EPTUnits already auto-target. They would just auto-target the enemy's unit that is almost dead. Not the one that is closest.
Yeah, it would remove micro. But the UI improvement removes macro.
Is there easy cloning mode now? - Page 8
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
BlackStar
Netherlands3029 Posts
Units already auto-target. They would just auto-target the enemy's unit that is almost dead. Not the one that is closest. Yeah, it would remove micro. But the UI improvement removes macro. | ||
|
Chodorkovskiy
Israel459 Posts
On August 14 2007 19:08 BeMannerDuPenner wrote: BW was perfect in evry possible way we all agree on that right?  On August 14 2007 19:19 H_ wrote: How many people do you know of that can do that? That's part of why it's amazing, because it's incredibly hard to do. Yes, exactly. And that's bad. It's bad, because what could easily be a powerful (and fun) Terran weapon, turns into a luxury even progamers can rarely afford. On August 14 2007 19:23 Fen wrote: Your post should read. "average players will actually be able to use Yamato and sniping as well as the pros. The horror..." Nah, pros will still be better. The bar is set higher for everyone, so the basic skills, that used to require a lifetime of dedication, are now available to all. Think of it as The Matrix, only without the Kung Fu virtual training. I mean, the hero actually goes to a Shaolin temple and lives there for twenty years. Sure, he comes back a bad-ass, but was it really worth it? The way The Matrix actually was, you have people doing somersaults and tiger punches all over the place, but some are still infinitely better than others. The difference between the two versions is, of course, fun. And for the last time, it's just a bloody game! It shouldn't require you to quit your job and dump your girlfriend to be any good! | ||
|
H
New Zealand6138 Posts
On August 14 2007 23:12 Chodorkovskiy wrote: Yes, exactly. And that's bad. It's bad, because what could easily be a powerful (and fun) Terran weapon, turns into a luxury even progamers can rarely afford. No, you're completely wrong. It IS powerful (Dunno why you think it would be more fun to be able to click abilities. Wheeeeee ~), and it IS - and I emphasise this - it IS easy to use. I don't know how often you play SC, but almost anyone with 100+ APM (read: Anyone who has been playing for 2 weeks casually) can easily handle a fleet of Battlecruisers. Sure, they might not be able to use all 12 of them perfectly, but that's all the more reason to improve, right? Nah, pros will still be better. Of course they will, it's their job. The point is that it's harder to appreciate them being better because now everybody has access to the same tools. The way The Matrix actually was, you have people doing somersaults and tiger punches all over the place, but some are still infinitely better than others. The difference between the two versions is, of course, fun. Stupid analogy. In The Matrix the limits were defined by your mind only. This sounds more like Kwark's idea for a game than SC2. Using your hands is a part of SC, and only you want to remove that. I mean, do you even find SC fun? If so, why do you play? You keep talking about fun, but I don't see where the lack of it is, or how you hope to attain said 'fun' from UI improvements in SC2 (like clicking abilities. Awesome). And for the last time, it's just a bloody game! It shouldn't require you to quit your job and dump your girlfriend to be any good! Do you even play Starcraft or do you just complain on forums? It's not like the game is hard to play. Do you want pro skill handed to you on a platter in the form of a UI? Maybe we should just automate the game for you. Christ, that's such a dumb statement to make. Your definition of "any good" must be "a progamer", because I don't think anyone here has quit their job and dumped their girlfriend to attain a decent(read: less than professional) level of skill. Remember, the game has been out for 9 years. You don't have to have played it all day every day to be "any good". | ||
|
Klockan3
Sweden2866 Posts
On August 14 2007 23:32 H_ wrote: Of course they will, it's their job. The point is that it's harder to appreciate them being better because now everybody has access to the same tools. So your really complaining about the fact that you are so bad at seeing the difference between good and bad micro to such a degree that you need to see yamato shots or lockdowns to notice? Uuh, they won't do anything more than they already do now. They would do it smarter. Units already auto-target. They would just auto-target the enemy's unit that is almost dead. Not the one that is closest. This would make unit behavior unpredictable, wich removes playercontroll to a degree. Also everything you guys talk about is not in any other rts games, while these UI improvements excist in almost every rts game made since wc3, its mainstream and is expected to be there. Smart cast doesnt pick wich caster to use, it picks the closest, just like autoattack attacks the closest. Both adds a tiny bit of automisation, wich doesnt remove playercontrol since its easily asumed that if a unit gets attacked it should fight back or if a group of casters is told to cast a spell they shouldnt