|
I think people would've been happier if blizzard had released sc2 under a different name -_- .
I like playing sc a lot and the physical element makes it way different and more engaging than those other newer rts. What recent rts can make you sweat and tired and full of adrenaline after an intense game?
I dunno if its just me, but I wouldn't like to lose to those terrans on bnet with pretty good micro and army control but manage to accumiliate 3k/3k resources later on in the game hehe. I mean if they have a good idea of how to micro units but can't micro for their life i don't think they deserve to win too much. A game that requires a balance of skill sets will allow for more distinction in skill level and raise the difficulty curve and make it harder to master (such as macro and micro for instance).
Too bad an sc2 without mbs and automining would get terrible reviews from all game review sites for being archaic. I'm starting to like Tasteless' idea more and more. I mean fastest map players shifting to melee players have to learn a huge new amount of skillsets, timing, strategy, ect but can still switch. I don't see too much of a problem with a competitive mode in sc. A casual player used to playing mbs and AM wouldn't have to even undergo as much as a change in playstyle than say, a fastest player changing to melee. I mean fastest map players shifting to melee players have to learn a huge new amount of skillsets, timing, strategy, ect but can still switch. An interface switch from casual players to those trying to ladder wouldn't be too difficult either, within a short while they cud get used to it and start learning a more intense, fast paced, and in my opinion, fun, game.
I don't see it as archaic but rather a UI which creates a good necessity for hand dexterity and a balanced set of micro and macro skills (even if unintentionally). I mean just look at sports. There are lots of artificial limitations that could easily be taken out (dribbling in basketball, not using hands in soccer) but are obviously in place to make the game good.
Of course, if sc2 can have mbs and automining while still requiring u to spend a similar amount of time macroing and multitasking and apm then its fine... but its gonna be pretty hard to achieve that. And to forget to do these new macro elements would have to be as damaging as forgetting to send workers to mine for an extended period of time or not macroing out of all your gates enough.
|
On September 06 2007 05:09 MyLostTemple wrote:
They said that. I played it already.
I saw nothing but an easy starcraft with awsom graphics and some very creative cool new units. Don't get me wrong though, it looks REALLY good and will obviously sell well when it releases. But i just can't see what game mechanics will some how fill up my time now. blinking around with stalkers? Leme tell you something... i can blink my ass off with stalkers, micro colossus up and down ledges and do all that cool shit the mother ship does WHILE going 4s5s6s7s8s9s0s and making sure my probes are mining. Unfortunately i didn't have to do that. What a shame if i don't have to do it any more at all.
Ya I played it too for hours at blizzcon but it was still wasn't even alpha so the races and gameplay is not fully fleshed out ( mostly for terran and zerg). While protoss may almost seem complete there can be so much that can be added. The warp in system is one of those mechanics that can occupy and reward skilled players but the warp in seems to be mid to late game which I did not see much at blizzcon especially considering how weak terran was against protoss at the time.
The terrans new building switch add on feature and salvage seems like a nice start for terran but the terran race are said to not be fully done concept wise which was evident on how stale and weak they were at blizzcon. It seems like blizzard is focusing on getting the concepts (like terran being a "nomadic") and foundation of each race into the game first, then they will get into the many small details of new game mechanics for each race to occupy player skills macro and micro.
The early game does seem less involving macro/hotkey wise and maybe that's where blizzard should pay more attention for all races or the gameplay as a whole. I just hope blizzard and the sc community can think of ideas and gameplay mechanics to help this issue and to further expand and make sc2 more dynamic than it's predecessor instead of just reverting back to the old SC1 UI suggestions. That is a cop out and the lazy way to go for for the game designers to keep sc2's competitive edge.
|
On September 06 2007 04:57 Hokay wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2007 05:48 MyLostTemple wrote:
It's been a while since i've posted in the SC2 topic area, however there are things i think we need to talk about. First let me say that did play sc2 at blizzcon and i was quite impressed with it. This game definitely has the potential to be an incredibly successful RTS game. I enjoyed almost every aspect of the game except for the interface; and that's what i'm going to talk about now.
I want starcraft 2 to be the best rts game ever. I don't want another warcraft 3. I also don't want silly newbie shit that brings this game a step down from it's older brother. And at the same time i definitely want to keep the game progressive so that we can attract new players.
I'm afraid of MBS (multiple building selection) and automining. I played SC2 at blizzcon for over seven hours. I was allowed to play the game the day before it was showed off at at blizzcon and there were so many things i loved about it. However, the MBS and automining felt absolutely terrible. It made sc2 feel A LOT slower than sc and that's very disappointing.
Now i know I've said i thought MBS could be a good thing. I was definitely wrong. It felt awfully newbie--macroing just wasn't fun. Tie this in with auto mining and it got even worse. I hardly had to think at all about my base. I think this could have massive negative ramifications on the competitive scene. Do we really want Starcraft 2 to always be known as the more popular but easier RTS game in the series? I would like to see it step up on all levels.
