|
On December 05 2008 15:39 Koof wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2008 13:53 A3iL3r0n wrote:
I dunno, I guess I always thought that tough button combinations in fighting games were supposed to mimic the requirement of practice as in real life martial arts. You couldn't just do them normally, but with practice, that's why they are the special moves. Am I wrong? I think that you should also feel physical pain after you get hit, just so we can mimic real life martial arts. What the hell kind of argument is this?
I think A3iL3r0n has a valid argument, but it applies to single player games where you get satisfaction on improving your skill.
In multiplayer, the skill gap in fighting games is already present in game knowledge and reaction speed and whatnot. The button mashing skill is only a hindrance keeping a large part of the population from trying their best on the other skills.
I think this as an argument does transfer to starcraft, but I can't say for sure it's a valid point for bms/automine. The other skills for starcraft must be very important, so as to retain a certain difficulty level to being really good at the game with bms/automine included.
|
Omg guys whats wrong with you? Do you really think that MBS, automining, idle workers warning etc will make you gosu? I mean think about this. Do you really think that if bliz makes 1.18 patch for SCBW with all those SC2 features, I will be able to beat pros? Or As, or Bs ?? Thats some bullshit. Cause good players will benefit from thos new features as well, meaning they will have more time to micro, work out their strategy etc. Think about what you say first.
ps. In other words C in SC2 will be worse from C in SCBW. But if you are A in SCBW, you will be like A+++ in SC2. Get it ?
|
On December 05 2008 20:29 herda wrote:
Omg guys whats wrong with you? Do you really think that MBS, automining, idle workers warning etc will make you gosu? I mean think about this. Do you really think that if bliz makes 1.18 patch for SCBW with all those SC2 features, I will be able to beat pros? Or As, or Bs ?? Thats some bullshit. Cause good players will benefit from thos new features as well, meaning they will have more time to micro, work out their strategy etc. Think about what you say first.
ps. In other words C in SC2 will be worse from C in SCBW. But if you are A in SCBW, you will be like A+++ in SC2. Get it ?
fail.
you refuse to see the problem plus you dont seem to have enough knowledge about sc bonus: return to b.net forums or w/e ur belong
|
On December 05 2008 20:49 Ki_Do wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2008 20:29 herda wrote:
Omg guys whats wrong with you? Do you really think that MBS, automining, idle workers warning etc will make you gosu? I mean think about this. Do you really think that if bliz makes 1.18 patch for SCBW with all those SC2 features, I will be able to beat pros? Or As, or Bs ?? Thats some bullshit. Cause good players will benefit from thos new features as well, meaning they will have more time to micro, work out their strategy etc. Think about what you say first.
ps. In other words C in SC2 will be worse from C in SCBW. But if you are A in SCBW, you will be like A+++ in SC2. Get it ? fail. you refuse to see the problem plus you dont seem to have enough knowledge about sc bonus: return to b.net forums or w/e ur belong
Troll detected. I never played on Bnet or w/e you belong. Iccup is my home.
|
On December 05 2008 20:29 herda wrote:Cause good players will benefit from thos new features as well, meaning they will have more time to micro, work out their strategy etc. Think about what you say first.
I work on my strategy between macro cycles too. wanna F- battle on iccup with me?
|
seriously, macroing rly take that amount of time that u cant work out ur strategy?
i always thought it was only a f2 click m click m click m as fast as your apm goes and then you focus on your units again...it takes like 3 - 6 seconds if u got 200ish to complete macro stages with like 6+ upb
|
On December 05 2008 10:14 AcrossFiveJulys wrote:
The game of Starcraft would (will) change dramatically with things like MBS and automine, just because taking difficult mechanics out removes 90% of what you are doing in every game of Starcraft. Whether that's for the better or for the worse, well, we'll just have to see.
I guess I always did it wrong. I always tried to MINIMIZE the time spend on unit production and peon ordering.
|
On December 05 2008 22:45 Ki_Do wrote:
seriously, macroing rly take that amount of time that u cant work out ur strategy?
i always thought it was only a f2 click m click m click m as fast as your apm goes and then you focus on your units again...it takes like 3 - 6 seconds if u got 200ish to complete macro stages with like 6+ upb
Taking into account starcraft's game-pace, that's a considerable amount of time that could be spent on working out strategy. By working I don't mean *thinking* about strategy, of course. I mean executing it. When you do "f2 click m click m click m, select worker, send to minerals" you're not executing any strategy, because it doesn't depend on any at all. This is the culprit. When player is forced to do non-sensual things which only purpose is to take away time from much more fun and seemingly important things it leads to very frustrating experience for player.
All what need to be done is to somehow turn actions that doesn't depend on game-plan or depend only indirectly into ones, which directly and in a obvious way impact players strategy and, in our case, macro.
For Zerg, good example would be Spawning Creep and Nydus Worming with Overlords/Overseers. If this abilities are made viable enough (in sense, players who constantly use them have bigger advantage over opponent than players who use them rarely) and if they are properly balanced (i.e. opponent can somehow cancel out this abilities once they were used, so player is forced to regularly reuse them), then it will add good amount of macro actions for Zerg and that's exactly what we need.
|
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
On December 05 2008 13:53 A3iL3r0n wrote:
I dunno, I guess I always thought that tough button combinations in fighting games were supposed to mimic the requirement of practice as in real life martial arts. You couldn't just do them normally, but with practice, that's why they are the special moves. Am I wrong?
Well, aside from the enjoyment one gets from executing a well-practiced combo correctly, special moves require joystick motions because many of them would be overpowered if they could be performed instantly with the press of a button.
