|
On January 26 2020 01:16 Steelghost1 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2020 06:00 Hunta15 wrote:
As a Zerg player the only difference between a 12 worker start and a 6 worker start is that I can make my natural hatchery at 48 seconds into the game compared to the 2 minutes 5 seconds. These times are not completely accurate since the game clock was changed; however, the point still stands. Reducing the starting worker count will not do anything beneficial to the game: all it does is make the most boring part of the game take longer.
All of the games cheeses such as pool first, proxy 2 rax, etc can still be done. If you really think this then I´m sorry to tell you that you are wrong. The math has been done, tested and explained. Zerg economy and larva mechanic rely on snowballing via massification of workers at the start, starting with 12 workers directly buffed zerg early game economy and it is not just a matter of when you put your hatchery.
I frankly don't care if you think I'm wrong. 12 workers is better for the game because it gets the player into the more interesting parts of the game quicker. The game is fine with it, and it's most likely going to stay that way.
|
On January 26 2020 07:36 Hunta15 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 26 2020 01:16 Steelghost1 wrote:On January 25 2020 06:00 Hunta15 wrote:
As a Zerg player the only difference between a 12 worker start and a 6 worker start is that I can make my natural hatchery at 48 seconds into the game compared to the 2 minutes 5 seconds. These times are not completely accurate since the game clock was changed; however, the point still stands. Reducing the starting worker count will not do anything beneficial to the game: all it does is make the most boring part of the game take longer.
All of the games cheeses such as pool first, proxy 2 rax, etc can still be done. If you really think this then I´m sorry to tell you that you are wrong. The math has been done, tested and explained. Zerg economy and larva mechanic rely on snowballing via massification of workers at the start, starting with 12 workers directly buffed zerg early game economy and it is not just a matter of when you put your hatchery. I frankly don't care if you think I'm wrong. 12 workers is better for the game because it gets the player into the more interesting parts of the game quicker. The game is fine with it, and it's most likely going to stay that way.
12 workers is worse because it completely trivializes deep strategical choices and the implications that they used to have in this game. It is almost mandatory that you get a third early into the game and tech paths are not a big commitment anymore. Opening build orders, which were a very strong mindgame/gamble/decisions in itself have diminished in number. Styles have become more generalized and players are not able to show their strengths/weaknesses the same way they could during Wol and HoTS. Midgame play and tactics are not as prevalent anymore because almost always you will get to have some kind of lategame army, specially if you are zerg.
No, almost every high level player or pro that has spoken out about this on streams/forums etc agree that 12 workers was a very big reason as to the game failing to retain the number of users that it had during HOTS. Playerbase and viewership numbers already spoke for themselves during the initial months of LOTV, a lot of people left permanently or for a time because they were angry the economic model took this current direction.
I lean to believe that you are most probably a low level player or your knowledge about starcraft 2 during its Wol or Hots days is limited. The argument that 12 workers is better because "speed ups boring early game" is, at best, a lame excuse that David Kim came up with (as if the reason the game was not as popular was because you had 3 mins of little action) and, at worst, plain stupid. It completely destabilizes a lot of strategical and tactical options this marvelous game could possibly have.
But anyway, not that you care or anyone at Blizz does, they are specialists at screwing things up and almost never acknowledging their mistakes. Such a great company that used to be the pinnacle of imagination and creativity, delivering high quality and memorable products, that is blatantly incompetent at balancing or understanding what makes their game great. 12 Workers was a mistake, maybe a change was needed, but doubling the amount of workers did more overall harm than it did good.
|
let's get 900 more word salad posts where some rando cries that people who disagree are "objectively wrong"
User was warned for this post
|
|
|
There are nice things about both systems. The old worker start did make for a more evenly paced game. Mid game was longer, and so we got to see the most interesting part of sc2 for longer. their was less of this just build up to 4 bases with 1 or 2 fights and some light harass kind of games we see a fair amount now between high level players. I liked that.
On the other hand I really appreciate being able to play more games in the same block of time with out really having a degraded experience. Having every game take 3 minutes less is really nice, especially since those 3 minutes were 90% of the time the exact same.
