punishing. I edited my previous post to explain what I mean. is sc2 the only rts you watch / play? the player with the best micro almost always wins in wc3. the player with the best micro very often wins in brood war. the player with the best micro only sometimes wins in sc2. that's the way it is. I think players with superior micro should win more often, and slowing the game down might be a good way of doing that. if you go from playing sc2 to wc3, it seems sluggish at first... but once you get into the swing of things, your apm picks up to sc2 levels. you will be microing like crazy. every grunt has a different command, not just A-move. every unit needs babysitting. that's what I mean by squeezing more out of sc2 units. if the game is slower, it would become realistic to stim / shuffle forward 1 marine to eat a tank shot... more realistic to perform show-stopping unit control. with the current game speed, this "sick micro" unit interaction is kinda rare... even at pro korean level. it's sad because micro is the one thing that makes the crowd go crazy. easier / less punishing? I don't agree. slower game speed, more micro potential = more difficult, more punishing for the less skilled player. sometimes the less skilled player can win the game through sheer numbers... how many times have you heard "wellllllllllll, it's just a number game at this point. yep, just waiting for him to tap out." why do you think there is never any incredible comebacks in sc2? because the game is too fast for that! in wc3 / brood war, you can take more damage and still have a chance to win if you have patience and superior micro. I'm not saying to slow the game down to wc3 levels, but even a slight decrease might improve the game. | ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
Both bw and sc2 are macro focused because there is no hero unit which has top priority, building more army usually just wins you the game. Now is bw more micro focused than sc2? No i don't think so, it's rather more macro focused. Why? Because you need more input and focus to macro compared to sc2, you need to spend more time macroing. You might prefer the micro you do in bw though, that's another topic entirely | ||
|
neptunusfisk
2286 Posts
On October 11 2018 17:38 fronkschnonk wrote: You're missing the point. A really failed proxyrax will also let you be behind but in LOTV a scouted proxy isn't automatically failed proxy anymore. Look at Maru's Games vs TY: he was mostly scouted quite early but he managed to deal damage to TY while still macroing behind his harassment. He almost always had more workers than TY after his harassment - not because of killing so much workers but because TY had to produce army units instead of workers. If you can do it and force defensive army units and get ahead, it stops being an allin and starts to be a pressure build. Like going 1 gate expand and sending over all your zealots and retaining them so they build lings instead of drones. Or that Bisu vs Flash game with the single proxy gate. That's just what a better player can do to you. | ||
|
Die4Ever
United States17721 Posts
On October 13 2018 04:31 SHODAN wrote: I edited my previous post to explain what I mean. is sc2 the only rts you watch / play? the player with the best micro almost always wins in wc3. the player with the best micro very often wins in brood war. the player with the best micro only sometimes wins in sc2. that's the way it is. I think players with superior micro should win more often, and slowing the game down might be a good way of doing that. if you go from playing sc2 to wc3, it seems sluggish at first... but once you get into the swing of things, your apm picks up to sc2 levels. you will be microing like crazy. every grunt has a different command, not just A-move. every unit needs babysitting. that's what I mean by squeezing more out of sc2 units. if the game is slower, it would become realistic to stim / shuffle forward 1 marine to eat a tank shot... more realistic to perform show-stopping unit control. with the current game speed, this "sick micro" unit interaction is kinda rare... even at pro korean level. it's sad because micro is the one thing that makes the crowd go crazy. easier / less punishing? I don't agree. slower game speed, more micro potential = more difficult, more punishing for the less skilled player. sometimes the less skilled player can win the game through sheer numbers... how many times have you heard "wellllllllllll, it's just a number game at this point. yep, just waiting for him to tap out." why do you think there is never any incredible comebacks in sc2? because the game is too fast for that! in wc3 / brood war, you can take more damage and still have a chance to win if you have patience and superior micro. I'm not saying to slow the game down to wc3 levels, but even a slight decrease might improve the game. I can agree with this, making the game slower means A-Move is still at the same effectiveness, but micro is able to have increased effectiveness which means it's a nerf to A-Move relative to actually microing, and that microing is buffed | ||
|
loft
United States344 Posts
| ||
|
Fedorabro69
2 Posts
| ||
|
inermis
353 Posts
| ||
|
Ej_
47656 Posts
On October 12 2018 23:40 SHODAN wrote: my point is this: Maru has reached the micro skill ceiling. we are never going to see next-level splits or next level marine shuffling on the current game speed. there is only so much fine unit movements a human can do when the game is this fast. Remember when people said it first about MarineKing and then about INnoVation? Who's the next Terran bonjwa? | ||
|
SHODAN
United Kingdom1144 Posts
