EPTcompetitive play issues - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
OrderlyChaos
United States1115 Posts
| ||
|
crazie-penguin
United States1253 Posts
On September 04 2007 12:11 OrderlyChaos wrote: Even with AMM, there are newbs who wouldn't buy because they wouldn't see how SC2 evolved RTS gaming, or they'd see reviews asking the same question. That would hurt the initial sales of SC2. Even if they catered to the pros, the sponsor companies would want to see that SC2 is successful and thus have a solid target audience. If no one new buys SC2, then there'd be no real expansion of the progaming scene. It'd just be the same audience watching SC2... I might be reading this incorrectly, but I don't see why sponsors would pay for a SC2 gaming scene without new buyers. Actually if you think about it, Starcraft has a history of being heralded as "the best RTS ever", just by the mere fact that it is the sequel to this "best RTS ever" it should have pretty good initial sales along with some more advertising and hyping. I mean just look at Halo 2, it was even MORE popular than Halo, raking in much more money than its predecessor, just because it was over hyped and the sequel to Halo:CE. But, then again, it was noobified as well... | ||
|
Tupan
Brazil319 Posts
The only explanation I can find is that most of you are very quick with the mouse/keyboard (high APMs) but are afraid not being good, creative strategists or tacticians at all. MBS and auto-mining would minimize the advantage you have on "newbies" who spent a small fraction of the time you spent playing SC 'cause even them would be able to build armies quickly (if they manage to get resources enought) and boost their income from granted mining spots. MyLost, what´s the point of your comparison between MBS/automining with BGH?? You even said BGH is easy because there is no need for expanding, but would these features make any easier the life for someone stuck and turtling in its choke? As I see, they´d just help the guy to spend his scarce resources even quicker, thus forcing him to expand. And if he´s not "teching in a precise way", he´ll be stomped by a foe that is doing it anyway. IMO, the real fun in Starcraft lies in the "smart" and "strategic" decisions one can make before the information he gathers from enemy armies and structures, in being skilled when microing in battle, in knowing when and how to expand and shifting strategies according to opponent´s reaction and condition. If SC2 is removing the need for mechanical actions that requires more repetition than intelligence, then the sequel is surely walking to the right direction. | ||
|
Wizard
Poland5055 Posts
On September 04 2007 12:44 Tupan wrote: 1.I´m trying to understand why do many of you think being quick at selecting 10,000 structures individually to make units and clicking on each produced peon just to send it mining again and again is essencial to SC. The only explanation I can find is that most of you are very quick with the mouse/keyboard (high APMs) 2.but are afraid not being good, creative strategists or tacticians at all. MBS and auto-mining would minimize the advantage you have on "newbies" who spent a small fraction of the time you spent playing SC 'cause even them would be able to build armies quickly (if they manage to get resources enought) and boost their income from granted mining spots. MyLost, what´s the point of your comparison between MBS/automining with BGH?? You even said BGH is easy because there is no need for expanding, but would these features make any easier the life for someone stuck and turtling in its choke? As I see, they´d just help the guy to spend his scarce resources even quicker, thus forcing him to expand. And if he´s not "teching in a precise way", he´ll be stomped by a foe that is doing it anyway. IMO, the real fun in Starcraft lies in the "smart" and "strategic" decisions one can make before the information he gathers from enemy armies and structures, in being skilled when microing in battle, in knowing when and how to expand and shifting strategies according to opponent´s reaction and condition. If SC2 is removing the need for mechanical actions that requires more repetition than intelligence, then the sequel is surely walking to the right direction. 1. Why is it essential? Well in my opinion, two reasons. First of all, it is fun. "What, dude, wtf are you talkingg about??? Macro =fun?? Crack???" No, I'm not kidding. I'm quite serious in fact. I have played WC3. I have played C&C3. The former was acceptable, the latter was ridiculous. Fun for some is being able to press one button and a-move (or simply right click) and watch explosions happen. But fun for me, and I think I speak on the behalf of others, fun is cycling through 10 production buildings making units, managing my base producing workers, building up any defense I need, to add to this, managing three or more bases, constantly scouting my opponent, harassing, dropping, microing. Are all of those macro? No. But let's say you take away the macro concept, you are left with what? Microing units? Progamers can micro units and macro at the same time so where's the problem? Next, we limit the skill gap between the newb and the progamer. I don't feel like talking about this as it is self-explanatory. 2. What is with people thinking that by taking away some aspect of the game their (non-existant beforehand) strategical genius will appear? | ||
|
LonelyMargarita
1845 Posts