But what the hell are we supposed to do with these players who would find SC2 too hard without MBS and auto mining? My solution is to keep MBS and auto mining a setting that can only be played in non competitive games.
We all know BGH right? This mode of play is for players who aren't interested in expanding, they aren't interested in teching in a very mathematical or precise way. To say the very least, BGH players play a different and more simple version of starcraft. I'm not by ANY means saying that's bad. BGH players make up a huge part of the sc population. But i think you all would be as frustrated as i am if blizzard hosted BGH ladders and ONLY bgh style ladders. In fact, we don't even see BGH ladders around because for the most part SC players who want to be the best try to master low money maps because it's more difficult and there fore more attractive.
Lets keep MBS and auto mining in SC2, but out of competitive ladder play and tournaments. By doing this the new players who pick up SC2 and want to use an easier interface and play for fun can do this while the hard core competitive players, like me, can still play on a ladder where it was as fun and challenging as the old SC.
I've thought about this a very long time since i attended blizzcon. I believe we must keep MBS and auto mining, but separate them as features that can only be used in non ladder/tournament games.
Thanks for reading <3
--Tasteless No. Go back to SC1 or at least wait till beta to see what blizzard will build upon having an easier UI. They already said having an easier UI leaves room to design other game mechanics that will occupy a players skill.
That's what every game designer says, and it usually comes true. Resulting in a game that cannot be played competitively.
|
On September 05 2007 22:23 FrozenArbiter wrote:
THIS IS THE DUMBEST ANALOGY I HAVE EVER HEARD.
You compare a mechanical ability to a game of rock paper scissors? What the fuck?
The fact that it takes time to become truly competitive at a game is a good thing, for it heightens the skill-cap, ie the game won't be 'perfected' as quickly.
Okay, Roshambo isn't the best analogy, as it's interactive whereas mechanical skill is not, but I was trying to think of a simple but difficult to master task that was required to get to the real meat of the gameplay (in the analogy, Go). Let's put it this way: say before each move in Go, a third person would say a Chinese word and the first player to write the move legibly would get to place a stone. This way, if a player had quicker calligraphy, they would always get to move, and dominate the game. Then a person comes by and points out that the calligraphy part has nothing to do with the rest of the game of Go, and simply keeps people who haven't mastered calligraphy from being able to exercise their mental skills. The reply is that taking the calligraphy out of the game would weaken the skill curve, and therefore ruin the competitiveness of Go. It's a reductio ad absurdum argument: I'm using your argument (that taking the physical aspect out of SC2 would completely ruin it as a competitive game) and putting it in a different situation, where the conclusion seems "absurd"; I doubt anyone would say that Go was less competitive or had a smaller skill curve if you took out the calligraphy requirement, it would just be an entirely mental game.
I don't get why so many people assume that there is some sort of "skill ceiling" to SC and SC2, such that it's possible to play the game "perfectly" if you take out some of the physical requirement; what's keeping the mental game from developing further now that the competitive community will be expanded by streamlining the interface? Is the physical aspect of SC the only reason why it is the most popular e-sports game of all time? After two years of following professional SC, I think there's much more to why the game is so great than just the extra mechanical skill involved.
Yes, you are god damn right I'm prepared to say that the last component is god damn essential to macro skill. Of course it wouldn't eliminate all skill in that regard, but why should that have to be the case in order for it to be viewed as an essential part?
Turn it on for single player then, which is all these people will play, or make a compromise a la the tab function I've been suggesting (not only because it will make macroing less easy, it will also make it more precise which is a good thing).
By essential, I mean if we make two players' skill in ordering units to be built the same (which MBS/automine won't do, but it will make it easier to accomplish), then even if the other player is superior in all the other aspects I've listed, the two players' macro will be the same. I doubt this is the case; in fact, I think the first three I listed are the majority of macro skill in the highest levels of play, once the mechanics have become muscle memory. MBS/automine simply removes the need to build up such a high degree of muscle memory before one can concentrate on the macro that really counts.
Keeping MBS/automine only for singleplayer/noncompetitive play, and this is @ MyLostTemple too, is sending a message to players that only noobs use MBS/automine, and will cause most players to force themselves to go without it for dignity's sake, even if they don't enjoy playing the game with such an "outdated" interface.
BW won't survive as a competitive sport past SC2 unless SC2 completely fails, there is just no way. SC2 should be SC's successor in every way.
I can pretty much guarantee that Kespa will be very reluctant to pick up SC2; after all, look how long SC took before it was balanced to the degree that Korean e-sports has been thriving on. Korea will wait until they are sure that SC2 can fully take the place of SC before they switch the leagues over to SC2. The best solution would be for the games to be different enough that Kespa can support leagues for SC AND SC2; Blizzard seems to be aiming for this approach, as they're including most if not all of the original SC units in the map editor for SC2, thus making it easy for a team like Project Revolution to recreate SC in the new engine.