On October 13 2018 21:39 Ej_ wrote: Remember when people said it first about MarineKing and then about INnoVation? Who's the next Terran bonjwa? no, I don't remember that. I don't remember anyone saying that MKP / INnoVation had reached the micro skill ceiling. that would be a stupid thing to say, even back in 2010. MKP and INno merely poked their heads through the clouds to see how high the ceiling goes. pretty soon, every korean terran learned how to split like MKP. pretty soon, sC and GuMiho were parade pushing with just as much finesse as INno. Maru, on the other hand... he's a different story. yes, there are some terran players who could beat him in a micro arena custom game, but there are no players who could micro as well as him during the turbulence of a real 1v1 match. are you familiar with "Maru's beautiful engagement vs Jaedong"? it is a good representation of Maru's micro ability from 2014 / 2015. I don't think Maru's raw micro ability has improved much beyond that point. why? because the game speed doesn't allow him to improve fine unit movements beyond that point. Maru has improved in many other ways... multi-tasking, game-sense, strategy, positioning... but not much in terms of micro ability. if you slowed the game down -5%, it is a whole new world of opportunity for players like Maru. there is a sweet spot for game speed I'm sure. wc3 found it. brood war found it. sc2 completely lost it. that's why 90% of code s lategame battles end up being A-move. that's why you have deathballs. the care and attention to micro individual units during big battles is often not worth the reward, so pro players use their attention on more important things. they could try to utilize more fine unit movements, but the battle would already be over. imagine a situation where Maru is fighting a maxed protoss army. on the current game speed, the most efficient use of micro apm would be to box 8 units and split them. on a -5% game speed, maybe the most efficient use of micro apm would be to box 3 or 4 units. slower game = more time devoted to finer unit movements, and this can only be a good thing! | ||
|
virpi
Germany3599 Posts
On October 13 2018 12:35 Fedorabro69 wrote: The game is definitely too fast for me. I just can't enjoy it at the pace it currently goes and that's why I never even bothered with LoTV. I enjoy slower gameplay that allows for more strategic thinking and less reliance on muscle memory. As it is, starcraft 2 is barely watchable without a third party observing the match. Even mid-tier Players jump their screens around and change ui menus so rapidly that it's borderline seizure inducing. Different people enjoy different things. Personally, I really love playing and watching LOTV. It is a very deep strategic game, but of course you need the ability to execute a lot of commands in a short span of time. Watching high level BW is even more seizure inducing than SC2, because players have to be even faster to keep up. | ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany16021 Posts
On October 13 2018 09:55 Die4Ever wrote: I can agree with this, making the game slower means A-Move is still at the same effectiveness, but micro is able to have increased effectiveness which means it's a nerf to A-Move relative to actually microing, and that microing is buffed Only that at he pro level nobody ever just amoves during a fight. | ||
|
Dav1oN
Ukraine3164 Posts
On October 14 2018 00:13 Charoisaur wrote: Only that at he pro level nobody ever just amoves during a fight. I'd like to add. When it comes to zerg multitask, pro actually amoves with lings on minumap, simply because no time to micro and there are dozen of things more important at the same time. Lings are too cheap to babysit them mostly. Although it's an exception. | ||
|
Die4Ever
United States17721 Posts
On October 14 2018 00:13 Charoisaur wrote: Only that at he pro level nobody ever just amoves during a fight. is this thread only about pro players? | ||
|
A.Alm
Sweden531 Posts
| ||
|
Achamian
82 Posts
On October 14 2018 06:32 A.Alm wrote: I think the battles are too fast. Everything dies so fast and the come-back potential is very small. We've gotten to a much better place than we were even a few years ago battle wise. Players have been fighting in multiple fronts and over different bases much more often. I think the mappool and LotV has helped quite a bit. But I agree to the basic sentiment, If the units health were doubled (and still balanced somehow), the battles would be more organic. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17149 Posts
On October 13 2018 06:29 The_Red_Viper wrote: I am no wc3 expert, but afaik wc3 is more micro focused mainly due to the hero system and them actively punishing you if you go above a certain supply. Both bw and sc2 are macro focused because there is no hero unit which has top priority, building more army usually just wins you the game. Now is bw more micro focused than sc2? No i don't think so, it's rather more macro focused. Why? Because you need more input and focus to macro compared to sc2, you need to spend more time macroing. You might prefer the micro you do in bw though, that's another topic entirely SC2 has fewer "economic household chores" to do than Brood War. In this aspect I like SC2 over Brood War. I really liked SC64's auto-mining feature. I like how little "economic chores" Red Alert 3 has. I want an economy and I want economic decisions to be an important part of the game without all the "housework chores" involved in Brood War and other RTS games of the mid 90s. | ||
|
DarthSidious_BR
8 Posts
| ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16109 Posts
On October 10 2018 13:19 halomonian wrote: The thing is, its not too fast. It is too definitive. In broodwar, it takes ages to finish off an opponent when you both go for macro games. In SC2, once the pendulum swings one way, its not coming back so easily, since you have perfect control and at the top level its rare for players to commit fuckups that would add up to costing someone the game. My simple balance idea would be to introduce the miss % from low to high ground. I would also like to see how sc2 behaves with limited unit selection and building, since managing a ton of stuff and having it go wrong constantly is one of the major comeback mechanics in BW for example SC2 has had metas where games would go on for a long time, sometimes even hours, precisely because it was difficult to finish off an opponent. People hated it. Like EVERYONE basically hated it. I'm not saying that I agree nor do I disagree with the idea that the game is too fast right now, but I'm just pointing out that LoTV is a lot more successful in both balance and overall enjoyment of gameplay than HoTS was BECAUSE the game got sped up, BECAUSE the bases mine out so much faster. We're just in an odd place in the meta currently where midgame tactics aren't favored in a couple of the match ups, so extreme early game cheese and late game macro plays are the norm. It'll level out. No one wants to see every game be a 5 minute cheese fest, just like no one likes to see tournament be delayed indefinitely because a single Bo3 is taking 3 hours. | ||
| ||