At this point I think things are just to far along for blizzard to ever consider changing worker start count since its so fundamental to balance and so many things get shifted around by a change like this. So conversations about it are more interesting then productive. The current economy system is here to stay.
|
ME: started playing in the last 2months of HotS. missed the entire WoL-Era.
Was fascinated both by playing and watching SC2.
Then LotV came -everything was new- but noProblem for me- i was also New.
4 1/2years forward>> i can play now. .but i try to play like bomber.teaja.polt intheir prime with focus on MMM.Needles to say. .the gamespeed sucks for me now. .It took me some time to find out if its only me with my not Maru-Apm or is it the game.
For a year now i accepted that LotV just isnt my expansion. . i would have done well in WoL or HotS.
So my ladder aspirations arent that high anymore. . highDiamond with dips into Masters is okay .I can live witthat.
But what saddens me is. . i ve lost interest in watching current Tournaments. Everything looks the same now.
In the last 12months I spend more time watching SCVODArchives on Twitch then todays tourneys.
|
On January 26 2020 10:35 Steelghost1 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 26 2020 07:36 Hunta15 wrote:On January 26 2020 01:16 Steelghost1 wrote:On January 25 2020 06:00 Hunta15 wrote:
As a Zerg player the only difference between a 12 worker start and a 6 worker start is that I can make my natural hatchery at 48 seconds into the game compared to the 2 minutes 5 seconds. These times are not completely accurate since the game clock was changed; however, the point still stands. Reducing the starting worker count will not do anything beneficial to the game: all it does is make the most boring part of the game take longer.
All of the games cheeses such as pool first, proxy 2 rax, etc can still be done. If you really think this then I´m sorry to tell you that you are wrong. The math has been done, tested and explained. Zerg economy and larva mechanic rely on snowballing via massification of workers at the start, starting with 12 workers directly buffed zerg early game economy and it is not just a matter of when you put your hatchery. I frankly don't care if you think I'm wrong. 12 workers is better for the game because it gets the player into the more interesting parts of the game quicker. The game is fine with it, and it's most likely going to stay that way. 12 workers is worse because it completely trivializes deep strategical choices and the implications that they used to have in this game. It is almost mandatory that you get a third early into the game and tech paths are not a big commitment anymore. Opening build orders, which were a very strong mindgame/gamble/decisions in itself have diminished in number. Styles have become more generalized and players are not able to show their strengths/weaknesses the same way they could during Wol and HoTS. Midgame play and tactics are not as prevalent anymore because almost always you will get to have some kind of lategame army, specially if you are zerg. No, almost every high level player or pro that has spoken out about this on streams/forums etc agree that 12 workers was a very big reason as to the game failing to retain the number of users that it had during HOTS. Playerbase and viewership numbers already spoke for themselves during the initial months of LOTV, a lot of people left permanently or for a time because they were angry the economic model took this current direction. I lean to believe that you are most probably a low level player or your knowledge about starcraft 2 during its Wol or Hots days is limited. The argument that 12 workers is better because "speed ups boring early game" is, at best, a lame excuse that David Kim came up with (as if the reason the game was not as popular was because you had 3 mins of little action) and, at worst, plain stupid. It completely destabilizes a lot of strategical and tactical options this marvelous game could possibly have. But anyway, not that you care or anyone at Blizz does, they are specialists at screwing things up and almost never acknowledging their mistakes. Such a great company that used to be the pinnacle of imagination and creativity, delivering high quality and memorable products, that is blatantly incompetent at balancing or understanding what makes their game great. 12 Workers was a mistake, maybe a change was needed, but doubling the amount of workers did more overall harm than it did good.
I would really like to see any sources on the middle paragraph there. Every pro has said 12 workers is a big reason for the game failing to retain users? What? And a lot of people left permanently? Our perspectives must've been SUPPPER different, because I remember a lot of excitement and hope for what LotV would bring. And most everyone agrees that LotV is the best step-up for SC2, with only the occasional '12 workers is baddddd' thread popping up here and there. I for one am convinced stuff like this thread is what comes out of wearing nostalgia goggles, but I'll admit to that being a personal opinion not shared by everyone.