On September 04 2007 12:44 Tupan wrote: IMO, the real fun in Starcraft lies in the "smart" and "strategic" decisions one can make before the information he gathers from enemy armies and structures There is no novel strategy in BW, and there won't be in SC2 after a year or two. Everyone knows every strategy and every counter, and it comes down to execution, intuition, timing, and luck. There is no room to open up for "strategic geniuses" to master the game just by lessening macro - that's what chess is for. Reducing one aspect of the game without adding enough in another area only weakens the skill curve, and makes luck much more of a factor. That's not a good game - that's a game where practicing isn't worth it past a certain point, and there's no room for standouts. I don't understand where the pro-automation side gets the idea that they can win because they'll come up with some super-great strategy on the spot. That might happen in 1 game in your playing career (very shortly after the game is released), but if it was really a great move, everyone else will adopt it as part of their arsenal and it will become a basic strat/counter. I also don't see how manually macroing your buildings to produce somehow impedes on your strategic genius or decision making. EDIT: I guess wizard said basically the same thing while I was typing this... | ||
|
404.Nintu
Canada1723 Posts
I'm sure most of you know how it feels to be perfectly in-sync with the game. When you're playing your best. Never queuing workers but still always producing them and telling them to mine immediately. What I love about Starcraft is that the game doesn't move, it expands. You start with 1 task and 1 task alone. To mine. This is essentially your only task right from the very beginning. You never lose this task. Throughout the entire game, that primary action still needs to be done. Instead of the game changing from one task to another, you add other tasks, but never losing them. You scout pretty early, and that is another task you need to keep up for the entire game. You expand, produce, construct, and theoretically, all of these continue from when you first start these tasks. Everytime you gain a new task, you add it to the cycle. The dance gains more steps. The song becomes more elaborate, but deep inside that song, you hear the original melody. Workers mining. Everyone has seen the faces of progamers playing in intense situations. Everyone always says "They're so emotionless. The game isn't fun anymore for them, it's so serious!" Quite the contrary. They're deep inside a ritual. A beautiful song that fully encompasses them. We've also seen their face right before they type out. All of a sudden, they're conscious again. You can tell by their face alone that for them, the game is over. Within a few seconds, you see those letters. GG, or if I'm not mistaken, ㅈㅈ. I, for one, wouldn't change that song for anything in the world. Do I really believe that adding auto-mining would have this drastic an impact? I absolutely do. It takes out the very foundation that the song was built on. If this is overly spiritual for some, I apologize, lol. | ||
|
CFDragon
United States304 Posts
On the topic of automining; I do NOT want this. You've got the idle worker key, use it! It's more boring starting with two extra workers, but having automine for the first 2/3, then starting with 4 and actually having to pay attention to when they pop out. Also, automine seems to leave Zerg out in the cold, as they still have to use their rally for their military units. | ||
|
mahnini
United States6862 Posts
Everyone I know who has played StarCraft absolutely loved it despite whatever level they were able to play on. I honestly do not see the point in making the game easier for the sake of attracting new players. Even to this day you can still find entry level players to compete against, 9 or so years after it's release. My point is, you don't have to give the very casual player oov-like macro for him to have fun. No one I know who has played this game on a regular basis wants MBS. In fact, 90% of the people who advocate MBS on this forum, have shown they have no idea how BW works or I've never seen them post before and am, naturally, skeptical. These people think for some reason micro is better than macro because macro "mindless clicking". First of all, it's not. Secondly, micro will become as trivial, as you think macro is now, if you enable it to be done so easily. To someone who mentioned pimp plays. Those plays are pimp because the players can do this under immense pressure during a very face-paced game. I also can name at least one mechanic base Pimpest Play: Oov's mnm split. Boxer's insane mnm or dropship micro would be nothing without the need to macro, quite frankly, because everyone else would be able to do it. To fend off the always-present "if you don't like it just play BW then" retort: Fuck you. Why don't you play something else? | ||
|
Sadist
United States7292 Posts
