| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
5HITCOMBO
Japan2239 Posts
On January 06 2008 13:35 Machine[USA] wrote: bottom line is automining makes the game EASIER, meaning complete newbs will play better and will make it a LESS competitive game Complete newbs will play better, but I think the effect really tapers off after you get out of the complete newb tier. | ||
|
mystik.kr
Korea (South)34 Posts
| ||
|
Fen
Australia1848 Posts
On January 06 2008 20:45 5HITCOMBO wrote: Complete newbs will play better, but I think the effect really tapers off after you get out of the complete newb tier. Its true, the new features will help newbs much more than it will help the better players. It will work on a scale, so everyone will benefit, but the worse you are, the more you'll benefit. The end result meaning that everyone is squished together. Games between good players and bad players will be much closer. But this is a bad thing. If I play a game of warcraft against grubby, sure I lose. Hes played the game a LOT more than I have and has a lot more experience. However hes not going to dominate me like Bisu would if I played him in starcraft (even though I have much more SC experience than warcraft). Bisu's dedication to his game rewards him by being able to smash anyone who is not at his skill level. Grubby's dedication to his game means that he will still beat everyone on bnet, but the win wont be anywhere near as decisive. He wont be doing anything major that I cannot do as well. He will just be beating me with subtle actions that will ultimately build up and destroy me. This is the effect of simplifying games. Warcraft has a completely different skill set that it tests yes, but at the same time, its a much less demanding game than starcraft and this leads to games between people of large experience differences to be much closer than they should be. Experience should be rewarded with decisive victories. Just like a tennis player would beat me to nil, a good starcraft 2 player should be able to destroy a lesser player. | ||
|
5HITCOMBO
Japan2239 Posts
| ||
|
MyLostTemple
United States2921 Posts
| ||
|
Markus
Canada11 Posts
This soft-cap SC feature is in itself, a noobifying feature, clearly reducing the skill-ceiling as you put it. Yet I would bet you would fight tooth and nail to keep this included in the game. This basically proves you guys don't really want the most skillful game out there, but one you are familiar with and spent x-million hours practicing your game. There are other features like randomness of maps, randomness of minerals per base, other stuff, that would make the game require more skill to play. But you won't have any of that. Proving that your skill-ceiling/skill-gap arguments are nothing to you but a means to keep the game SC2 as close to the way it is in SC1 as possible. | ||
|
evanthebouncy!
United States12796 Posts
Now I can hotkey all my nexus 0, and my entire increase probe count command can be summarized as 0p and I'm done lololol | ||
|
skyglow1
New Zealand3962 Posts
On January 06 2008 20:29 evanthebouncy! wrote: Okay I think single building selection classify as mundane work, if your definition of mundane work is different from mine, then I guess we'll leave things as it is. I don't like alot of the sc mechanics. I would love to select multiple sunkens, for instance, to have a group of sunken hotkeyed so I can snipe marines when they go for a sunk break, and such feature cannot be w/ out MBS. So to replace the mechanics that you did not particularly like in SC with ones that you feel are better like MBS, you'd also be willing to change the balance of having just enough robot-like actions too? Because I don't see how we can introduce something like MBS and automining without upsetting this balance significantly. You'd either have to introduce some other aspect which balances out the introduction of MBS/automining, or be content with having easier mechanics overall. On January 07 2008 08:30 evanthebouncy! wrote: Haha I think nobody has adressed what would happen with MBS and Auto-mining together Now I can hotkey all my nexus 0, and my entire increase probe count command can be summarized as 0p and I'm done lololol You make it sound like a bad thing, but aren't you pro-MBS and pro-automining? | ||
|
Reason
United Kingdom2770 Posts
Look at Broodwar. Good macro and micro are required, but one without the other is useless. This is a skill that you need to learn and separates the men from the boys. Adding MBS and and automine makes the macro aspect simpler and leaves more time to focus on micro. This means that what defines a good player will almost solely be down to micro, effectively removing or at least reducing the importance of what is essentially the most important aspect of the game : multitasking. say no to "pro-noobification" | ||
|
MyLostTemple
United States2921 Posts
On January 07 2008 06:41 Markus wrote: It is my opinion that auto-mine won't be as game changing than what lots of people believe. Much like WC3 has a hard-cap in that after 5 workers, each additional worker does next to nothing if not nothing... SC has a soft-cap on its expansions, as each additional worker after so many does a hell of a lot less than the first few workers you created at that expansion. So the biggest decisions you will make are when/how to secure expansions. How much does auto-mine affect WC3 (it does have that).... it doesn't. This soft-cap SC feature is in itself, a noobifying feature, clearly reducing the skill-ceiling as you put it. Yet I would bet you would fight tooth and nail to keep this included in the game. This basically proves you guys don't really want the most skillful game out there, but one you are familiar with and spent x-million hours practicing your game. There are other features like randomness of maps, randomness of minerals per base, other stuff, that would make the game require more skill to play. But you won't have any of that. Proving that your skill-ceiling/skill-gap arguments are nothing to you but a means to keep the game SC2 as close to the way it is in SC1 as possible. nm, i missread it. ignore my post. | ||
|
XCetron
5226 Posts
| ||
|
IdrA
United States11541 Posts