Let's be honest here, none of us have any idea how MBS/automine will affect SC2, as it is incredibly difficult to look at an idea and figure out how it will affect gameplay dynamics without actually playing the game. That's why the iterative method of game development, where the game is made playable at a very early state and constantly playtested, is far superior to the 'waterfall' method, where the game is only made playable after most of the content has already been made. Even the TL peoples who were at Blizzcon played a very early internal alpha version of the game, that is nowhere close to having all features implemented, and played mostly against people of far inferior skill level, to the point where they could sit back and max up without experiencing severe harrass (which is what units like reapers and colossus who can traverse cliffs, and the recall abilities given to all races seem to be headed for). Is it too much to wait until closed beta, which I assume some members of TL will have access to, when all the features are complete and players of equal skill will be playing, to decide whether MBS/automine should stay or go?
|
On September 06 2007 08:06 Hokay wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2007 05:09 MyLostTemple wrote:
They said that. I played it already.
I saw nothing but an easy starcraft with awsom graphics and some very creative cool new units. Don't get me wrong though, it looks REALLY good and will obviously sell well when it releases. But i just can't see what game mechanics will some how fill up my time now. blinking around with stalkers? Leme tell you something... i can blink my ass off with stalkers, micro colossus up and down ledges and do all that cool shit the mother ship does WHILE going 4s5s6s7s8s9s0s and making sure my probes are mining. Unfortunately i didn't have to do that. What a shame if i don't have to do it any more at all. Ya I played it too for hours at blizzcon but it was still wasn't even alpha so the races and gameplay is not fully fleshed out ( mostly for terran and zerg). While protoss may almost seem complete there can be so much that can be added. The warp in system is one of those mechanics that can occupy and reward skilled players but the warp in seems to be mid to late game which I did not see much at blizzcon especially considering how weak terran was against protoss at the time. The terrans new building switch add on feature and salvage seems like a nice start for terran but the terran race are said to not be fully done concept wise which was evident on how stale and weak they were at blizzcon. It seems like blizzard is focusing on getting the concepts (like terran being a "nomadic") and foundation of each race into the game first, then they will get into the many small details of new game mechanics for each race to occupy player skills macro and micro. The early game does seem less involving macro/hotkey wise and maybe that's where blizzard should pay more attention for all races or the gameplay as a whole. I just hope blizzard and the sc community can think of ideas and gameplay mechanics to help this issue and to further expand and make sc2 more dynamic than it's predecessor instead of just reverting back to the old SC1 UI suggestions. That is a cop out and the lazy way to go for for the game designers to keep sc2's competitive edge.
Maybe that's a lazy way, but it's the only sure and confirmed solution to get a competitive game which lasts long enough and can be suitable for progaming.
Finally, maybe the pro-MBS will be able to explain why it is "needed", and in which sense it's an "improvement". As someone described perfectly above, it's pure "limitation"... In EVERY competitive game or sport you must have limitations, to a certain extent, for a certain balance. It is necessary, as it's necessary for starcraft to keep an important macro side for the physical and stressful aspect it generates. This kind of thing which keeps you on the toes all games. Of course, as Nony said, the pure essence of macro will maybe stay, fact is the attention you'll give to this side will be greatly reduced, especially with auto minning shit thing. Not mentionning it will necesseraly close the skill gap, you can't even argue. OH, YES I FORGOT, in fact you still can argue :
On September 05 2007 21:33 Sadist wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2007 15:00 LonelyMargarita wrote:On September 05 2007 14:33 YinYang69 wrote:
Wouldn't a easier interface still give the higher APM player more things to do and therefore still be better than their opponent? So instead of like the old game where you have to fight the outdated/bad interface to storm and build zealots in a few seconds, now you can storm, web, maelstrom, build zealots, do two simultaneous drops, expand and get a few extra gateways all in the span of like five seconds. Doesn't that sound better? No it does not. It's much, much worse. Luck is a part of every game. As you decrease the skill-gap (through automation for instance), luck becomes more and more of a factor, until it is the primary factor. Play the lotto if you want a game based on luck. We don't want SC2 to be a crap-shoot like CNC3. it doesnt decrease the skill gap because the faster player will always be able to do more than the slower player.
I wont comment on this statement cause its so obviously failed, but I had to quote it somewhere...
Also i dont want to introduce an other debate but why the fuck the idle button ? Why do you all want a fucking assisted game ? If you want to try to replace macro and base attention by another kind, more "interesting" and "constructive" as you seem to suppose, please do testing on your war4. At least you'll find plenty rooms to improve, and you still can fail without blowing up the future progaming industry.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On September 06 2007 09:00 1esu wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2007 22:23 FrozenArbiter wrote:
THIS IS THE DUMBEST ANALOGY I HAVE EVER HEARD.