stupidly waste all their mana doing so. Yeah, it would remove micro. But the UI improvement removes macro. Nah, it removes some mundane building micro and caster micro, telling each worker to mine is micro, telling each factory to produce 1 unit at a time is micro, going through a ritual before casting each spell with a caster group is certainly micro and fits an action game more than an rts. I mean, do you even find SC fun? If so, why do you play? You keep talking about fun, but I don't see where the lack of it is, or how you hope to attain said 'fun' from UI improvements in SC2 (like clicking abilities. Awesome).. Clicking buildings is fun to you? And for how smartcast affects playerskill etc, why not make the game even more skillfull? Add a 1 time use grenade laucnher to marines, now you can do your spell casting ritual from the start! Then we can add a leap attack to zerglings, again limited use so you have to clone the lings. And make a charge to zealots without autocast! Great, now the start of the game the better player will clearly have a great advantage simply beacuse his units is a lot stronger since h can click his abilities faster! No, no no, clicking abilities as fast as possible is not a definition of rts skill in most peoples eyes, sure in sc overcoming the UI is a great part of the skill but what Blizzard tries to do is remove the UI obstacles and digg up what makes starcraft really great since the old UI is certainly not the reason why people play it. | ||
|
H
New Zealand6138 Posts
On August 15 2007 00:41 Klockan3 wrote: So your really complaining about the fact that you are so bad at seeing the difference between good and bad micro to such a degree that you need to see yamato shots or lockdowns to notice? Jesus christ, talking to you is pointless. | ||
|
Klockan3
Sweden2866 Posts
But why shouldnt players be able to choose to use their abilities when they like? Why should they have to go through arbitary rituals just to tell their units to do a simple task? Your only answer is that its needed so that it gets more exciting to look at pro games since they can use abilities wich most others find to time craving to be worth it. | ||
|
Senix
Germany149 Posts
On August 14 2007 23:12 Chodorkovskiy wrote: Yes, exactly. And that's bad. It's bad, because what could easily be a powerful (and fun) Terran weapon, turns into a luxury even progamers can rarely afford. Thats exactly what makes this good! These are the things th audience gets excited about and the the player can be proud of if he pulled it off correctly. Boxers Carrier lockdown is so awesome because not every noob can repeat it. Do you even watch SC vods or replays? [B] And for the last time, it's just a bloody game! It shouldn't require you to quit your job and dump your girlfriend to be any good! Perfect example of laziness. If you want to be good you have to practice!! If you want to be able to dance you have to actually spent time training to do so. People like you want the skill but dont have the ballz to actually DO something about it. Got owned too much on b.net recently? Seriously thats what all COMPETITIVE sports are about. The more time you spent the better you are. There´s no easy way. | ||
|
Zanno
United States1484 Posts
On August 14 2007 19:15 Tiptup wrote: Yeah, you're fucking psycho. I'm not contradicting anything you're saying because I can't - you're talking in pure abstractions. Kinda hard to counteract your argument when all you're saying it "the game will be too easy!!!" for paragraphs with no examples to back it up. There are 10000 reasons that smartcasting can go wrong and here's two of them:I'm psychotic, eh? Is this the opinion of a professional psychologist? Either way, your approach to this issue is not that simple by any means. How do you think the closest unit with enough mana is chosen? A program must calculates this for you and then issue the final command on your behalf. Whether you like it or not, this is a tactical element of the game and one that I consider fun. If you believe that smartcasting will not make spellcasting in StarCraft mundane and commonplace, then that's your opinion. If our desire is to simply make everything easy so we see it performed more, then Blizzard might as well just remove our need to perform any action at all. We should have programs play the game from start to finish for us. This way we would be sure to see every unit and ability in the game being used. I'm sure the game would be much easier to balance as well. I agree that certain spells like Broodling were rare to see used. But I used it quite often. If anything, the spell itself isn't powerful enough in comparison to the price. That's the real reason it isn't used. Hell, I'm not even asking that cloning be left as difficult as it is in StarCraft. I clearly want the interface itself to be smoother and be one that provides more information. I outlined what I wanted in the previous post. I simply don't want a computer program to decide which unit is the best unit to cast a spell for me as a pseudo improvement to the interface. Choosing which spellcaster should cast a spell is a fun tactical decision and the fact that StarCraft's cloning process made this so difficult was bad enough, I don't want a computer program to completely take this decision process out of my hands. I think that's a fucking boring solution to an interface problem and if you disagree with that assessment then I am forced to say that I think you're boring too. Otherwise, I'm not even sure why you quoted my post since you contradicted none of the basic things I said. Oh well, it's an interesting issue and one that I am passionate about. 1) the templar with 243 mana happens to be the closest temp to the target, while your templar with 77 mana by the templar with 12 mana left and low shield is ignored 2) the closest defiler to the target happens to be under a swarm getting shot at. defiler in your group walks out of the swarm, splat T_T | ||
