| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
InRaged
1047 Posts
On August 07 2007 18:33 Heen wrote: And autocast should be upgradeable for select units: marines (stimpack), vessels (irradiate), ghost (lockdown) Blizzard will never make THESE spells autocast | ||
|
Blacklizard
United States1194 Posts
On August 07 2007 19:14 InRaged wrote: Now listen you. Today. In SC:BW ladder game. Without all "so-called improvements". Can you repeat Nada's invulnerable marines/vultures? Can you reaver drop like Nal_rA or Stork? Can you dance with dragoons like Free? Can you perfectly flank like sAviOr? How Multiple Building Selection or smart-casting will help you to do so? Do you ever had need to cast more than one Psi-storm/Plague/Sworm in one place? Do you ever had need to cast more than one Irradiate/Matrix at the same unit? Why there is option to do so then? Chobo players have no problems with repeatedly clicking on Factories/Gateways. They have problem with doing it at the right time. Hosu players have no problems with cloning they have problems with casting spells at the right place, at the right time. Or do you think only few can use defilers like sAviOr or storms like Reach cause cloning requires a lot of skill? Do you know one of the reasons why almost no one - including micro-beasts like Casy and Nada - uses restoration to heal plagued units especially marines? Use your brains to think before saying to someone "Now please quit posting" or you will look like arrogant idiot InRaged's post is really about enough to convince me that easy cloning is OK. When I remember all those close matches were the pros were unable to micro quickly enough and died were just sad. There are a few clear ways to fix this, honestly. 1. Reduce the game to Faster speed. 2. Simplify interface (Multiple Building selection, Easy Cloning, etc.) 3. Get rid of all the micro special abilities and make it an attack move only type game. 4. Play BW and live with the many errors executed even by pros, and just chalk it up to unreachable perfection (like better than a perfect 10 in gymnastics or whatever) #1 would be my preference. #3 sounds terrible. #2 is the choice they are taking. | ||
alffla
Hong Kong20321 Posts
On August 07 2007 19:14 InRaged wrote: Now listen you. Today. In SC:BW ladder game. Without all "so-called improvements". Can you repeat Nada's invulnerable marines/vultures? Can you reaver drop like Nal_rA or Stork? Can you dance with dragoons like Free? Can you perfectly flank like sAviOr? How Multiple Building Selection or smart-casting will help you to do so? Do you ever had need to cast more than one Psi-storm/Plague/Sworm in one place? Do you ever had need to cast more than one Irradiate/Matrix at the same unit? Why there is option to do so then? Chobo players have no problems with repeatedly clicking on Factories/Gateways. They have problem with doing it at the right time. Hosu players have no problems with cloning they have problems with casting spells at the right place, at the right time. Or do you think only few can use defilers like sAviOr or storms like Reach cause cloning requires a lot of skill? Do you know one of the reasons why almost no one - including micro-beasts like Casy and Nada - uses restoration to heal plagued units especially marines? Use your brains to think before saying to someone "Now please quit posting" or you will look like arrogant idiot in scbw ladder game. with all the improvements can you macro like oov? can you clone irradiate 10 lurkers at the same time like nada? can u maelstrom like 2 groups of devourers spread out like reach? can you storm as accurately with all ur templars while trying to micro your other shit in a long PvP game? hmm..maybe cuz restoration uses a lot of energy and its not worth the time to spend clicking on the few medics to restore a few marines while u could be macroing some more marines out or sending a dropship into an expo or something. | ||
|
shadowenergy
Australia78 Posts
On August 07 2007 18:40 fusionsdf wrote: The only way you could increase strategy is to speed up map rotations. Spoiler: Pros are pretty good on figuring out the best way to play a map yes the map plays a massive factor in it, but there isnt only one best way to play a map, thats why strategies in RTS games are so dynamic compared to certain type of games. | ||
|
red.venom
United States4651 Posts
On August 07 2007 11:24 NonY[rC] wrote:PS: Blizzard's idea of making a game easy to learn but difficult to master is exactly what this is about, partly. It seems that they want to make the execution of strategies easy, while formulating strategies will take a lifetime. This is not how to make a proper computer game, especially not the successor to BW. People don't want an animated board game on their screens. Other RTS's have been going that direction and their games hold interest for less than a year. The solution is for Blizzard to apply "easy to learn, difficult to master" to both strategy and execution. That is, it's easy to learn how to clone magic spells, but it's incredibly difficult to master. I definitely agree with most of what Nony is saying. I still think BW has some interface issues that any way you look at it are outdated.. But the big problem as I see with trying to make a game play easily/automated as possible and relying on strategical depth is that inevitably the strategy will be reduced down to common outcomes. You look at Starcraft now and its hard to really call it a strategy game. Its a tactical game heavily influenced by your skill with the interface, it just happens