You compare a mechanical ability to a game of rock paper scissors? What the fuck?
The fact that it takes time to become truly competitive at a game is a good thing, for it heightens the skill-cap, ie the game won't be 'perfected' as quickly.
Okay, Roshambo isn't the best analogy, as it's interactive whereas mechanical skill is not, but I was trying to think of a simple but difficult to master task that was required to get to the real meat of the gameplay (in the analogy, Go). Let's put it this way: say before each move in Go, a third person would say a Chinese word and the first player to write the move legibly would get to place a stone. This way, if a player had quicker calligraphy, they would always get to move, and dominate the game. Then a person comes by and points out that the calligraphy part has nothing to do with the rest of the game of Go, and simply keeps people who haven't mastered calligraphy from being able to exercise their mental skills. The reply is that taking the calligraphy out of the game would weaken the skill curve, and therefore ruin the competitiveness of Go. It's a reductio ad absurdum argument: I'm using your argument (that taking the physical aspect out of SC2 would completely ruin it as a competitive game) and putting it in a different situation, where the conclusion seems "absurd"; I doubt anyone would say that Go was less competitive or had a smaller skill curve if you took out the calligraphy requirement, it would just be an entirely mental game. I don't get why so many people assume that there is some sort of "skill ceiling" to SC and SC2, such that it's possible to play the game "perfectly" if you take out some of the physical requirement; what's keeping the mental game from developing further now that the competitive community will be expanded by streamlining the interface? Is the physical aspect of SC the only reason why it is the most popular e-sports game of all time? After two years of following professional SC, I think there's much more to why the game is so great than just the extra mechanical skill involved.
Congratulations on making yet another analogy that's completely nonsensical. I realize it's hard to come up with one that makes sense, and that's because there isn't one.
Having to actually PLAY the game is an integral part of any computer game, and yes, it is one of the reasons SC is played at such a high competitive level.
It's not some retarded pre-requisite for playing the game, it IS the game. You want to take golf, remove the drive and make it a game of pure putting.
Comparing 4z5z6z7z8z9z0z to caligraphy pre-stone placement in go would make sense if Starcraft was a Turn-Based Strategy game, but it's a Real Time Strategy game - speed will and is supposed to be a factor.
Starcraft is what it is because it combines quickness of mind with quickness of hands. Starcraft is not chess. Starcraft is not Go. Starcraft is not turn based and it's not a game of purely strategy, being faster than your opponent should be rewarded just as much as being smarter should.
Show nested quote +
Yes, you are god damn right I'm prepared to say that the last component is god damn essential to macro skill. Of course it wouldn't eliminate all skill in that regard, but why should that have to be the case in order for it to be viewed as an essential part?
Turn it on for single player then, which is all these people will play, or make a compromise a la the tab function I've been suggesting (not only because it will make macroing less easy, it will also make it more precise which is a good thing).
By essential, I mean if we make two players' skill in ordering units to be built the same (which MBS/automine won't do, but it will make it easier to accomplish), then even if the other player is superior in all the other aspects I've listed, the two players' macro will be the same. I doubt this is the case; in fact, I think the first three I listed are the majority of macro skill in the highest levels of play, once the mechanics have become muscle memory. MBS/automine simply removes the need to build up such a high degree of muscle memory before one can concentrate on the macro that really counts.
That is not what essential means. ALL of the things listed are essential PARTS of the whole that is macro ability.
Keeping MBS/automine only for singleplayer/noncompetitive play, and this is @ MyLostTemple too, is sending a message to players that only noobs use MBS/automine, and will cause most players to force themselves to go without it for dignity's sake, even if they don't enjoy playing the game with such an "outdated" interface.
Good. In theory it's not all that different from ladder games being played on fast instead of normal speed.
Ok, I'm being a smartass here, I don't like the idea of different modes at all since I hate the thought of the community splitting, but if that's the only way we'll have non-MBS SC2 I guess I'm prepared to accept it.
Show nested quote +
BW won't survive as a competitive sport past SC2 unless SC2 completely fails, there is just no way. SC2 should be SC's successor in every way.
I can pretty much guarantee that Kespa will be very reluctant to pick up SC2; after all, look how long SC took before it was balanced to the degree that Korean e-sports has been thriving on. Korea will wait until they are sure that SC2 can fully take the place of SC before they switch the leagues over to SC2. The best solution would be for the games to be different enough that Kespa can support leagues for SC AND SC2; Blizzard seems to be aiming for this approach, as they're including most if not all of the original SC units in the map editor for SC2, thus making it easy for a team like Project Revolution to recreate SC in the new engine.
