|
I love Starcraft because of its difficulty, I played up to highish EU masters as Terran through WoL and HotS and I adored the game, I still do. The idea of something so special to me potentially being ruined sucks. But this is the reality a lot of people are beginning to face now, or is it?
With Blizzards proposed suggestion that Larva be auto cast we know they are thinking about this issue, and this is something they definitely want to try out. But what has caused this sudden shift? You only have to look to the successes of other e-sport titles and what they are doing to understand. League of Legends for example is hugely accessible, not only this but it caters to its casual player exceptionally well. When someone can control the game comfortably, they will feel a lot more secure. It is why League of Legends has a lot more players in silver who think they are the next Faker, but just don't know how to be good at a more information hungry game. Because the ease of control gives them the delusion that they are good players, and this keeps players playing.
Archon mode also gives more support that this is probably Blizzards mission statement moving forward into LotV. Team mates lessen the burden of responsibility one might feel, especially in a game as hard as SC2. Most people would agree that Archon is a wonderful idea.
So is it really that bad that Blizzard want to move away from giving the player a lot of things to do, to giving the spectator more things to watch? I personally don't think so now. I was completely on the other side about this, and I thought about it for a few days. Initially I thought that taking away macro mechanics would stop the player from utilising their speed effectively. But in reality, this will lead to players executing more elaborate strategies, with better, more consistent micro. Think of your favourite SC2 match as a spectator, it is usually going to be a game with endless battles.
This beta is just not going to work if its Blizzard vs the community, they have a lot of incentive to make this game more accessible to casual players. They just have to do whilst maintaining a high skill ceiling. We need to work with them and help them make the game more accessible in a way that won't fuck things up, so we can all benefit from a healthier community and stronger game overall; even if it is a little easier to to play casually.
With that said, I think this would be a good place to discuss ideas that could make the game easier without sacrificing quality.
My suggestion is a small one for Terran. Emp has priority over Stim, this to me is a perfect example of a really irritating rule in the game that makes control less fluid and just awkward. EMP takes priority over Stim so you are forced to keep your ghosts completely independent of your bio army. The main problem is that to fight Protoss effectively there is a high skill ceiling on bio control and perfect Stim use. If you have Ghosts with your army you just can't box Stim areas of your army comfortably. So then you have to constantly be moving them out of your army, positioning them, and making sure your hotkey management is perfect so you don't mess up and not Stim.
Players can obviously overcome this, I eventually got to a point where I could control my ghosts well, but that small change would of saved me a lot of irritating time. This was obviously a balance band aid addressing the strength of Ghosts if they were too easy to use. If they're going to add a gazillion unit abilities though, things like unintuitive difficulty for the sake of balance, need to be gone.
And that is that. All opinion of course, but just adding my thoughts.
|
I agree with this post, I agree with it very much.
I've watched as one by one all of my friends have stopped playing Starcraft. When I ask them why, they always say that it's because it's too hard, and they go play LoL.
I can't stand that so many people in the community are constantly complaining that any casual-ization of SC2 is unnecessary because "no skill players should just learn how to play."
I've played guitar for 13 years. I don't even have to think when playing open chords, or pentatonic scales, or certain styles of music, but when I started out I had to stop and think every time I made a chord change. It took years of playing to get to the point where playing guitar felt as comfortable as talking.
Good players need to remember how hard it was when they started. And if it wasn't difficult for them to learn SC2, well then they can pat themselves on the back, in a room, alone, with no one else playing cause the game is too goddamn hard.
|
I want a real time strategy game, not a Moba, to hell with casual gamers and their lack of skill.
We should take Broodwar as the example to follow, not childish games such as LoL.
User was warned for this post
|
And even then LoL has a high barrier of entry because of so many things you need to understand first. While Sc2 is rather easy to graps. Get resources kill the opponents buildings. Problem is a RTS can never be as easy as a MMO simulator err Moba. Unless the player only controls one unit and the computer the rest. But then you just made a Moba out of a RTS.
The only option would be to make it slower, which again doesn't fit into the 20 min each match goal that Blizzard aims for. Which is also the main reason why they want to get rid of the macro mechanics. As they need to reduce the amount of necessary actions because of the reduced game duration.
But I really hope they don't turn Sc2 into a fake Moba. Where your main army stands for a Hero you build up. And you have units that are good on a-move and they reintroduce the attack move rally of the WoL Beta . Mostly because Blizzard already as a really good Dota style game, that LotV could never surpass.