|
Fen
Australia1848 Posts
On August 15 2007 00:41 Klockan3 wrote: Nah, it removes some mundane building micro and caster micro, telling each worker to mine is micro, telling each factory to produce 1 unit at a time is micro, going through a ritual before casting each spell with a caster group is certainly micro and fits an action game more than an rts. This is a starcraft forum, in starcraft, macro actions are those actions which are not given to your army. Making building clicking and telling probes to mine minerals macro actions. By the looks of your argument, you just want some flashy game with some nice explosions. If your calling spellcasting mundane, what is not mundane? Would you just rather let the computer play the game for you while you watch? No mundane actions at all. EDIT: Id just like to add to this, that anyone who says starcraft game is about who can click the fastest has absoultly no idea what they are talking about. APM is actions per minute. Players with high apms are not just spamming, they are just playing the game way faster than you are. | ||
|
Element)LoGiC
Canada1143 Posts
On August 15 2007 00:47 Klockan3 wrote: But why shouldnt players be able to choose to use their abilities when they like? Why should they have to go through arbitary rituals just to tell their units to do a simple task? Your only answer is that its needed so that it gets more exciting to look at pro games since they can use abilities wich most others find to time craving to be worth it. Why do basketball players work out their legs to jump higher? I think jumping high should be a feature available to everyone. Let's work on that. | ||
|
Klockan3
Sweden2866 Posts
On August 15 2007 00:53 Element)LoGiC wrote: Why do basketball players work out their legs to jump higher? I think jumping high should be a feature available to everyone. Let's work on that. No, this is totally wrong. Its more like: Starcraft UI is like lead shoes on basketball players. It makes it a lot harder to jump and players who hasnt trained can barely jump at all. Starcraft 2 UI removes the lead shoes in favor for lighter sport shoes, now everyone can jump but those that could jump before can jump a lot higher, meaning that strong leggs are still important but it isnt needed to play the game. Imagine if everyone playing basketball would need to wear lead shoes? How many would play it casauly? Would it ever become a big sport then? Do people who watch basket on TV think "Gee, that guy can jump, it would be awsome if i also could jump" or do they think "Awsome how high the players can jump, and how accurately they shoot the ball and how well they play as a team". EDIT: Id just like to add to this, that anyone who says starcraft game is about who can click the fastest has absoultly no idea what they are talking about. APM is actions per minute. Players with high apms are not just spamming, they are just playing the game way faster than you are. Yes, this supports my argument, since you want to add unnececary clicks to the game such as having to go through your buildings wich is just a ton of clicking and you dont play the game when doing that, you play the UI, same as caster cloning, you click a ton just to execute a few thought actions. What we will remove: The need to click a lot to be good at the game. What we wont remove: The need to think and play fast to be good at the game. You will still need to be as fast as before in your decision making, you just dont have to click 3 times per spell or 2 times per unit rtrained anylonger. It isnt me that want the number of clicks to be important, its you. Also by removing all these unnecesary clicks people will have to become faster, since each action takes shorter time to execute they will have to make more actions to compensate or they will fall behind. | ||
|
H
New Zealand6138 Posts