It doesn't matter one little bit what KESPA will do or not do, SC2 is going to be the biggest RTS ever released, it will most likely completely wipe out the fanbase. SC will not survive long term unless SC2 completely bombs. Yes, there'll be a short time where both games have leagues, but that won't last long.
Let's be honest here, none of us have any idea how MBS/automine will affect SC2, as it is incredibly difficult to look at an idea and figure out how it will affect gameplay dynamics without actually playing the game. That's why the iterative method of game development, where the game is made playable at a very early state and constantly playtested, is far superior to the 'waterfall' method, where the game is only made playable after most of the content has already been made. Even the TL peoples who were at Blizzcon played a very early internal alpha version of the game, that is nowhere close to having all features implemented, and played mostly against people of far inferior skill level, to the point where they could sit back and max up without experiencing severe harrass (which is what units like reapers and colossus who can traverse cliffs, and the recall abilities given to all races seem to be headed for). Is it too much to wait until closed beta, which I assume some members of TL will have access to, when all the features are complete and players of equal skill will be playing, to decide whether MBS/automine should stay or go?
"Let's wait for blizzcon" <- Done, judgement: MBS is inferior to the way it works in SC.
Let's wait for Beta: Okay, say it still sucks after we've played the beta.
Are you really going to change your mind? I'm not at all averse to waiting for the beta before passing final judgement, but I am going to argue against its implemention in topics such as these, as I have just as much of a leg to stand on as you do.
If by beta it turns out that hey, MBS isn't so bad, it doesn't really change the balance between micro and macro all that much, then I'll be really happy.
I can imagine reviews saying 'oh no, UI is not as advanced as *Generic RTS 2008*).
|
I don't see why MBS is needed at all. I haven't heard one convincing argument. All of it is based on speculation. Simplification alone won't encourage new people to buy the game. Why? Because if they were new players they wouldn't know much about RTS's anyway and whether or not the UI has been "improved". Anyone who follows StarCraft will have an opinion on this, but some random newb in an electronics store won't have an opinion either way. They will buy the game based on other things. The key staying power is how the game itself plays, and whether or not it is consistently enjoyable. Obviously, StarCraft at all levels is. Look at all the newbs that play BGH. Do you think they are honestly going to buy SC2 based on the UI? Hell no. They will buy it because it has shiny new graphics. But to keep the old fans and generate new ones, you need to have a game that has lots of different facets to it, that you have to improve at to be good, to marvel at when someone has them mastered etc.
|
That's the point of the analogy...despite the fact that skill at calligraphy doesn't have anything to do with skill at Go, the players still feel that it is an essential part of the game. With MBS/automine, fast players will still have a huge advantage, but players won't have to commit awkward sequences of inputs in order to perform what should be basic actions within the game.
Maybe the golf analogy will work better. Think of SC like a par 5 golf hole. There's the initial drive, the shot at which failure screws any chance of playing the hole well, while success simply sets you up for the difficult part: the second shot, the approach shot, and the putting. Because of the consequences of failure, the initial drive must be perfected to start playing golf competitively, but mastery of it has no real effect on the overall play of the hole. The other shots remain, and that's where the strategy and really difficult execution takes place. The most competitive golfers are still the ones who have mastered the short game.
The mechanics of macro are analogous to the drive: if you don't have the sequences committed to muscle memory, it becomes almost impossible to compete against someone who has. The second shot and short game that remains corresponds to the rest of the macro (including the mechanics, which are still important because there is now no room for error), the micro, and the strategy. , i.e. these other components of SC. The best SC players are not those who have simply mastered the mechanics of macro, but who have done that and excel in these other factors. MBS/automine makes the 'drive' easier, thus allowing players to reach the real meat of the game and develop them further.
As I've said before, I don't care whether MBS/automine is implemented or not, as long as it goes through closed beta. If during closed beta, the majority opinion is that it's hurting the game, I'll be fine with dropping it. But Blizzard has been so sensitive to our complaints about the game lately, I'm worried that they might make a huge mistake and drop the idea before it's properly tested. Personally, I think they have a stronger backbone than that, but it's possible.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
But caligraphy has nothing to do with go, strong technical fundamentals has everything to do with a computer game! I don't want someone who hasn't mastered that to be able to beat me without being significantly superior to me in the other aspects of the game just because the importance of it has been diminished greatly.
The amazing things you can pull off are only made more impressive because of the constant pressure to not slack off on your macro.