So they should just give up trying to force their ideal game duration on a genre where it is just not possible, unless they increase the barrier of entry. Or in other words create objectives that force the game to end at a certain point. Otherwise it will just be enjoyable for a really small portion of players out of the rts scene. And not what they seem to hope for, a rts that everyone can enjoy. But it seems we can't change this particular goal of theirs anyway, so I'll just wait and see what comes out of it. And having low expectations can lead to more enjoyment!
|
On August 02 2015 01:41 FeyFey wrote:And even then LoL has a high barrier of entry because of so many things you need to understand first. While Sc2 is rather easy to graps. Get resources kill the opponents buildings. Problem is a RTS can never be as easy as a MMO simulator err Moba. Unless the player only controls one unit and the computer the rest. But then you just made a Moba out of a RTS. The only option would be to make it slower, which again doesn't fit into the 20 min each match goal that Blizzard aims for. Which is also the main reason why they want to get rid of the macro mechanics. As they need to reduce the amount of necessary actions because of the reduced game duration. But I really hope they don't turn Sc2 into a fake Moba. Where your main army stands for a Hero you build up. And you have units that are good on a-move and they reintroduce the attack move rally of the WoL Beta . Mostly because Blizzard already as a really good Dota style game, that LotV could never surpass. So they should just give up trying to force their ideal game duration on a genre where it is just not possible, unless they increase the barrier of entry. Or in other words create objectives that force the game to end at a certain point. Otherwise it will just be enjoyable for a really small portion of players out of the rts scene. And not what they seem to hope for, a rts that everyone can enjoy. But it seems we can't change this particular goal of theirs anyway, so I'll just wait and see what comes out of it. And having low expectations can lead to more enjoyment! The thing about LoL and Dota is that there is somewhat of a barrier to entry due to the huge amount of understanding and terms, etc. you need to know, but these you can learn just by watching streams or reading on a wiki or something. For the SC2 barrier to entry, macro, you actually have to deliberately practice to get anywhere at all in any reasonable amount of time, otherwise it takes you thousands of games to get close to the top of the ladder. You can't learn how to do it by reading and watching.
It's a wonder to me that CSGO does as well as it does when one of its most crucial fundamentals, controlling spray, requires so much practice. Maybe it's because lower-level CSGO games still closely resemble professional games, whereas that isn't necessarily true for Starcraft.
|
People and Blizzard need to understand that the problem with SC2 is that build orders and unit composition matter more than skill. The "hard counter" system makes the game stupid as it gives you only one way to play each matchup, and often will make you feel like you're getting underserved losses. When people feel like they're losing because their units are worse and not because they are facing someone better, they get bored and leave.
Now, if you look at Broodwar, the game is very hard to dominate, you need sick multitasking to keep your macro and need to work hard to make your units effective. You have to recognize your opponent skill when you're beaten.
SC2 is already an easy game, to the point that protoss players say "apm is just spam". If you make it even easier, it will just worsen that broken "hard counter" system.
LotV changes are meant to make the game more fun by forcing multitasking, making it easier is just a deadly mistake.
|
On August 02 2015 00:44 okto wrote:
I've watched as one by one all of my friends have stopped playing Starcraft. When I ask them why, they always say that it's because it's too hard, and they go play LoL.
Then fuck 'em. Lazy people who don't want to put in the effort should not ruin the game for people who are willing to do it, in order to enjoy a deeper and more beautiful game.
Some people want to go really hardcore, others just want to play casually. Let people choose freely, but don't make every game cater to casuals. They have their game. Let us have our.
|
Y'know, maybe they should just give Ghosts Stim.
I see no need for the Ghost unit itself to have Stim, usually there are sufficiently few of them to make a difference, and I really doubt this change would make mass Ghost become a thing.
I suggest the change not so much so the Ghost can gain the ability to Stim, but rather to address your issue. This way, if you hit T with a Ghost, all the Marines and Marauders selected will Stim too.
Main problem I see is that it detestably conflicts with the Ghost's identity as a sneaky, refined solo unit, but that may be worth the ease of access this change would bring.
|
On August 02 2015 03:36 vOdToasT wrote:
Some people want to go really hardcore, others just want to play casually. Let people choose freely, but don't make every game cater to casuals. They have their game. Let us have our.