On January 07 2008 08:30 evanthebouncy! wrote: Haha I think nobody has adressed what would happen with MBS and Auto-mining together Now I can hotkey all my nexus 0, and my entire increase probe count command can be summarized as 0p and I'm done lololol ya thats been mentioned when talking about the ramifications of MBS but no this stuff wont change the game at all. | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On January 07 2008 10:15 IdrA wrote: Careful with sarcasm over the intarnetz. You'll probably be quoted with that by some idiot on the Bnet forums.ya thats been mentioned when talking about the ramifications of MBS but no this stuff wont change the game at all. | ||
|
Fen
Australia1848 Posts
On January 07 2008 06:41 Markus wrote: It is my opinion that auto-mine won't be as game changing than what lots of people believe. Much like WC3 has a hard-cap in that after 5 workers, each additional worker does next to nothing if not nothing... SC has a soft-cap on its expansions, as each additional worker after so many does a hell of a lot less than the first few workers you created at that expansion. So the biggest decisions you will make are when/how to secure expansions. How much does auto-mine affect WC3 (it does have that).... it doesn't. This soft-cap SC feature is in itself, a noobifying feature, clearly reducing the skill-ceiling as you put it. Yet I would bet you would fight tooth and nail to keep this included in the game. This basically proves you guys don't really want the most skillful game out there, but one you are familiar with and spent x-million hours practicing your game. There are other features like randomness of maps, randomness of minerals per base, other stuff, that would make the game require more skill to play. But you won't have any of that. Proving that your skill-ceiling/skill-gap arguments are nothing to you but a means to keep the game SC2 as close to the way it is in SC1 as possible. The soft-cap in starcraft exists for the reason of actually increasing the skill level. If multiple workers could mine from minerals at the same time, there would be no need to expand at all until minerals ran out. Players would then become nomadic, securing an expansion when their last one runs out and then moving their whole base. This would be a severe simplification in starcraft, because in starcraft, the more you have, the harder it is to coordinate and defend. If you only have to defend 1 expansion, life would be pretty damn easy. However In starcraft, a strong economy means having 3-4 expansions running at the same time. Its difficult to mange. Youve got to bounce around between them all, and defending such a large area of the map becomes a real challenge. If you were to reduce the amount of workers that was optimal at bases, you end up slowing down the game. This can be seen from the earlier days of starcraft when maps had 6-7 mineral patches. Resources were scarce, but rapid expansion was not a viable strategy due to the requirement to defend larger portions of the map. Players would therefore spend large money on armies before expanding and caused the game to move much slower than it moves now. The soft-cap of about 2 workers per mineral patch and about 10-12 patches per base strikes a very good balance between players needing to build up worker numbers, but also players being required to expand out. | ||
|
evanthebouncy!
United States12796 Posts
On January 07 2008 11:20 Jibba wrote: Careful with sarcasm over the intarnetz. You'll probably be quoted with that by some idiot on the Bnet forums. He's romanian. No problem. On January 07 2008 08:41 skyglow1 wrote: So to replace the mechanics that you did not particularly like in SC with ones that you feel are better like MBS, you'd also be willing to change the balance of having just enough robot-like actions too? Because I don't see how we can introduce something like MBS and automining without upsetting this balance significantly. You'd either have to introduce some other aspect which balances out the introduction of MBS/automining, or be content with having easier mechanics overall. You make it sound like a bad thing, but aren't you pro-MBS and pro-automining? Yeah it will upset the balance significantly, and I don't see why we shouldn't? All those new units have already upset the game far more than what we could've imagine. If we keep everything else same, one thing for sure the balance won't be balanced. I'm not really pro or con MBS or Automining, as I probably won't be playing SC2 seriously enough to care. But I think personally the features of the game, the options(rally point, MBS, ect) should be made so that the players has the most options when he's playing the game and not fewer options. Let us put it this way: Auto-mining does not take away the option of a player manually selecting which mineral patch he wants to mine, so I think such feature that does not inhibit more options should be kept. However, if zealot has auto-charge, such feature I am against as it inhibits the option of "I don't want it to charge blindly at my enemy." | ||
|
skyglow1
New Zealand3962 Posts
On January 07 2008 17:50 evanthebouncy! wrote: He's romanian. No problem. Yeah it will upset the balance significantly, and I don't see why we shouldn't? All those new units have already upset the game far more than what we could've imagine. If we keep everything else same, one thing for sure the balance won't be balanced. I'm not really pro or con MBS or Automining, as I probably won't be playing SC2 seriously enough to care. But I think personally the features of the game, the options(rally point, MBS, ect) should be made so that the players has the most options when he's playing the game and not fewer options. Let us put it this way: Auto-mining does not take away the option of a player manually selecting which mineral patch he wants to mine, so I think such feature that does not inhibit more options should be kept. However, if zealot has auto-charge, such feature I am against as it inhibits the option of "I don't want it to charge blindly at my enemy." Sorry I don't see how the introduction of new units affects the balance of how much mechanics there is in the game. The type of balance you're talking about is just racial balance isn't it? The 'balance' I was talking about is not having too much or too little mechanics. I guess with some new abilities etc that could change how much attention you'd need to give to microing your units but I could live with a minor change like that. MBS or automining? It just seems too drastic for me. | ||
|
evanthebouncy!