It's not some obstacle you have to get over before you can reach the 'real game', it is a major part of the real game.
|
On September 06 2007 04:41 MyLostTemple wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I've just read through this entire thread. A lot of interesting points brought up. Let me remind everyone that this discussion is not JUST about MBS and automining. It's about making these features a setting that can only be used in public games. Thus keeping the good people still able to compete in the manner they did in the original SC You can break all sports into two basic parts: The strategic element and the physical aspect there is incredible strategy weaved within all sports: baseball, soccer, football, tennis, racket ball, boxing, wrestling, starcraft etc SC2 has less of a physical aspect than SC. They've turned baseball into tee ball. That ball is a lot easier to hit when it isn't moving huh? Well maybe one fun part of the game was the challenge of hitting a moving ball. As we all know, baseball > tee ball as far as skill and competition goes. But making a game that requires less dexterity (lower apm) they are reducing physical aspect which made the original starcraft so fucking awsome. Let me use another sport, this time with pictures: Starcraft as golf ![[image loading]](http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a151/tasteless9/golf1.jpg) Starcraft 2 turned into minature golf due to MBS and auto mining. ![[image loading]](http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a151/tasteless9/minigolf_main-1.jpg) Before you respond to this, look at your keyboard. Does it have missing keys?... like the windows ones? You might not even be playing starcraft correctly... This is what mine looks like: ![[image loading]](http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a151/tasteless9/keyboard1.jpg) At the bare minimum do you have your windows keys missing? are you using your entire keyboard when you play (i'm talking about the keys that actually work in sc)? Do you bind all the number keys when you play?... from 1 to 0? do you know every hotkey for your race? I mean everything--from special upgrades to unit hot keys. Do you use all five fingers? Do you know which fingers to use on which keys? Most starcraft players don't. Even the die hard ones. They spend too much time looking at the screen and less time looking at their hands. There's a reason why those koreans have such high apm. I just want that same feel in the new starcraft. I'll be sad if new players pick up starcraft 2 and start laddering with the computer playing the game for them. This is essentially the autocast of macroing. Again, i only care about this for ladder/competitive play. If you want your buildings all bound to one key and your probes going to minerals the second they get out--fine, but don't expect to be a progamer. Don't expect to be the best. MBS and auto mining deter from the very elements that make the game competitive. What about all these progamers, people who devoted their lives to starcraft, mastering these skills and falling in love with them. MBS and automining is a spit in the face for these people, the ones who know the game far better than Blizzard does. Blizzard should be building off what made the game successful, not "fixing" it. I can only assume that Blizzard wants MBS to bring a new type of macro into starcraft. However that macro type seems to be a much slower, much easier one. One that involves less apm and less concentration. One that is centered around memorizing when different unit combos are coming up and then rebinding gateways accordingly. Hmm... Should be quite easy to master with the computer making sure my probes mine for me when they pop out. Again, if you don't like the difficulty and demanding dexterity of starcraft then that's fine. But don't fuck up Starcraft because this game was too hard for you. Play another game. Keep MBS and automining as a setting and keep it out of the esports scene.
![[image loading]](http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/6013/sc2bk1.png)
|
On September 04 2007 06:37 lamarine wrote:
i don't like MBS, but there is one issue - it would be hard to purchse units from warp gates without it.... (u have 20 gates, can't bind them all, so u have to click one, then press key then click on location and so on for 20 times o_O, although may be warp gates won't be that popular, who knows)
So far as we know the Protoss has a special hotkey to select all of his warpgates instantly. Just keep this and remove MBS and it'll be fine. Or put a limit to how many buildings you can bind with MBS?
|
If it's really true that someone could beat you while being inferior in other aspects of the game simply because something like 4z5z6z7z8z9z0z becoming 4z for both of you, then SC really does deserve the moniker of a "clickfest". I don't believe that's the case, even without the new features Blizzard is adding. On the other hand, if the game feels "too slow", I have faith that either the new features will fill the gap or increase macro in other ways (like the warpgates), or the game speed will be increased again. If we go into closed beta and even after all of this it feels that MBS/auto-mine is killing SC2, then I'll be the first to advocate taking it out. But until then, even though TL experiences with the early alpha version of the game were not optimistic (though I'd like to hear whether the game was still boring when the players were of equal skill), I think we should wait until closed beta and play the game before we publicly render judgement upon MBS or automine.
EDIT: Limiting MBS to say, three per group, was my original solution, but upon further reflection I realized that it was a rather arbitrary limitation; people would look at it and wonder why they couldn't select more per group, just like they did with SC's 12-per-group unit limitation. Perhaps tabbing through groups of three buildings, or tabbing through buildings at different areas of the map (determined by a certain radius) would be a good alternate solution to throwing MBS out entirely, but again I'd advocate us playing it for ourselves before we stamp it out.
|
This is maybe a little off topic, but ... I think a great idea would be to put the TAB key to a better use, and say that if you select a building, pressing tab will cycle to the next building of that type, and so on. So I could just press 1zTzTzTgTg etc... No need to select multiple buildings at once, no need to use up your whole mess of hotkeys just for macro.
|
MyLostTemple
United States2921 Posts
This is maybe a little off topic, but ... I think a great idea would be to put the TAB key to a better use, and say that if you select a building, pressing tab will cycle to the next building of that type, and so on. So I could just press 1zTzTzTgTg etc... No need to select multiple buildings at once, no need to use up your whole mess of hotkeys just for macro.
