EPTDo We Want the Game Harder? - Page 25
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Quotidian
Norway1937 Posts
| ||
|
iokke
United States1179 Posts
On January 24 2012 16:22 Koshi wrote: Mechanical it should be a bit harder. Something simple like a 25 food cap on selection and removing MBS would be a great step. This is ofcourse not balanced in WoL but should be something Blizzard should consider for HotS imo. Why though? I mean if you think of it, how much depth does the the fact that you have to bind and use 3 hotkeys instead of one adds to our strategy game? 1a 2a 3a instead of 1a? I get being nostalgic about BW, but I really see no reason for a change like this. If I have to use 3 keys to create a worker instead of 1... would that make the game better? | ||
|
Sawamura
Malaysia7602 Posts
On January 24 2012 16:47 iokke wrote: Why though? I mean if you think of it, how much depth does the the fact that you have to bind and use 3 hotkeys instead of one adds to our strategy game? 1a 2a 3a instead of 1a? I get being nostalgic about BW, but I really see no reason for a change like this. If I have to use 3 keys to create a worker instead of 1... would that make the game better? I think you didn't play broodwar even at D rank because I don't even hot key my command center to even make a scv lol . I just use the F1,F2,F3 save screen key's to change between expansion and presto I can macro like a pro. | ||
|
iokke
United States1179 Posts
On January 24 2012 16:52 Sawamura wrote: I think you didn't play broodwar even at D rank because I don't even hot key my command center to even make a scv lol . I just use the F1,F2,F3 save screen key's to change between expansion and presto I can macro like a pro. good call, I just did single player in bw for a bit for fun, but i've read so many threads about BW mechanics vs SC2 mechanics.. I did play wc3 a lot where your binds were limited also (though not to the same extent). I really dont see how that adds to the game. well ur nit picking a bit too, in sc2 also usually takes at least 2 keys (hotkey + e for protoss...) im saying that if we just inserted extra steps, like hotkey + e + f + z, sure it would be harder, but how does that add to the game? | ||
|
Sawamura
Malaysia7602 Posts
On January 24 2012 16:57 iokke wrote: good call, I just did single player in bw for a bit for fun, but i've read so many threads about BW mechanics vs SC2 mechanics.. I did play wc3 a lot where your binds were limited also (though not to the same extent). I really dont see how that adds to the game. well ur nit picking a bit too, in sc2 also usually takes at least 2 keys (hotkey + e for protoss...) im saying that if we just inserted extra steps, like hotkey + e + f + z, sure it would be harder, but how does that add to the game? Meh the way I play things , I usually hotkey really crucial tech buildings like ebay,Armories to ensure I can get my upgrade's faster and I spare most of my hotkeys on my units . Having multiple hotkeys didn't impair me from making strategies because I still make correct decision along the way. Macroing in broodwar is actually quite straight forward , you just have to make more production buildings for terran and protoss and hatcheries for zerg . So it's nothing hard about macroing . Oh you are asking for adding extra steps , but in broodwar there is no extra steps at all , I just press f3 and I am at my 6 barracks selecting each barracks pressing M and C to macro marine and medic and F if i want to make some firebats . Pretty easy stuff happening here. | ||
|
Luppy1
Singapore177 Posts
| ||
|
houseurmusic
United States544 Posts
As for the question, I think the game should be a little harder. Units should be harder to micro. Spectators love marine king for his marine control, but I feel the other races lack the aww of impressive micro. I miss broodwar's mutalisk vs marine micro and well executed reaver drops. They were impressive because we all knew how hard they were to control which I feel made the game more exciting for the spectator. | ||
|
Sinensis
United States2513 Posts
| ||
|
Perseverance
Japan2800 Posts
| ||
|
gn1k
United States441 Posts
On January 23 2012 21:12 DeepBlu2 wrote: Adding things like automine and smartcast significantly lower the skillcap, yet don't make the game more fun, so I can't understand why they would add it. Auto mine totally makes the game more fun. You can focus on making interesting decisions. Instead of doing the same thing 80 times a game. Something that is not a decision. Something you don't think about, you just have to do it. WTF are you talking about? I think the game should have more micro things to make it a little harder. More interesting decisions to make. That's what makes it fun. | ||
|
Neurosis
United States893 Posts
On January 24 2012 16:20 Uncultured wrote: The game is slowly getting harder. As people are getting better/more familiar with it, and the skill cap is slowly rising. This. We still haven't seen perfect play from any one player out there, and even if we had that just means it was perfect play in an underdeveloped meta game. You have to realize that as players get better and better more amazing feats are required to win. This sounds like common sense but everything is really up to the players and how good they get. | ||
|
Elefanto
Switzerland3584 Posts