If you don't like the 12 workers start, great. But your whole post just reeks of having your own personal opinion and then blanketing it over everything and everyone.
|
Agreed. I quit SC2 because of this change. It just kinda erased the early and mid game. Also when i look at pro players now in LoTV, they all play kinda the same. There's not really a diversion in strategy i feel. In WOL/HOTS players had their unique playing style atleast to some degree.
|
Are there any chat channels in game to find wol/hots custom games? I learned they took down the old ladders a couple years ago and that something like 50k people were still playing on those older versions of the game and I’m wondering what happened to them. Been trying to get back into the game but I’m not a fan of the economy change. Also the maps are huge now lol.
|
I think there are three angles here:
1. There is a sense of calm to starting with 4 or 6 workers. It means that your number of options at the start of the game is very constrained, loosening only after some time. If you've made your peace with this, you might have come to tolerate or enjoy the quiet. You can do a couple of rote actions at the start that you've done a million times before and see the pacing of the game catch up organically only as you build up. Whether you appreciate this or not depends on many different factors and is probably quite personal. I personally don't mind the quiet, similarly I never minded the early game of WC3 where you slay creeps and build up your hero levels. But too much player comfort gets a bit dangerous, they shouldn't get too safe in their shell. It's a battle to the death and not a cooperative game, hence you should force the player to come to terms with this reality by taking them out of their comfort zone, creating gameplay that organically flows to create conflict. But this creates a lot of stress for players as well, I think it's a very delicate art.
2. Actual competitive gameplay only takes place as you are forced to make decisions and interact with your opponent. Blizzard specifically seeks to standardize their competitive games, such that every time you play the ladder you can do so in responsible 15-20 minute chunks. No drawn out stalemates, no instant rushes to ravage your base at the outset of the game. This also works better for e-sports. Tournaments want to be able to deliver content and control downtime. For that to happen the game has to be reliable and the pressure is on developers to create experiences where you can fire off the signal and then the players go at it. This is about efficient design, you analyze the early game and discover it doesn't score well on some sort of excitement metric, therefore you eliminate it since you can't meaningfully change it.
3. It seems only natural that players become nostalgic about something so iconic as the proxy rush or zerg rush. It's something that's always been part of the game, but kind of randomly it's just been cut out because of some Blizzard directive. I guess you suddenly look at the game and don't recognize it anymore, something that I imagine is true especially for older players. And it's not like the community had no voice in it, but it's always been pretty easy for Blizzard to listen only when it's convenient for them to do so and they're always more likely to be true to their own agenda and priorities, as well as to the demands of content producers, rather than to some vague notion of the integrity of the game or the cumulative needs of the players.
So personally I don't think it's too bad, it's just something that makes sense given the environment of a game which is at the mercy of Blizzard and tournament play. Dreams can be manufactured. We don't wait for the perfect game to materialize out of thin air and to be presented fully whole by loyal custodians. Instead Blizzard contorts and distorts it until it fits their purposes, even if that means cutting off the early game.
|
Czech Republic12131 Posts
On January 26 2020 23:22 A.Alm wrote:
Agreed. I quit SC2 because of this change. It just kinda erased the early and mid game. Also when i look at pro players now in LoTV, they all play kinda the same. There's not really a diversion in strategy i feel. In WOL/HOTS players had their unique playing style atleast to some degree.
In a lot of sense, yeah, even players are now less unique.
|
As your 'average player and viewer', I can confirm I left the game because of 12 worker start and overall speed of the game significantly increasing. It's like all those old memes that made fun of the game being 'korean clicking simulator' and 'whoever clicks faster wins' coming true.
But in the sc2 community, the feeling I get is that unless you're top 1% you should literally kill yourself before you even attempt to consider thinking of criticising the game. Even if you're top 1%, your criticism will probably be met with 'whatever, you aren't a top korean pro' or some shit like that.
|
On January 27 2020 03:02 ihatevideogames wrote:
As your 'average player and viewer', I can confirm I left the game because of 12 worker start and overall speed of the game significantly increasing. It's like all those old memes that made fun of the game being 'korean clicking simulator' and 'whoever clicks faster wins' coming true.