For example, in most 2D fighters you have "dragon punch" type moves or super moves which are invincible and will beat almost any other attack. If these moves could be performed with a single button press, then one could press that button on reaction to any non-fast attack from the opponent and beat their attack (by "non-fast", I mean more than 6 frames (1/10th of a second) of start-up time, since that is the limit of unconscious human reaction speed). This ability would obviously take a lot of depth and fun out of the game.
But if you need to do a joystick motion first, then the amount of time you need to beat an opponent's attack on reaction is greatly increased, making the game more balanced and giving it more depth.
Furthermore, most of these joystick motions require you to leave the blocking position, leaving you vulnerable. In contrast, with 1-button special and super moves, you could simply mash on the button while blocking.
So, similar to StarCraft, making the mechanics of a fighting game easier changes its balance and its gameplay. And, beyond a certain point, it makes the game less fun as well.
However, I think most of you guys don't realize that the mechanics that Sirlin made easier were much more difficult than most of the mechanics you see in fighting games these days. Furthermore, they were random: a random number generator decided how much time you had to execute a special move! Ridiculous.
I doubt that Sirlin wants to remove mechanics from fighters completely: a minimum amount of mechanics is necessary for multiple reasons, such as the ones I gave above. Instead, he is searching for a balance: mechanics that are not too difficult to learn and to perform consistently, but also not so easy that they unbalance the game or ruin the gameplay.
We are searching for the same balance in StarCraft 2. We all seem to agree that the move from WarCraft 2's mechanics to StarCraft's was an improvement. It's just a matter of deciding what is "too easy" for a competitive RTS. And it could be completely different from what is "too easy" for a fighter.
|
well, today and yesterday, myself, FA, maybenexttime, sven, and some more guys played a fuckton of Armies of Exigo, which is an RTS very similar to SC2 (it is right in the middle between SC and Warcraft3). And I say, I don't mind MBS and automine at all. It can be still hard to macro, hard to multitask.
MBS:
in AoX, it is not exactly like in SC2. if you have 5 barracks, and you press the hotkey of footman, and you have the money to produce five footmen, your five barracks will start producing. If you have money only for one, then a not busy barrack will start producing. If all the hotkeyed barracks are busy, then the first one in the group will produce the footman.
automine:
compared to starcraft, there are less peons here, so automine has less significant effect in this game. Honestly, I like automine. My argument is, if you have an idle worker button anyway, what is the point of having no automine.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
I'll just say I agree with this pretty much 100%. I never felt like "oh I have nothing to do..", and I was constantly going back to my base anyway to build farms and new production buildings or to expand.
However, there is a little bit less macro in the game (ie you dont seem to need as many production buildings or peons) so it's not identical to SC, but still.
I really enjoy the game and none of the features bother me at all, it still feels quite intense. Maps with underground terrain gives you a lot to keep track off as well, so that's nice.
|
i dont know, the macro seemed too easy in aox fa =/
|
On December 06 2008 10:27 Ki_Do wrote:
i dont know, the macro seemed too easy in aox fa =/
you said that you didnt play any multiplayer of it..
|
multiplayer isnt the only way to test macromanagement,i played skirmish and saw how many times i came to my base
|
I dont think its the general high apm which is defining the skill, but the need for high APM for certain actions etc does give you yet another factor to think about, it basically dictates how many attacks you can do at the same time, how well you can macro while your attacking etc. If the game is severely "dumbed down" and simple attackmoves will surround etc and whatnot, and there's autorally etc, a lot of these descisions will be taken out. Its not a horrible thing or something that cant be overcome, but I do regret it should it happen.
|
On December 06 2008 09:16 FrozenArbiter wrote:
I'll just say I agree with this pretty much 100%. I never felt like "oh I have nothing to do..", and I was constantly going back to my base anyway to build farms and new production buildings or to expand.
However, there is a little bit less macro in the game (ie you dont seem to need as many production buildings or peons) so it's not identical to SC, but still.
I really enjoy the game and none of the features bother me at all, it still feels quite intense. Maps with underground terrain gives you a lot to keep track off as well, so that's nice.
You guys just don't understand maaaaaaaaannnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn!!! It's gotta' be hard man. Gotta' be like back in 'nam. We had to bleed out our anuses to macro man! You had to bleed 'fer 'least a month before a man would look 'ya in 'th eye! Macro's gotta' be hard maaannn!! You gotta feel the pain man. Feeeeel it.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
|
|
|
On December 06 2008 11:34 Ki_Do wrote:
multiplayer isnt the only way to test macromanagement,i played skirmish and saw how many times i came to my base
It's seems like you completely don't understand the meaning of 'easy to learn hard to master' concept.
You can't test how hard something is by playing against vastly inferior player. You can't test how hard something is when you have no idea what are you supposed to test, and if you haven't heavily competed in any RTS besides SC you definitely don't now how macromanagement may look like when it's not heavily based on punishment (like in starcraft).
Now, go in Broodwar and play Zerg. Start sending your Overlords around the map and then individually clicking on them once they reach destination, like if you were activating 'spawn creep' ability. Realize, that you have to watch them carefully on minimap and if they under attack, cancel ability and move them away from attacker. You can't let them die needlessly - if they die you will lose more than 100 minerals (overseer cost more than that), you will lost supply and you will have to find Overlord, morph it in Overseer and once done, move him somewhere on the map to spawn creep.
Is it EASIER to do than to send couple workers to mine minerals once in a while? Is it EASIER to master than clicking at buildings? Please, read that and try to understand.
|
What does that zerg example have to do with anything? Are you required to spawn creep on every square inch of the map in SC2? And no, you can very easily tell how legitimately difficult a game is by playing by yourself. Starcraft macro is still fairly difficult even without an opponent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