to have a small group of players who have decent mechanics but spend a lot more time making strategies(Which I will call poker-like in nature despite my lack of familiarity with that game) and theorizing and manage to win based on that. They are the minority though and in most cases in the long run someone with superior mechanics will best them in overall wins. Even if SC2 has twice the depth of Starcraft it will be figured out a lot quicker. Starcraft had a HUGE acclimation period that most likely no other RTS will ever have. People spent a long time coming to grips with everything in the game. But now everything that even moderately good SC players learned are quickly applied to all new games and you see games "figured out" within a year at which point the strategical players leave and the technical gods take over(I'm mostly thinking of WC3 RoC when I write this, but im pretty damn sure it applies to other games), and thats even with smaller player communities than SC ever had. | ||
|
Jusciax
Lithuania588 Posts
Anyways, we'll test it much more in beta ourselves rather than basing everything on slow motion WC3 gameplay or few hours of play in Blizzcon on some pre-alpha build against complete newbies. | ||
|
A3iL3r0n
United States2196 Posts
On August 07 2007 19:14 InRaged wrote: Now listen you. Today. In SC:BW ladder game. Without all "so-called improvements". Can you repeat Nada's invulnerable marines/vultures? Can you reaver drop like Nal_rA or Stork? Can you dance with dragoons like Free? Can you perfectly flank like sAviOr? How Multiple Building Selection or smart-casting will help you to do so? Do you ever had need to cast more than one Psi-storm/Plague/Sworm in one place? Do you ever had need to cast more than one Irradiate/Matrix at the same unit? Why there is option to do so then? Chobo players have no problems with repeatedly clicking on Factories/Gateways. They have problem with doing it at the right time. Hosu players have no problems with cloning they have problems with casting spells at the right place, at the right time. Or do you think only few can use defilers like sAviOr or storms like Reach cause cloning requires a lot of skill? Do you know one of the reasons why almost no one - including micro-beasts like Casy and Nada - uses restoration to heal plagued units especially marines? Use your brains to think before saying to someone "Now please quit posting" or you will look like arrogant idiot You're talking about examples that don't even relate to what I am talking about. There's sick micro in WC3 too and it has a more simplified interface than SC. So what's your point? What I am talking about is the total package. I am not that good of a BW player for sure, but with these improvements I would be able to macro like a player that is 10x better than me because its so much easier now. All I have to do is make an SCV at each one of my expos and that's it because now I don't have to tell it to mine. I can mass build + rally in a couple clicks. Oh wait! Lurks are charging my marines! In BW I would have to go 1 click, 2 click 3 click 4 click to move them away, or if I want to attack it would be even more work. Now I can have 30 units (that's the latest word, I believe) hotkeyed to one key, so now its 1 click, 2 click. Yawn. This simplicity, overall, will allow me to focus more on micro. And, most players can micro well if that's all they are focusing on. In other words, the spectrum of execution for most things is being flattened, which makes other parts of the game easier. When you make competent or even above-average execution available to most players, the game gets more boring because there are less holes in your game to identify and fix. | ||
|
FlyingHamsta
United States77 Posts
On August 07 2007 16:29 A3iL3r0n wrote: I find it aggravating that a lot of the newer posters to the forum are all for these simplifications of the famed SC UI. There is one statement that counters everything you have to say: All of the so-called "improvements" will make cool feats of micro and strategy less impressive. Done. Now please quit posting. I don't care that it will make it easier for YOU to do these things. I don't care about arguments that it will help sell the game to 12 year-olds who constantly complain about how the game sucks if they aren't pro at it immediately after installing the game on their computer. All I care about the creation of a game that has the appeal and longevity of the original SC. Making the moves that are considered top tier feats in SC more accessible is the completely wrong way to go. Yeah you've posted 1000 posts on this site, that makes your opinion more valid. Your statement counters nothing, it's a half-assed opinion that holds little value or substance. How do you know SC2, with these UI changes, will be less impressive to watch? Didn't the blogs already teach you there was a huge gap in skill at Blizzcon? Whether or not the game will be more or less interesting to watch, how the ##@$ would you know? Bigger post count won't compensate for your shortcomings in other areas of your life, if you know what I mean. Peace | ||
|
gravity
Australia2198 Posts
| ||
|
A3iL3r0n
United States2196 Posts
On August 07 2007 21:36 FlyingHamsta wrote: Yeah you've posted 1000 posts on this site, that makes your opinion more valid. Your statement counters nothing, it's a half-assed opinion that holds little value or substance. How do you know SC2, with these UI changes, will be less impressive to watch? Didn't the blogs already teach you there was a huge gap in skill at Blizzcon? Whether or not the game will be more or less interesting to watch, how the ##@$ would you know? Bigger post count won't compensate for your shortcomings in other areas of your life, if you know what I mean. Peace I can bash newbies in checkers too, but that doesn't make checkers as deep as chess. | ||