But in the sc2 community, the feeling I get is that unless you're top 1% you should literally kill yourself before you even attempt to consider thinking of criticising the game. Even if you're top 1%, your criticism will probably be met with 'whatever, you aren't a top korean pro' or some shit like that.
I just wish the game was designed in a way that makes it as good of a game as it can be, regardless of the implications. I know pro's livelihoods are in the balance of such things, but I'd rather the approach be to just make it a wonderful GAME and not completely niche for the top .0001%.
Heroes of the storm faced this problem. The game was a hell of a lot of fun at the start. Then with the pro scene, the game got increasingly more and more stale because everything was balanced or designed around the tip top pro's. Now that the pro scene is dead the developers have focused on simply making the game fun and enjoyable. I'd rather have the latter approach, as I am not a pro and never will be. No current pro will say they want the game to change in this way - Day[9] said a long time ago if pro's had their way, the game would be the most boring, stale crap in the world with extremely boring maps and the game being 100% the same every time.
Lastly, I was one of those people who played the WOL and HOTS ladders a LOT - I was playing the day they shut them down. I wouldn't mind LOTV doing whatever it wants if I could still play the previous versions I enjoyed more.
|
On January 27 2020 03:02 ihatevideogames wrote:
But in the sc2 community, the feeling I get is that unless you're top 1% you should literally kill yourself before you even attempt to consider thinking of criticising the game. Even if you're top 1%, your criticism will probably be met with 'whatever, you aren't a top korean pro' or some shit like that.
There has been a certain subset of this community that has been toxic in this manner since the game came out. These people have essentially decided that it is better to belittle others than allow them to talk about issues they have with the game. They don't seem to understand that people don't give a shit about being GM in a game that isn't fun to play in the first place or that discussions involving constructive criticism aren't a bad thing. Even in this thread there have been several dismissive posts in this manner and it sucks.
On January 27 2020 03:52 LHK wrote:Show nested quote +On January 27 2020 03:02 ihatevideogames wrote:
As your 'average player and viewer', I can confirm I left the game because of 12 worker start and overall speed of the game significantly increasing. It's like all those old memes that made fun of the game being 'korean clicking simulator' and 'whoever clicks faster wins' coming true.
But in the sc2 community, the feeling I get is that unless you're top 1% you should literally kill yourself before you even attempt to consider thinking of criticising the game. Even if you're top 1%, your criticism will probably be met with 'whatever, you aren't a top korean pro' or some shit like that. I just wish the game was designed in a way that makes it as good of a game as it can be, regardless of the implications. I know pro's livelihoods are in the balance of such things, but I'd rather the approach be to just make it a wonderful GAME and not completely niche for the top .0001%. Heroes of the storm faced this problem. The game was a hell of a lot of fun at the start. Then with the pro scene, the game got increasingly more and more stale because everything was balanced or designed around the tip top pro's. Now that the pro scene is dead the developers have focused on simply making the game fun and enjoyable. I'd rather have the latter approach, as I am not a pro and never will be. No current pro will say they want the game to change in this way - Day[9] said a long time ago if pro's had their way, the game would be the most boring, stale crap in the world with extremely boring maps and the game being 100% the same every time. Lastly, I was one of those people who played the WOL and HOTS ladders a LOT - I was playing the day they shut them down. I wouldn't mind LOTV doing whatever it wants if I could still play the previous versions I enjoyed more.
Strongly agreed on pretty much all points.
|
speed only really matters in SC:BW, sc2 you can do w.e u want
|
Drogo's twitter thread essentially sums it up well.
Twitter thread
(click around his tweets to see all his responses to the terrancraft guy, poor terrancraft)
|
Imo the biggest problems with sc2 right now are the lack of early/midgame, and the way lategame is designed. Early/midgame interactions with smaller armies are a lot of fun, and lategame has always been the worst part of Starcraft 2. It can be fine in good meta's and armies like ghost lib or ultra ling bane are fun, but in general capital ships and air units are boring. They reduce the nuance of positioning and make the game too risky because of the price of those armies.
|
|
|
|
|
Czech Republic12131 Posts
I like the fact Neuro thinks more or less the same as myself. I feel touched.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