United States12796 Posts
On January 07 2008 17:54 skyglow1 wrote: Sorry I don't see how the introduction of new units affects the balance of how much mechanics there is in the game. The type of balance you're talking about is just racial balance isn't it? The 'balance' I was talking about is not having too much or too little mechanics. I guess with some new abilities etc that could change how much attention you'd need to give to microing your units but I could live with a minor change like that. MBS or automining? It just seems too drastic for me. Yeah so when you are playing you can certainly turn MBS and Automining off so you can play exactly like you did in SCBW, what's the problem? >_> | ||
|
Qrly
Belgium3 Posts
On one hand it will free up a lot of time at the highest level of play that can be used for better troop management and to really focus on the action. Which will make watching starcraft games more exciting. Viewability is very important for an e-sport after all (face it, how many actually pay attention to Boxer managing the scv's at all his expansions?). But on the other hand it will thin the gap between many players at the mid skill level range. It's being efficient at little things like managing your peons that can really make a player stand out from another. Nothing as frustrating in a competitive game than seeing how little difference there is between a good player and an average player. Personally I'd say no to auto-mining and have an idle worker notification similar to WC3s after your worker has been idle for 20-30s instead. | ||
|
LonelyMargarita
1845 Posts
On January 07 2008 18:13 evanthebouncy! wrote: Yeah so when you are playing you can certainly turn MBS and Automining off so you can play exactly like you did in SCBW, what's the problem? >_> Because there are two things that make the game fun: winning/having close matches and the intense, almost frantic, fun feel of starcraft. With MBS/automine as an individual's setting, you can only have one: you can have the advantages of them but lose the feel of the game (so you win a boring game) or you can lose their advantages and lose the game (so you lose an exciting game). If I want the sooner, I'd play WC3, and if I want the latter, I just play B or better people on iccup. Having it an option for both players is fine, but no one would "choose" not to use MBS or "choose" to manually select which patch to mine from past the first 2 minutes, because it would cost you games. Once you have 1 miner or more per patch, the gains of manually selecting a patch each time are basically nonexistent. And to everyone who says it won't, things like this WILL affect even professional leagues. I've seen vods where nada has 5 scvs idle at one of his expos. We saw Mind vs sAviOr where Mind screwed up his factory's rally point and never realized it (MBS issue). And certainly auto-mine will tip the favor to overly micro-oriented players. When people say there will be other macro and micro tasks to occupy the time of better players, there's two problems with this: 1) you can't name what they are and 2) why would you want to forcefully introduce more tasks in the off-chance you MIGHT end up with a balanced game? The balance between micro, macro, and strategy were perfect in Starcraft 1, and you're going to risk losing that for something that has no real benefit to the gameplay? If they want to try making a RTS game with a different balance don't risk ruining the franchise of the best balanced one ever. Either wait for another RTS to actually be balanced but in a different way (and copy that balance), or experiment with another series so you don't risk soiling the Starcraft name with another game not cut out for professional play. --------------------- My other point was the exact opposite of what someone mentioned a while ago that I'm not quoting. They said that things like auto-mine will increase the longevity of the game because of the ability for worse players to have a better chance vs better players. This is absolutely backwards. When you decrease the skill gap between players and the skill ceiling, you decrease the rewards of practicing. In SC, you can develop the ability to basically never lose to players who have practiced a certain amount less than you. If you take that away, so you just go from winning 50% of the time to winning 70% of the time, it's really not worth it, especially when you know they can so quickly bring it back to 50% by doing the same thing. Starcraft has lasted because the ceiling has not been reached and because there are huge gaps between classes of players. Everyone always has something to strive for, and your practice pays off substantially. On the other hand if you decrease the skill gap, your practice doesn't mean as much, top players reach a point where there's basically nowhere to improve, and overall there's just no reason to play after a couple years. | ||
|
Unentschieden
Germany1471 Posts
Economical decisions should be about how and how much to invest into resource gathering and (what type of) military, that is the essence of RTS after all. Challenges are fine as long as they don´t feel artificial, witholding UI improvements is very risky if there is no very good reason. To many new players telling workers to do the obvious could feel like a chore. | ||
| ||
The PiG Daily
Best Games of SC
herO vs Clem
Solar vs Clem
Zoun vs Spirit
Clem vs MaxPax
PiGStarcraft536
[ Submit Event ] |
|
StarCraft 2 Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
Epic.LAN
BSL Team A[vengers]
Dewalt vs Shine
UltrA vs ZeLoT
LAN Event
BSL 21
BSL Team A[vengers]
Cross vs Motive
Sziky vs HiyA
LAN Event
BSL 21
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