Also automining is fine too, I dont see what the big deal is. It takes away one dumb aspect of the game that cancels out at high levels anyway. BW shouldnt necessarily be about how good your multi task is, it can help I guess but its sort of dumb that it has sort of come to that when competing at higher levels (and lower levels too I guess) edit: Also lets not forget you still have to tell things to build as well as manage your money/supply and micro, all this does is get rid of stupid situations such as where you are back at your base because something didnt build and your army gets raped because you werent able to watch because of some shit pathing function. This has nothing to do with either of your skill, its purely chance that they attacked the very instant you decided to go back to your base because of stupid pathing. They did not know you werent watching your units for that split second, its just dumb luck. If you are faster obviously you will have less of these situations but this idea of speed translating into somesort of bw skill is dumb(obviously you have to be skilled at the other parts of the game, but for example a reason why non koreans seem to struggle vs the koreans is partly due to the vastly superior mechanics of the professionals vs the amateurs) IMO its dumb, it has little to do with the actual skill of the game, ya it can give you an advantage, but like I said at the highest levels of the game it cancels out anyway so why even bother to have it. Ya its part of the reason why bw is so difficult but that doesnt necessarily mean its a good facet of the game. Having MBS and Automining could possibly even speed up play since faster players would be allowed much more freedom to harass and use the full potential of units than ever before. Imagine actually being able to use optical flare and shit in meaningful games? Imagine it being hectic to where you have to manage several battles all over the map with nice micro to survive? I mean where one facet of the game theoretically goes away, another part of the game is allowed to be better. | ||
|
ImgGartok
United States216 Posts
Warp gates for example, they cannot be multiple selected, and every individual gateway must be chosen to turn into a warp gate. Then of course involves clicking where the warp gate will warp too... that doesn't sound APM intensive to you? I think top Protoss players will truly make warp in shine. As long as GAMEPLAY features make up for the UI "friendliness," isn't the overall result a much better and competitive game? | ||
|
fight_or_flight
United States3988 Posts
I made a thread about the issue you are describing here: http://teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=57866 Basically my argument is that they have essentially freed up many apm. So now they can add more features and complexity to the game while keeping it at the same level of speed as the original. (I'm not saying your arguments aren't good, I'm talking about macro in general.) | ||
|
Remmargorp
United States28 Posts
What if I could go outside one day, pick up a tennis racket, and automatically be able to have perfect mechanics on my forehand...there would be no need to PRACTICE mechanics on my forehand now. Now the only action left, is to hit the ball wherever I want. That is equivilent to MBS/automining being included in SC2. Now, same situation. Real world, real game, real SPORT. I go outside, pick up my tennis racket. If I want to be able to master where I want to hit my shot, I cannot just pick up the racket a couple times and have awesome mechanics...nonono sir. I will get my forehand to land on my opponent's side of the court at the precise angle, with the exact amount of topspin, speed, and depth by PRACTICING MY FOREHAND mechanics over and over. Only once I've mastered the mechanics will I be able to then implement my strategies and tactics. This situation = SC1 macro = you must practice! Which one do we want? I'd rather have the more human of the two - the second one, that requires practice and dedication to be the best, rather than having the mechanics of the game almost mastered for me. And that is why SC1 is so great, challenging, and will be loved forever. | ||
|
Kacas
Brazil3143 Posts
i want a haaaaaard game! and we would spent more time on micro...yes...but even micro have a "apm"limit and the game would be boring 4us | ||
|
HunterGatherer
118 Posts
 Much attention you give to either macro or micro. Its inevitable that they are going to lower the amount of buildings and units you produce in SC2, but i didn't expect them to lower the tank count so  BoxeR cant ever say "That is many tanks yes?". And i also didn't expect them to build the game around protoss instead of terran first.If they want to make the game faster and have more emphasis on harassment and micro, then why not build the game around zerg? I just want a fun micro/macro game that has less buildings/less units, but faster production.Im looking at 1-3 hotkeys being the number of units in packs of 12-16 that you can control @ 200/200 and the standard 4-0 buildings that would be your whole base @ 200/200. I want it to feel like the game ive been playing for 10 years, just harder,better,faster,stronger,newer and wont hinder the pro players we look up to and follow. BoxeR maybe could come back on top in sc2 if it was more directed at micro and harasment, but his skill would be capped and it wouldn't be the boxer we know, while new-age BW players like  sAviOr Bisu and NaDa will be paralyzed from the waste down.Blizzard could even make a new race if they wanted to (if they stayed true to BW). Its space, a new race can come from anywhere.This isn't Warcraft where 2 random races come from no where and start making trouble.When i first switched from War2 to SC, the races were genuine and uniqe. The game was simply fast zerg, strong/slow terran, fast/strong protoss. And now today i try out any other RTS and im still not impressed since the day Broodwar was released, and they think im going to buy SC2 if its a inferior to BW? Their