I think tab is too far over to the left hand side of the keyboard to make it logically accessible. look at the tab key now, you can't spread your fingers across to hit a hotkey at distance, your fingers should always have a steady bouncing motion while playing sc. instead you'll be moving your hand back and fourth from hotkey 'x' and the tab button, the result is that the 4d5d6d7d8d9d0 method will still be more logical because it would be faster than using the tab key.
even then, tabbing seems rather redundant and overly repetitive. one thing that i love about starcraft is the fact my left hand is gliding all over the keyboard and shifting positions constantly. I want that feel in sc2.
for those of you such as esu1 who keep arguing that blizzard will have other features that will occupy us competitive gamers... i think your wrong. I can't imagine what other features that aren't micro oriented blizzard can come up with. I started another thread you can find here:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=55733
which discusses the idea of multiple key combinations to occupy the players left hand since MBS has made this part much easier. While some supported this, others seemed greatly disappointed with it. I think it would be wiser to keep the identical interface and the identical pace... otherwise blizzard should have made this RTS under another title.
|
On September 06 2007 04:41 MyLostTemple wrote:I've just read through this entire thread. A lot of interesting points brought up. Let me remind everyone that this discussion is not JUST about MBS and automining. It's about making these features a setting that can only be used in public games. Thus keeping the good people still able to compete in the manner they did in the original SC You can break all sports into two basic parts: The strategic element and the physical aspect there is incredible strategy weaved within all sports: baseball, soccer, football, tennis, racket ball, boxing, wrestling, starcraft etc SC2 has less of a physical aspect than SC. They've turned baseball into tee ball. That ball is a lot easier to hit when it isn't moving huh? Well maybe one fun part of the game was the challenge of hitting a moving ball. As we all know, baseball > tee ball as far as skill and competition goes. But making a game that requires less dexterity (lower apm) they are reducing physical aspect which made the original starcraft so fucking awsome. Let me use another sport, this time with pictures: Starcraft as golf Starcraft 2 turned into minature golf due to MBS and auto mining. Before you respond to this, look at your keyboard. Does it have missing keys?... like the windows ones? You might not even be playing starcraft correctly... This is what mine looks like: At the bare minimum do you have your windows keys missing? are you using your entire keyboard when you play (i'm talking about the keys that actually work in sc)? Do you bind all the number keys when you play?... from 1 to 0? do you know every hotkey for your race? I mean everything--from special upgrades to unit hot keys. Do you use all five fingers? Do you know which fingers to use on which keys? Most starcraft players don't. Even the die hard ones. They spend too much time looking at the screen and less time looking at their hands. There's a reason why those koreans have such high apm. I just want that same feel in the new starcraft. I'll be sad if new players pick up starcraft 2 and start laddering with the computer playing the game for them. This is essentially the autocast of macroing. Again, i only care about this for ladder/competitive play. If you want your buildings all bound to one key and your probes going to minerals the second they get out--fine, but don't expect to be a progamer. Don't expect to be the best. MBS and auto mining deter from the very elements that make the game competitive. What about all these progamers, people who devoted their lives to starcraft, mastering these skills and falling in love with them. MBS and automining is a spit in the face for these people, the ones who know the game far better than Blizzard does. Blizzard should be building off what made the game successful, not "fixing" it. I can only assume that Blizzard wants MBS to bring a new type of macro into starcraft. However that macro type seems to be a much slower, much easier one. One that involves less apm and less concentration. One that is centered around memorizing when different unit combos are coming up and then rebinding gateways accordingly. Hmm... Should be quite easy to master with the computer making sure my probes mine for me when they pop out. Again, if you don't like the difficulty and demanding dexterity of starcraft then that's fine. But don't fuck up Starcraft because this game was too hard for you. Play another game. Keep MBS and automining as a setting and keep it out of the esports scene.
fucking a tasteless, you took the words right out of my mouth. all these arguements for dumbing down starcraft and taking away the awesome balance reached with the current series is bullshit. reading through the whole thread, and i am full of fear that blizzard might listen to these fools who don't understand the competetive nature of starccraft and make some hybrid version of bw and c&c.