On January 24 2012 17:40 gn1k wrote: Auto mine totally makes the game more fun. You can focus on making interesting decisions. Instead of doing the same thing 80 times a game. Something that is not a decision. Something you don't think about, you just have to do it. WTF are you talking about? I think the game should have more micro things to make it a little harder. More interesting decisions to make. That's what makes it fun. First, I don't advocate non auto-mine, i'm just neutral, but what you're saying is wrong. It adds more depth to decision makin, you have to make more split decisions. It adds difficulty in one of the most important areas: screen control. You'll have to make a decision each time a worker is built: "Do i switch back to send it to mine, and lose focus on my army for a brief moment, or is it more important to watch my army than to potentially lose mining time". | ||
|
bgx
Poland6595 Posts
But first there needs to be a micro or mechanic to work with. Micro and mechanic that can rival pure macro 1a move. | ||
|
Hypatio
549 Posts
| ||
|
Kamelixs
Sweden88 Posts
There was a thread a while a go concerning the fact that it in Sc2 is hard for a good player to get extra value from units by microing better. The example in the text was that 5 marauders always wins against 4 marauders, and theres not so much you can do about it, However, MorroW commented in that thread that theres alot of neat stuff that he and other people wants to utilize, but that the game still is too hard to do those things. Im definatley not aginst making the game harder though | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On January 24 2012 18:29 Kamelixs wrote: This is somewhat relevant to the disscussion so Im gonna bring it up. There was a thread a while a go concerning the fact that it in Sc2 is hard for a good player to get extra value from units by microing better. The example in the text was that 5 marauders always wins against 4 marauders, and theres not so much you can do about it, However, MorroW commented in that thread that theres alot of neat stuff that he and other people wants to utilize, but that the game still is too hard to do those things. Im definatley not aginst making the game harder though Yeah... A lot of pros comment in these directions. TLO keeps on stating how he has so many ideas what he wants to do, but can't because he is still not fast enough and still experimenting with hotkey settings and ingame routines too much too have spare APM for this kind of stuff. If you just watch the amount of targetfire possibilities armor types give players and how MMM is kited as one ctrl-group and army right now, often not even targetfirering at all, I don't see how this game lacks the potential for players to outmicro each other. But well... as long as the metagame in certain MUs is/was: Build a ton of units and sit on your ass until you can clash, there were hardly any possibilities for such things to develope. Thankfully this is pretty much only TvP and TvT when it's Mech vs Mech anymore. All other MUs just have those huge amounts of small engagements right now. (PvZ lacking a bit behind, but warp prisms, 4gate+1zealots and mutalisks have added more and more potential to those games) | ||
|
Tulkas25
Greece292 Posts
[QUOTE]On January 24 2012 08:30 ChoboDane wrote: [QUOTE]On January 24 2012 08:04 zeden wrote: -remove smart-casting. -equal and harsher punishment for missing mules/larvae inject/crono. -bigger reward for great micro/control. [/QUOTE] -I said EQUAL AND HARSHER punishment. Right now missing mules or chrono is not even close o missing larvae injects. I want a equal punishment for all 3 races to obviously a zerg player with just his mind on his own troubles.Injects are your macro mechanic.they are your way of pumping more units out.It's the same as a terran player or protoss player adds or doesnt add in time barracks/gates and all their other production facilites.In addition injects are cool cause even if u get supply blocked you don't really lose the production cycle(except if you try to hold an attack and you need units that specific second),You can just pump twice the units the next cycle.Missing your injects is like a terrand or protoss forgets gates or he doesnt add them at the right time.Comparing chronos and mules to creep spread maybe(which undeniable is a most valuable tool) could be more accurate. | ||
|
bgx
Poland6595 Posts
On January 24 2012 18:29 Kamelixs wrote: This is somewhat relevant to the disscussion so Im gonna bring it up. There was a thread a while a go concerning the fact that it in Sc2 is hard for a good player to get extra value from units by microing better. The example in the text was that 5 marauders always wins against 4 marauders, and theres not so much you can do about it, However, MorroW commented in that thread that theres alot of neat stuff that he and other people wants to utilize, but that the game still is too hard to do those things. Im definatley not aginst making the game harder though I think we are mixing 2 things here, BW was harder but the difference of 4 marauders and 5 marauders in bw was possible because there was more "tools" to play with. You could set a trap on high ground, you could ambush a player and because there was not auto concave etc. the one who was controlling units first would gain advantage over the guy who didnt pay attention. Thats why Players are more active in bw, not because the game is easier or harder, but because you can FEEL the difference of being active. Limitations DOES NOT MATTER when they are applied to both players, in fact you can exploit your opponents limitations he cant overcome. Funny experiment, try to play bw for few days and try to get as much of it as you can, i bet that your D level play will be more active than sc2 mid master. Now lets go back to sc2, pros dont do that, because they cant yet got their macro to 100% while doing tricks that give their only 5% efficiency, to compared 20% bw efficiency. In bw everyone will sacriface 1 macro cycle for that 20%, Flash does it Jd does it, the lack of automization makes losing 1 macro cycle much less of a burden in bw than in sc2, where you know that your opponent doesnt care about that 5 % unit efficiency and he only cares about macro and you try to sacriface even slight bit of macro means you gonna get oblitarated because of Snowball effect of macro in sc2. Mules Inject chrono and bazillion worker count equals in huge huge scale macro, and no ammount of 5% tricks gonna get you near it. The conclusion is not that SC2 is harder than BW, the conclusion is simple: gameplay/strategy priorities are shifted. | ||