right, but I want RTS to take other directions and Blizzard is the only one that can accomplish that. Or else SC2 is going to look like all the generic bad RTS's wich communities die within a year. Its simply not a good idea if Blizzard chooses to be scientific instead of thinking long term. They are already holding park place and boardwalk with micro RTS's like Warcraft3 and true RTS's that take full macro/micro skill like Broodwar, SO WHATS WITH THIS CNC3/WARCRAFTINSPACE BLASPHEMY?! I want Blizzard to be king of MMORPG's and RTS's and maybe even FPS's in the future. But no matter what they are going to be king of RTS just because of Broodwar. A better RTS will come along in 50 years and nock Broodwar off, only then ill be too old to play with my massive carpo tunnel from playing BW for 50 years, but that wont matter because ill be able to micro/macro with my mind inside a fish tank. Seriously tho, alot of stuff can be added,tweaked, and taken from what Broodwar is TODAY! Not totally revamped... this is going to be a sequal isnt it? And an expansion in SC2 thats going to magically fix and ballance everything like what Broodwar did is not something i want, i want them to get it right the first time if they do what they say they do. Then they put shields on marines and gave dark templars a 4 strength 4 stam leather belt... | ||
|
rushz0rz
Canada5300 Posts
| ||
|
Infundibulum
United States2552 Posts
On the other hand, I'd prefer not to have automining and rather just an idle peon button/key. At pro level it's almost the same thing anyway. i used a lot of acronyms in this post. | ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On September 04 2007 07:25 oshibori_probe wrote: Wether or not its better. I am 99% certain that Blizzard wont have an on/off setting for MBS and automine. This should mean more multi front micro. I'm so sick of this argument, forced multi-front micro just because macro takes about 10% of your effort is a bad, bad bad badbadbadbabdabd thing. | ||
|
lololol
5198 Posts
On September 04 2007 06:56 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote: i also don't like the trapezoidal, messy looking screen location indicator on the minimap the minimap in starcraft looks way more polished than the minimap in sc2 it seems  In real 3d you'll always have a trape-whatever, because of perspective. The only way to make it square is if they use pseudo 3d like in BW, which makes switching to a 3d engine kinda pointless ^_^ Stating WC3 is bad, because it's all micro is ridiculous, because micro in WC3 is NOT EVEN FUCKING RELATED to micro in Starcraft. In WC3 you have extremely high hp units and heroes, which you just need to pull back when damaged and spells, that you just spam when they have cooldowned, is that anything like BW -> NO. | ||
|
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On September 04 2007 13:56 Sadist wrote: imo MBS will improve micro in that you wont have to worry as much about shit being messed up in your main and will be able to focus on units which is good. As nony said macro isnt even about how fast you press the keys. Also automining is fine too, I dont see what the big deal is. It takes away one dumb aspect of the game that cancels out at high levels anyway. BW shouldnt necessarily be about how good your multi task is, it can help I guess but its sort of dumb that it has sort of come to that when competing at higher levels (and lower levels too I guess) edit: Also lets not forget you still have to tell things to build as well as manage your money/supply and micro, all this does is get rid of stupid situations such as where you are back at your base because something didnt build and your army gets raped because you werent able to watch because of some shit pathing function. This has nothing to do with either of your skill, its purely chance that they attacked the very instant you decided to go back to your base because of stupid pathing. They did not know you werent watching your units for that split second, its just dumb luck. If you are faster obviously you will have less of these situations but this idea of speed translating into somesort of bw skill is dumb(obviously you have to be skilled at the other parts of the game, but for example a reason why non koreans seem to struggle vs the koreans is partly due to the vastly superior mechanics of the professionals vs the amateurs) IMO its dumb, it has little to do with the actual skill of the game, ya it can give you an advantage, but like I said at the highest levels of the game it cancels out anyway so why even bother to have it. Ya its part of the reason why bw is so difficult but that doesnt necessarily mean its a good facet of the game. Having MBS and Automining could possibly even speed up play since faster players would be allowed much more freedom to harass and use the full potential of units than ever before. Imagine actually being able to use optical flare and shit in meaningful games? Imagine it being hectic to where you have to manage several battles all over the map with nice micro to survive? I mean where one facet of the game theoretically goes away, another part of the game is allowed to be better. Sadist I like you but I can't finish reading this post because I disagree so much with it -.- | ||
|
BluzMan
Russian Federation4235 Posts
As for auto-mine, I don't really know. It certainly has effect, but it's unbelievably mundane. I guess I could accept it, but only if I get something in return. | ||
| ||