PEOPLE MACRO IS A MANDATORY PART OF THE GAME! without it starcraft wouldn't have reached the spectacular level where you need skill in all aspects of the game. pure micro and no macro, you are essentially taking out 1/2 of the game. you all complain about how the interface is shitty, but do u guys even still play? when i first started this game, i fell in love with almost every aspect of it (albeit i hated siege tanks like no other), whether it be the need to focus on your base while watching over your army, one mistake resulting in win or loss due to not paying attention. all was necessary to create the perfect RTS game. I actually started from the original Red alert series, and moved on to sc. bringing the macro down to the level of war3 or c&c wouldn't promote the game at all, it would end up being another rts game where people play it for 6-12 months and move on for the next best thing. starcraft has created a loyal fan base and dedicated players due to the fact that no matter how mnay times you play it, you can always improve, new things to test and you wont master the game even after 5 years of playing.
i dunno i am ranting but seriously, all i can say is mbs and auto mining should not be allowed in ladder/melee/tvb play in sc2. keep it in for ums or whatever else people play non competitively, but forcing this feature across the board would ruin the competitive nature of sc due to the dumbing down of the game and allowing every goddamn player to be able to micro like boxer while building up an army like oov. -_-;; stop this madness
|
I'm against the suggestion to make MBS and automining (and whatever else that could make newbs play easier) a turn-on/off setting. It's a very bad idea IMO because:
- At first how could you concretely define different levels of play? Most of us are somewhere at the middle between the lowest level i.e total new beginners and the highest level i.e progamers. Should it only applicable at pro levels or competitive ladders? How about normal Battle.NET games? Small, fun tournaments? It will cause confusions or even unnecessarily divide SC2 into two totally different schools.
- Once the newbs get deeper into the games and familiar with everything, will they be happy to turn off MBS and other "newb" settings? Probably not. They are used to it, and there is nothing fun or rewarding in turning it off, and if it's optional at Battle.NET then there is no reason for them to play without it. Again this will virtually divide us - people that still play SC1 and love its challenging gameplay - and the rest of the world.
- MBS and automining do not simply make the game easier but also obviously change the gameplay and style a lot. Generally speaking this is bad, a game should always be the way like it is at any level of play.(I'm talking about great games like sport games or chess etc.).
- One important success of Starcraft 1 is that it is both very friendly to newbs yet still challenging to hardcore gamers after years of playing it. Shouldn't Blizzard just try to achieve it again with Starcraft 2 instead of "going around" it like this?
- And put it this way, if you think having MBS and automing as "newb settings" could make the game friendlier to newbs, why not adding even more switchable settings to make it friendlier to newbs and harder to pros? How about more auto-cast spells? Smart attacking? Or even an in-game helper? Or making everything absolutely manual as a pro-only mode?
I believe it's just fine to make SC2 a bit harder than other regular RTSs. I don't think it will scare people away, as long as their efforts spent on the game are well deserved (by rewarding them an exciting gameplay, providing them places for improvement, reasons to practice and so on)
|
Well Im sure blizzard would be capable of running 2 ladders with different skill sets. When you go to your AMM, you select which rule set you want to play. However this means that less people get matched up. Still its better than having MBS and Automine on across the board. People looking for a challenge will play on the tough rule set while casual gamers can play on their rule set.
|
United Arab Emirates5090 Posts
some arguements and counter arguements
1)people go see the micro and not them macroing off 8 gateways bla bla bla building probes
but the point is that the macroing is a -prerequisit- to awesome micro. you wouldnt have shit to micro if you didnt macro so fucking hard you set fire to the table under your computer. that game Iris vs Savior holy shit Iris was fucking scorching macro and microing. a lot of people can micro and end up playing V-tec i guess but the macro is an -essential- part of the game.
2) macro is tedious
no it is not asshole it is a part of the game and players that actually get off their asses and actually do something are rightfully rewarded with a great fucking army. end of discussion. if you keep on saying that macro is tedious then all i can conclude is that youve been playing NeXuS dEsTrOyErS all day.
3) lets try something new
its not new. people have tried SC2 already and given feedback. I have tried wc3 and it sucks.
4) it will get noobs interested
no the noobs (and trust me there are a lot of them) are already playing dota, wow or just watching cinematics from games they bought. why cater to a market thats already saturated with 20apm games when theres a niche of competitive players totally ready to take on a real game?
and by the way blizzard already has "competitive play" as one of SC2's top priorities.
to conclude, if automine and MBS is an option then fine but just dont make it standard. it will be like bgh and money maps. the people using them live in denial while everyone else laughs at them.
|
3) lets try something new
its not new. people have tried SC2 already and given feedback. I have tried wc3 and it sucks.
.
and yet the game is not even alpha or in beta with blizzards promise of "other ways to occupy a players skill".
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
Make AMM + MBS possible in the UMS editor - so if people want they can create maps with these things in them
however
i think you'll find nobody does
1) The real competitors will come from SC anyway (and it seems like most of the true SC players are against it)
2) I'm sure most of the "noob" crowd will disappear away to the next 'title' game released after SC2
3) I really wonder how many of the lobbyists for AMM/MBS will end up playing a majority of UMS games anyway?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