|
Tobberoth
Sweden6375 Posts
It means that focusing on learning macro meant more in BW. In SC2, you can at least get to gold/plat just by learning to macro well. In BW, the difference is way bigger. All you really have to learn to macro well as terran in SC2 is to hotkey your CCs, make sure they are building workers. Hotkey all your unit procuding structures on one key, make sure they are constantly producing. Make supply depots. Make bases. It's actually ridiculously easy. In BW, you have to constantly make workers AND go back and set them to mine, on each base. You have to make sure you were building out of all your unit producing structures, which means actually clicking on them, which forced you to use base cameras to have a chance. The bad AI made sure you couldn't just rally them to where you needed them. All of this together made "learn to macro" a concept far more important than it currently is in SC2. The macro mechanics was a good addition to make this less so, perfect queen usage is ridiculously hard to achieve, chrono boost can be hard to keep useful, and MULEs... are still a ridiculously easy mechanic, but still. When people ask for auto-mine and such to be removed, they don't do it because they love looking at their workers... they do it because they want the skill cap back, that good players didn't just do good strategies and awesome micro... they did this while constantly macroing in a sense which doesn't exist in SC2. | ||
|
sCuMBaG
United Kingdom1144 Posts
On January 24 2012 16:17 Bleak wrote: You know, that "BW players had 10 years to figure out..." comment actually means that before BW (and competitive RTS) took hold in Korea, the concepts of macro, micro, timings, expansions and how they affect the game, strategy and army movement etc. weren't known at all. It was built from nothing. That's why Boxer, even in its top form, won't take a game off current game's monsters like Flash. So SC2 is already built on these concepts so its improvement has been much faster. I'm sorry but I'm following a lot more BW compared to SC2 nowadays and I'm noticing that there are inherent problems with how WOL works. Due to MBS and ease of macro, it is impossible to come back if you lose the main deathball battle. The clumping mechanic and smarter unit ai means a lot more firepower available, and splash damage is all the deal in big battles. Units just die too damn fast before you can do anything (and sometimes you literallly cannot do anything, force fields and fungals) Smartcast removes the skill of good caster use (carpet storms and carpet emps with a few clicks). There are many very poorly designed units that are just a-move (colossus,roach,marauder) Interesting units like Reaver which require and reward good control are absent. Sentry and Blink Stalkers are really the only units that reward good control through forcefield usage and blink micro. Battles end far too quickly to allow an efficient retreat or micro that makes a big difference. There are subtle but really nice ways in how BW units function. Take Reaver. It hits like a freight train (100 unupgraded and 125 upgraded damage) and with a splash. Yet it is probably the slowest unit in the entire game, so you cannot just take it, a-move and cross your fingers. You need a fast way to transport it to the battle, and Shuttle provides that. Shuttle is fast, but it is prone to be sniped by your enemy, so you need to control it well, because if you fail, you not only lose it but also the precious Reaver inside. Plus the lost opportunity for harrassment and extra firepower for your army. You can take a deathball with Colossi and Stalkers with a few sentries and just a-move across the map, and the only thing you need to do is good forcefields that honestly aren't that hard to execute, and protecting your Colossii, which the stalkers can take care of. But this isn't an interesting interaction between these units, it is just basic stuff, a unit covering another. A Shuttle brings a whole new depth into how you can use a Reaver. SC2 lacks that interaction. A Colossi harrass does nothing but make your opponent laugh, its whole function is to provide firepower in a major engagement. Warp Prism could be interesting if Warp-in mechanic was exclusive only to Warp Prism's energy area but due to Pylons giving the same effect, they aren't as interesting as they could be. Still, it's a great idea and it deserves an applaud, but it could have been much better. Get this: There isn't much more if anything left to figure out in WOL. HOTS will bring its own dynamics and then there will be a period of learning, just like it happened last year with WOL. But for WOL, the progress is pretty much over unless Blizzard introduces a major change through a patch. I personally honestly believe the biggest problem of WOL is how Protoss is designed. TvZ being arguably the best matchup in the game closely followed by TvT shows this clearly. very nice post mate. I agree with pretty much everyting in there. | ||
| ||