|
gravity
Australia2198 Posts
On August 07 2007 21:48 A3iL3r0n wrote: I can bash newbies in checkers too, but that doesn't make checkers as deep as chess. Seeing as checkers has exactly the same "interface" as chess (or Go for that matter), that just proves that interface doesn't determine the depth or lack thereof of a game like some people seem to think. | ||
|
FlyingHamsta
United States77 Posts
I can bash newbies in checkers too, but that doesn't make checkers as deep as chess. I'll rebut that terrible analogy by pointing out Go. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_(board_game) Probably one of the simplest rules in any board game, yet considered far more deep and complex than chess. | ||
|
InRaged
1047 Posts
I am sucks at explaining with words and even would I be good my english won't allow me to, so let's dive into magic world of kids math and common logic Firstly basic question: Why certain players better with cloning or casting stuff like irradiate or matrix than others? Only one true answer - they have better mouse accuracy and that allow them spend less time for targeting. x = time_for_one_target In one group we can take maximum 12 vessels, with them we can irradiate 12 mutalisks - 24 targets. For this rare situation: Time_for_casting = 24x Let's say there are two competing players, one of them has twice worser accuracy and he spends twice as much time in same situation. His time_for_casting is 24x * 2 = 48x. Players ratio is 48x:24x = 2:1 i.e. one player obviously twice worser than other. Now is key phrase: All what smartcasting does is reduces number of targets twice. With smartcasting we shouldn't click at vessels. So now we have 12x for first, good player, and 24x for another. Ratio is 24x:12x = 2:1 Their relation doesn't changed at all, one player is still twice better at this aspect, but they BOTH spend less time on microing units. Is it clear now why it called interface improvement? This is exactly what players have got from multiple unit selection On August 07 2007 19:54 alffla wrote: in scbw ladder game. with all the improvements can you macro like oov? can you clone irradiate 10 lurkers at the same time like nada? can u maelstrom like 2 groups of devourers spread out like reach? can you storm as accurately with all ur templars while trying to micro your other shit in a long PvP game? Oov is good at macroing not cause he clicks faster at factories. He just knows how to macro  Macroing is not about clicking and I'm absolutely sure all top foreigners clicks as fast as oov. But macro is about attention and decisions. Players should: 1. Pay attention to supply level 2. Keep factories/gateways working all the time 3. Know when to expand and when to add more production buildings. It's basic for Zerg, but terran and protoss have problems there. Players with bad macro usually wait when they have enough resources to add 2 or more factories and if they haven't they just spend them on units/defence. In replays I saw players like Oldy, Whyte_ra, Advocate have problems with all three aspects. Other three your questions already cleared above, I hope. hmm..maybe cuz restoration uses a lot of energy and its not worth the time to spend clicking on the few medics to restore a few marines while u could be macroing some more marines out or sending a dropship into an expo or something. I marked aspect that smartcasting is taking away | ||
|
IzzyCraft
United States4487 Posts
| ||
|
A3iL3r0n
United States2196 Posts
On August 07 2007 21:52 FlyingHamsta wrote: I'll rebut that terrible analogy by pointing out Go. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_(board_game) Probably one of the simplest rules in any board game, yet considered far more deep and complex than chess. The point is, just because the game rewards differences in skill level, doesn't mean its deep. So your example of saying people were owning other people in SC2 at BlizzCon doesn't mean a thing. | ||
|
terranmetal
Canada153 Posts
x = time_for_one_target In one group we can take maximum 12 vessels, with them we can irradiate 12 mutalisks - 24 targets. For this rare situation: Time_for_casting = 24x Let's say there are two competing players, one of them has twice worser accuracy and he spends twice as much time in same situation. His time_for_casting is 24x * 2 = 48x. Players ratio is 48x:24x = 2:1 i.e. one player obviously twice worser than other. Now is key phrase: All what smartcasting does is reduces number of targets twice. With smartcasting we shouldn't click at vessels. So now we have 12x for first, good player, and 24x for another. Ratio is 24x:12x = 2:1 I'm gonna have to disagree with you on this one. The difference between no easy cloning, and auto cloning is much larger than that. Pretend you have 1 player, as an average player, I assume he can dull out 12 irridiates withing 10 seconds(I know I can) While he is cloning the vessels he needs a screen length of at least 1.5 screens away to allow time for the on coming vessels. Now remember these factors, for they increase the skill by a large factor. With auto cloning, the same player, can probably dull out 12 irridiates within only 5 seconds. Not only this, the screen length can be as low as only .5 screens away. Can't you imagine how easy this would be compared to no easy cloning. All it is now is click "i" and click away at whatever you want to die. | ||