On August 15 2007 00:47 Klockan3 wrote: But why shouldnt players be able to choose to use their abilities when they like? This is not getting through to you at all. I don't think you've even read one of my posts. THEY CAN. OH MY GOD. Have you EVER said to yourself "GEE I WISH I COULD USE MY YAMATO CANNONS RIGHT NOW, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA BECAUSE MY MICRO ISN'T GOOD ENOUGH TO HANDLE IT"? I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt (I don't know why, because you don't seem to have any SC experience whatsoever) and say no. So there you have it, your point is null and void. Battlecruisers are good units even IF, for some UNGODLY reason (because my micro isn't good enough to justify it, hurr hurr) you decide not to use Yamato Cannon. Now, I don't know if you know this - but Ghosts? *whisper* They can cloak. That makes it somewhat easier to do lockdowns, yeah? It gives you a window of opportunity to carry out whatever you want to do. The same goes for Battlecruisers - they don't have 500hp for no reason. If you're trying to argue maybe that Templars are too hard to micro (I hope you know storms don't stack), then I don't know what to tell you. Maybe you should take up playing Civilization. Why should they have to go through arbitary rituals just to tell their units to do a simple task? Firstly, it's not arbitrary. Look a word up in the dictionary before you decide to use it. Do you think that the unit selection system itself is arbitrary? Of course it isn't. A lot of thought went into it, because that's what this game is about. You cannot be the best simply with strategy, you must have the hands to match it as well. That is one of the reasons why the game is amazing to watch and comprehend. That's why progamers have an APM of 200 or more. Your only answer is that its needed so that it gets more exciting to look at pro games since they can use abilities wich most others find to time craving to be worth it. Yeah, yeah, whatever. Keep reciting arguments that I've dismantled more than once. | ||
|
Fen
Australia1848 Posts
I never supported your argument, I only defined APM. A high APM is required because without it, the game becomes a simple game of strategy. In a simple game of strategy, there is always a 'best' option avalible to the player. If everyone can execute this option, then the only thing that defines good players is their ability to see this 'best' strategical option. Most people that watch a pro starcraft game know what the correct strategy is, the only reason they arent up their playing with the pros is the fact that they are unable to execute it. By removing the difficulty of the execution, you'll end up with heaps of people who know what the correct strategy is and are able to execute the strategy, leaving the difference in skill between these players extremely low. As for your basketball analogy, your wrong. The Ui is the way that you effect things in the game. In a basketball game, this would be your body. Now a truely basic UI, would mean you could select one thing at a time etc. This would be the norm. or in the basketball analogy, a player with just normal shoes. Every change to the interface which makes gameplay easier, is like adding things to the basketball player's body to increase his ability to play (maybe shoes with springs). However there is going to be a point, where it doesnt matter how much higher you can jump, the optimum height for the game has been reached. When you hit this point, upgrades begin trivial to the better players, but allow the worse players to catch up. So its like giving crapper people advantages so they can take on better people. Not good for competetition, because one person is better than another, but due to the limits of skill that one player can show, he is not recognised for it. | ||
|
Klockan3
Sweden2866 Posts
On August 15 2007 01:07 H_ wrote: This is not getting through to you at all. I don't think you've even read one of my posts. THEY CAN. OH MY GOD. Have you EVER said to yourself "GEE I WISH I COULD USE MY YAMATO CANNONS RIGHT NOW, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA BECAUSE MY MICRO ISN'T GOOD ENOUGH TO HANDLE IT"? I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt (I don't know why, because you don't seem to have any SC experience whatsoever) and say no. So there you have it, your point is null and void. Battlecruisers are good units even IF, for some UNGODLY reason (because my micro isn't good enough to justify it, hurr hurr) you decide not to use Yamato Cannon. Now, I don't know if you know this - but Ghosts? *whisper* They can cloak. That makes it somewhat easier to do lockdowns, yeah? It gives you a window of opportunity to carry out whatever you want to do. The same goes for Battlecruisers - they don't have 500hp for no reason. If you're trying to argue maybe that Templars are too hard to micro (I hope you know storms don't stack), then I don't know what to tell you. Maybe you should take up playing Civilization. Lol wtf, your arguments makes no sense. Firstly without yamato battlecruisers sucks unless you somehow gets around 20 of them. You know why? Beacuse they cost a ton, do extremely low damage per cost and are extremely slow. You know that a battlecruiser about the same dps as a crackling? And ghosts have like no health and unless you fight noobs people will have detectors. Why do you think that theres only boxer using them? And sometimes he even waste so much time using lockdown that he would be better off macroing instead wich could cost him the game, this isnt what i call viable for noobs when it is barely viable for the best of the best against its primary target. Firstly, it's not arbitrary. Look a word up in the dictionary before you decide to use it. Do you think that the unit selection system itself is arbitrary? Of course it isn't. A lot of thought went into it, because that's what this game is about. You cannot be the best simply with strategy, you must have the