|
On January 04 2009 09:02 anotak wrote:
tbh I think it'd be even better if the game would tell you which start location your opponent is at on a 4 player map because there's no skill in getting lucky and you scouting him before he scouts you.
Are you serious? I can't believe you are serious?
You one of those people who leave when they get their gas stolen?
|
On January 04 2009 09:04 CharlieMurphy wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2009 09:02 anotak wrote:
tbh I think it'd be even better if the game would tell you which start location your opponent is at on a 4 player map because there's no skill in getting lucky and you scouting him before he scouts you. Are you serious? I can't believe you are serious?
Yes I'm serious?
Randomly seeing who manages to scout the other first? That's not competitive, that's bullshit.
|
On January 04 2009 08:45 CharlieMurphy wrote:
If they nickel and dime all the little elements of skill; automining, MBS, shroud, MUS, etc. Then the game gets watered down. Where does it end with the simplification?
PS- do not derail this thread about MBS or whatever, I'm just using that as an example.
You sound like you don't want anything changed.Time moves on , RTS games evolve.
War3 method all the way.
|
I'm all for change, but if change is just in the form of simplification just for the sake of making it easier and nothing else, that's just retarded.
I mean if they made the standard map like twice as large or threw on so much detail it was confusing then maybe no shroud would be good.
|
On January 04 2009 09:05 anotak wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2009 09:04 CharlieMurphy wrote:On January 04 2009 09:02 anotak wrote:
tbh I think it'd be even better if the game would tell you which start location your opponent is at on a 4 player map because there's no skill in getting lucky and you scouting him before he scouts you. Are you serious? I can't believe you are serious? Yes I'm serious? Randomly seeing who manages to scout the other first? That's not competitive, that's bullshit.
You know you can time a scout or something to block his scout right? I do it all the time. Cliff advantage helps your worker survive.
And since they only hit 70% of the time uphill maybe we should just take out that lucky crap too...
|
it'd be cool if they made each layer a few shades darker, it got kind of confusing to tell what was barely in range or not.
|
On January 04 2009 09:15 mahnini wrote:
it'd be cool if they made each layer a few shades darker, it got kind of confusing to tell what was barely in range or not.
Seeing how everyone is disagreeing with me. I would be willing to compromise if they made the shroud really really dark.
|
I believe removing shroud of darkness encourages new player to try new maps. And thats positive.
|
On January 04 2009 09:11 CharlieMurphy wrote:
I'm all for change, but if change is just in the form of simplification just for the sake of making it easier and nothing else, that's just retarded.
I mean if they made the standard map like twice as large or threw on so much detail it was confusing then maybe no shroud would be good.
ok look at it this way
war2 had no unit queueing and starcraft did
should starcraft 2 have no unit queues so people need to 'learn 2 macro betta LoLoL11!!1!1!'
point is starcraft had every ease of use UI feature implemented at time of release , SC2 will be the same.
|
You can't possibly think that having it the current way won't encourage people to play new maps..
How often do people find someone to 1v1, host a map, have the other person say I don't know this map, and then they remake python. This happens thousands of times every day.
It's so far superior in so many ways...
|
As far as making it very dark.. Just no..
People would be upping the gamma just so they could see it more clearly.
How is it fun to have to squint to try to figure out what the fuck the map is like.. and then if you misread it because of the darkness.. that isn't fun.
It's fine the way it is.
|
What if they only just showed the lines on the map?
Like for example;
Only show where the edges of cliffs and water and space and stuff are. So just a general guide for map pathing without revealing too much?
|
Sweden33719 Posts
The only thing that changes is that you will no longer have your probe go to some obscure part of the map because you clicked in the water accidentally when trying to scout.
--;
|
I prefer the BW model. Just much more interesting to me. Makes multiplayer on a new map so interesting the first time.
|
Some people just like exploring, I am one of those people. I don't need a guide, I like to figure it out on my own.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Then have an option to switch between wc3/sc style and enjoy your exploring along with the misclicks, it's not like it's gonna make a noticeable difference anyway.
|
On January 04 2009 09:41 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Then have an option to switch between wc3/sc style and enjoy your exploring along with the misclicks, it's not like it's gonna make a noticeable difference anyway.
That doesn't work for competitive play/ladder. That's what this is about obviously
|
On January 04 2009 09:31 CharlieMurphy wrote:
What if they only just showed the lines on the map?
Like for example;
Only show where the edges of cliffs and water and space and stuff are. So just a general guide for map pathing without revealing too much?
Why? Say two people are playing a Bo5 with many obs, they are playing just for fun but both have the desire to win.
Loser picks map.
Now every time a map is chosen that the other player doesn't know, he goes to google images to take a look at where the expansions are.
Or maybe he doesn't care that much so now he's playing at a disadvantage.
Either way nothing is being added to the game.
On the other hand, the way it is currently allows people to plan their map dependant tactics such as cliffing a persons expo during the early game where there may be much downtime.
BTW you're like 100x more agreeable in person lol
|
I think it should be an option...
I have a lot of fun 1v1-ing on maps that neither my friend nor I have played on before and we're like "LOL, how did you get here!? I didn't know you could do that, HAHA"
Also for maze maps... not much of a (8)Labyrinth if you know how to get around.
On the other hand, for user-made melee maps, you would better tell the quality of the map right away at the beginning of the game and can altqq when you notice that somebody's minerals is 50000 while yours is only 1500.
|
In a serious competition, knowing where to send your units blindly by memorization of the map is an arguably legitimate skill, for sure. I'm talking about knowing where the main bases are and being able to comsat scan them on the first try, or to send out your worker scout without accidentally, occassionally clicking just outside the border of the base you're going for.
I like the idea of being able to look over the map while you've nothing to do in the early game and plan out your terrain abuse a little bit, especially on an unfamiliar map. But i've always found personally that playing on a map that i truly have no idea what to expect from, is fun largely because of being so completely in the dark. If you want to play a new map but don't want to be completely confused, well maybe you just have to study the map preview/map editor, and then play it a few times and actually make it part of your repetoire. I don't see what's so horrible about that or how it would likely be discouraging to most people who are willing to play unfamiliar maps in general.
But i really liked watching those two fairly newb blizzard employees actually have a fairly fun looking game, and i like the idea of making that possible, so long as it's not at a significant cost to the expansiveness of the skill gradient.
Here's a suggestion. Bw-esque black shroud for ladder mode, optional, just like many other things should be, in casual custom-game mode.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