|
A3iL3r0n
United States2196 Posts
On August 07 2007 21:59 InRaged wrote: So there is still doubters, meh I am sucks at explaining with words and even would I be good my english won't allow me to, so let's dive into magic world of kids math and common logic Firstly basic question: Why certain players better with cloning or casting stuff like irradiate or matrix than others? Only one true answer - they have better mouse accuracy and that allow them spend less time for targeting. x = time_for_one_target In one group we can take maximum 12 vessels, with them we can irradiate 12 mutalisks - 24 targets. For this rare situation: Time_for_casting = 24x Let's say there are two competing players, one of them has twice worser accuracy and he spends twice as much time in same situation. His time_for_casting is 24x * 2 = 48x. Players ratio is 48x:24x = 2:1 i.e. one player obviously twice worser than other. Now is key phrase: All what smartcasting does is reduces number of targets twice. With smartcasting we shouldn't click at vessels. So now we have 12x for first, good player, and 24x for another. Ratio is 24x:12x = 2:1 Their relation doesn't changed at all, one player is still twice better at this aspect, but they BOTH spend less time on microing units. Is it clear now why it called interface improvement? This is exactly what players have got from multiple unit selection This doesn't take into account that not having to re-click your sci vessels makes it so much easier to accomplish your hypothetical task that simple math doesn't really cut it. That inaccuracy comes clicking back and forth from sci vessel to muta quickly. Now you can just focus on irradiating the mutas. The difficulty is much lower, and will result in less player error. | ||
|
HeavenlyEvil
United States12 Posts
Say a Z vs P match: Z has a swarm of lings and hyra in the main battlefield and a bunch of mutalisks a little bit up north. P has some 15 zealots, 3 pheonix, 4 HT, 6 stalkers. _ a avg player will send in zealots to form a line with stalkers backup, storm 4 places at the line on the Z swarm almost at the same time. Cool ! Actually not !! In SC2, that\'s normal, that\'s standard. And he\'ll probaply lose because the Z will quickly retreat back out of the storms then comme back and overwhelm the P force while the Mutalisk FF and pick out the HTs and stalker form the North. _ a pro player will send the zealots to form a line, storm 4 places slightly behind the line at the Z swarm at the same time AND blink the stalkers to the back of the Z swarm to block their retreat route so most the Z swarm are trapped under the storms AND fly his pheonix to the North, form a triangle with the mutalisks in the middle and overload to kill all the mutalisks. All that happen just a few secs and the seemly underhand P stand victory over the overwhelming Z force. Bloody everywhere almost instantly and the crowd go nuts. Can the avg P player in the example above think of the same strats to bring victory to his smaller force of Protoss ? May be yes. Can he execute it ? Definitely no. He just does not come up with this strats quick enough, he can\'t order his force fast and precisely enough. And it\'s just the same as SC:BW, many avg players think of lock down 12 Carriers with 12 Ghosts. They bring their ghosts, but they can not lock down as fast or as precise as the pro. Just that in SC2, it gonna be bigger, more strategic, require more quick thinking and fast execution at the same time and it must be precisely at the right time and right place. SC2 is different!!!!!!! I personal think that the gap between avg players and pro players is even bigger in SC2 than SC:BW. And I also believe the reason why Blzz took out Lockdown and Irr. or rework these abilities is to ensure this gap. Easy to play, hard to master. | ||
|
FlyingHamsta
United States77 Posts
The point is, just because the game rewards differences in skill level, doesn't mean its deep. So your example of saying people were owning other people in SC2 at BlizzCon doesn't mean a thing. Well, I'm not even really arguing one way or another, but the majority consensus seems to be against UI tweaks, and all I'm saying is that most of these fears are unfounded because the game is so far from completion. If the UI tweaks were taken and added to SC1, it would be a much more different game, and I would buy the argument that SC1's "pro moments" would be less appreciated because of that. But SC2 is different. At least wait for the Zerg to come out, which is probably when they'll start to have some solid grounds on which to begin balancing AOE, to make educated guesses about the "noobification" of the game. | ||
|
IzzyCraft
United States4487 Posts
Well define easy because if you want say all your high templars to storm all at once you have to spam it now insted of selecting them all, there are+ and - to things haha why not turn this into a -. Or say that changeing zelot has a cool down witch it proably does maybe not but then we could just bait all the zelots to change 1 unit and and make them waste it no such thing as easy micro. There is always somethign gained and loss with new ui | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
CranKy Ducklings
PiG Sty Festival
herO vs Krystianer
Solar vs Cure
IPSL
Sparkling Tuna Cup
PiG Sty Festival
Maru vs Shameless
Reynor vs TriGGeR
IPSL
OSC
Afreeca Starleague
Rush vs Hm
Bisu vs Shuttle
WardiTV Weekly
The Patches Monday
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