hands to match it as well. That is one of the reasons why the game is amazing to watch and comprehend. That's why progamers have an APM of 200 or more. Its arbitrary since it makes no sense forcing players to do it. Also i dont propose that we take out all actions needed, but having to click an unnecesarily amounth of times just to order your units is arbitrary. Instead of having a lot of unnecesary apm we will only have necesary apm, wich means that the game gets harder to play since you cant rely as much on automation as people currently do in sc1. Fast cloning, either for building or casters, is just training reflexes to act faster, you dont train yourself to order units faster you train your reflexes to minimise the disadvantage the ui gives you. Yeah, yeah, whatever. Keep reciting arguments that I've dismantled more than once. You havent dismantled this. Pros will still be better than noobs, you agree on that. The game will still require skill, it will still be impossible to reach the skill cap, noobs dont play in leagues. As such how a noob plays doesnt affect the pros at all, all it affects is what i mentioned there: Your only answer is that its needed so that it gets more exciting to look at pro games since they can use abilities wich most others find to time craving to be worth it. | ||
|
Chodorkovskiy
Israel459 Posts
On August 14 2007 23:32 H_ wrote: No, you're completely wrong. It IS powerful (Dunno why you think it would be more fun to be able to click abilities. Wheeeeee ~), and it IS - and I emphasise this - it IS easy to use. I don't know how often you play SC, but almost anyone with 100+ APM (read: Anyone who has been playing for 2 weeks casually) can easily handle a fleet of Battlecruisers. Sure, they might not be able to use all 12 of them perfectly, but that's all the more reason to improve, right? There's a difference between using BCs "perfectly" and just having the ability to use all of their Yamatos during combat. A pro will still pwn me with those same BCs, but it's a whole new field when special abilities are easy to use. Of course they will, it's their job. The point is that it's harder to appreciate them being better because now everybody has access to the same tools. Heh, if cloning is the most impressive skill a progamer has, maybe he's not really that good. Stupid analogy. In The Matrix the limits were defined by your mind only. This sounds more like Kwark's idea for a game than SC2. Using your hands is a part of SC, and only you want to remove that. I mean, do you even find SC fun? If so, why do you play? You keep talking about fun, but I don't see where the lack of it is, or how you hope to attain said 'fun' from UI improvements in SC2 (like clicking abilities. Awesome). The lack of fun is in having to rely on units like goons and zealots, if I am to make the most of my investment. "Clicking abilities" encourages investment into casters. Wheeee! Do you even play Starcraft or do you just complain on forums? It's not like the game is hard to play. Do you want pro skill handed to you on a platter in the form of a UI? Maybe we should just automate the game for you. Christ, that's such a dumb statement to make. Your definition of "any good" must be "a progamer", because I don't think anyone here has quit their job and dumped their girlfriend to attain a decent(read: less than professional) level of skill. Remember, the game has been out for 9 years. You don't have to have played it all day every day to be "any good". Of course I don't, it's so much more fun talking to you. Seriously, I'm simply a casual gamer. On August 15 2007 00:46 H_ wrote: Jesus christ, talking to you is pointless. And I thought we'd never find common ground...  On August 15 2007 00:50 Senix wrote: Thats exactly what makes this good! These are the things th audience gets excited about and the the player can be proud of if he pulled it off correctly. Boxers Carrier lockdown is so awesome because not every noob can repeat it. Do you even watch SC vods or replays? Yes and more often than not, the game boils down to extreme efficiency. Fancy shooting with secondary abilities is gravy. Perfect example of laziness. If you want to be good you have to practice!! If you want to be able to dance you have to actually spent time training to do so. People like you want the skill but dont have the ballz to actually DO something about it. Got owned too much on b.net recently? Seriously thats what all COMPETITIVE sports are about. The more time you spent the better you are. There´s no easy way. People like me, if that is indeed your point, study in college, work out and try to lead an otherwise normal life. I have the ballz to DO something about a whole lot of things. However, allow me to repeat myself: SC is just a game. I don't want to be a pro, but I don't see how reducing the amount of practice time required for basic handling of your race can hurt anybody. | ||
|
KlaCkoN
Sweden1661 Posts
If you can't enjoy sc without beeing good at it, and are not prepared to saccrifice the necessary time to get good, then maybe you simply ought not to play?. And klockan you do know that BCs aren't widely used not because yamato is a difficult spell to handle but simply because BCs are not cost effective right? Seriously about the only time BCs are good to get are stalemateish tvts (the other races counter them too easily but you knew that as well right?) and one does not need to be a pro to slowly yamato tanks. =P Same goes for queens they are not underused because decent and up players find it hard to clone broodling, but because spending 100 gas and then waiting for the fucker fo charge until 150 mana is NEVER EVER a cost effective way to kill a single unit. (Ok i might have to eat "never ever" but the principle stands) | ||
|
Soulforged
Latvia979 Posts
One hotkey and pressing one button to produce workers perfectly, and they are even immediately starting to mine. Few hotkeys for units to control them all even if you're zerg. Smarter UI for better flanking and autocasting. Have you ever watched war3 fpvod? As soon as a player gets some units, they start to control their army 90% of the time. It's FCKING BORING. What I play starcraft instead of war3 for is multitasking. Changing screen position every half second because you have a ton of the things to do is what I love the most about this game, and if it won't be in sc2, it better come out with something as addictive. Seriously, what there is to control at sc2 atm? Workers are easy to manage, static defence capabilities are improved, for terran scouting became easier, for protoss - warping is availiable...watching for opponent's actions and microing your own army while making supplies are almost the only things I can think of, and I'd fall asleep this way. | ||
|
Response
United States1938 Posts
On August 15 2007 00:47 Klockan3 wrote: But why shouldnt players be able to choose to use their abilities when they like? Why should they have to go through arbitary rituals just to tell their units to do a simple task? Your only answer is that its needed so that it gets more exciting to look at pro games since they can use abilities wich most others find to time craving to be worth it. because its a GAME* and not a movie? | ||
|
Response
United States1938 Posts
On August 14 2007 23:12 Chodorkovskiy wrote: As stated above, I bow to Klackon's wisdom and patience. Yes, exactly. And that's bad. It's bad, because what could easily be a powerful (and fun) Terran weapon, turns into a luxury even progamers can rarely afford. Nah, pros will still be better. The bar is set higher for everyone, so the basic skills, that used to require a lifetime of dedication, are now available to all. Think of it as The Matrix, only without the Kung Fu virtual training. I mean, the hero actually goes to a Shaolin temple and lives there for twenty years. Sure, he comes back a bad-ass, but was it really worth it? The way The Matrix actually was, you have people doing somersaults and tiger punches all over the place, but some are still infinitely better than others. The difference between the two versions is, of course, fun. And for the last time, it's just a bloody game! It shouldn't require you to quit your job and dump your girlfriend to be any good! | ||
|
Response
United States1938 Posts
On August 15 2007 01:23 Klockan3 wrote: Lol wtf, your arguments makes no sense. Firstly without yamato battlecruisers sucks unless you somehow gets around 20 of them. You know why? Beacuse they cost a ton, do extremely low damage per cost and are extremely slow. You know that a battlecruiser about the same dps as a crackling? And ghosts have like no health and unless you fight noobs people will have detectors. Why do you think that theres only boxer using them? And sometimes he even waste so much time using lockdown that he would be better off macroing instead wich could cost him the game, this isnt what i call viable for noobs when it is barely viable for the best of the best against its primary target. Its arbitrary since it makes no sense forcing players to do it. Also i dont propose that we take out all actions needed, but having to click an unnecesarily amounth of times just to order your units is arbitrary. Instead of having a lot of unnecesary apm we will only have necesary apm, wich means that the game gets harder to play since you cant rely as much on automation as people currently do in sc1. Fast cloning, either for building or casters, is just training reflexes to act faster, you dont train yourself to order units faster you train your reflexes to minimise the disadvantage the ui gives you. You havent dismantled this. Pros will still be better than noobs, you agree on that. The game will still require skill, it will still be impossible to reach the skill cap, noobs dont play in leagues. As such how a noob plays doesnt affect the pros at all, all it affects is what i mentioned there: Your only answer is that its needed so that it gets more exciting to look at pro games since they can use abilities wich most others find to time craving to be worth it. basically you're a moron....the top half of your post you argue nothing for why we should have auto-casting or easy cloning but only argues that Terran units are weak...what does this have to do with auto-casting at all? its how blizzard made the game go play a crappy RTS if you can't get over this fact *edit* actually go watch a movie because this will take out all the "arbitrary" actions of a video game that you seem to hate so much | ||
| ||