This is exactly how I feel. I like difficulty of SC2 because it feels rewarding after you won a game. And I'm sure there are a lot of people who feel like that.
|
It's time to get with the times. A lot of macro in sc2 feels like a chore and it's boring as hell. It's like putting pieces together on an assembly line. The fun is killing your opponent with your army. Obviously there's more to it than that but streamlining the early game and removing unnecessary macro mechanics makes the game faster and allows us to focus on microing our army. That's not making the game casual and it's definitely not turning the game into a moba.
|
On August 02 2015 00:53 xTJx wrote: I want a real time strategy game, not a Moba, to hell with casual gamers and their lack of skill.
We should take Broodwar as the example to follow, not childish games such as LoL.
Never said SC2 should be like League, was just comparing what creates the huge success it has over a game like SC2. SC2 should never be like a moba, but removing various tasks that are only logical to the design team and high level players would be a good step. I personally think auto larva inject is too much given the other races will have the same amount of macro to do. It's a huge buff/nerf for zerg (depending how you view it) and a possible good step, but I have a feeling Zerg will be tweaked a lot if they implement this change in any form.
|
On August 02 2015 03:58 Deathstar wrote: It's time to get with the times. A lot of macro in sc2 feels like a chore and it's boring as hell. It's like putting pieces together on an assembly line. The fun is killing your opponent with your army. Obviously there's more to it than that but streamlining the early game and removing unnecessary macro mechanics makes the game faster and allows us to focus on microing our army. That's not making the game casual and it's definitely not turning the game into a moba. I don't know about that, I feel like the most fun I ever have with starcraft is when I'm playing a TvZ or Maru style TvP, and I macro and micro and my apm flies up to 200 for 4 minutes until I win the game because my mechanics were so on point. Those are the wins that I love, where it's macro-split-kite-drop endlessly and I win because I kept my macro up but I killed all of the zerg's queens or something.
|
I don't think 1v1 SC2 is ever going to have that kind of mass appeal. There are no teammates to blame your losses on, no upgrades to grind for, games are intense, and the skill range is huge. Going the route of making 1v1 easier for the sake of bringing in new players may just leave us with the worst of both worlds where it's not as fun to play competitively and it still doesn't have the mass appeal of other games.
I think the best shot at growing the player base is for Blizzard to continue with alternative game modes like Archon and Allied Commanders. I think Archon mode should probably have the same rules as 1v1 but other than that I would like to see Blizzard push the boundaries in team modes with different units/stats/objectives. Those are the modes where they can focus on lowering the mechanical barriers and retain the less hardcore player base IMO.
|
On August 02 2015 03:36 AmicusVenti wrote: Y'know, maybe they should just give Ghosts Stim.
I see no need for the Ghost unit itself to have Stim, usually there are sufficiently few of them to make a difference, and I really doubt this change would make mass Ghost become a thing.
I suggest the change not so much so the Ghost can gain the ability to Stim, but rather to address your issue. This way, if you hit T with a Ghost, all the Marines and Marauders selected will Stim too.
Main problem I see is that it detestably conflicts with the Ghost's identity as a sneaky, refined solo unit, but that may be worth the ease of access this change would bring.
Then how about they only benefit from the movement speed buff? Or remove snipe altogether and let stim buff them too. I personally think ghosts should fill more of a support role than they currently do. Give them a mini scan ability within their range, make nukes more viable, change them around a bit but just make them less of a chore. The fact you have to get a whole production facility, a tech lab, high mineral cost, then deal with the Stim issue makes them a nasty prospect in a lot of games. I don't really know though.
|
On August 02 2015 05:18 PinheadXXXXXX wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2015 03:58 Deathstar wrote: It's time to get with the times. A lot of macro in sc2 feels like a chore and it's boring as hell. It's like putting pieces together on an assembly line. The fun is killing your opponent with your army. Obviously there's more to it than that but streamlining the early game and removing unnecessary macro mechanics makes the game faster and allows us to focus on microing our army. That's not making the game casual and it's definitely not turning the game into a moba. I don't know about that, I feel like the most fun I ever have with starcraft is when I'm playing a TvZ or Maru style TvP, and I macro and micro and my apm flies up to 200 for 4 minutes until I win the game because my mechanics were so on point. Those are the wins that I love, where it's macro-split-kite-drop endlessly and I win because I kept my macro up but I killed all of the zerg's queens or something.
I agree, the most fun games I've had as Terran have involved beating players of a decent level through superior multitasking and macro. That feeling really can't be topped. But what you're saying is a misconception. Removing macro mechanics doesn't actually make the game easier, as long as they remove the right ones. You see, when you have more time to devote to being out on the map. That couple of seconds you jump around 4 bases to inject, suddenly becomes a ling runby. Which creates more action. Great for the spectator and the player still uses the APM for something now inject has gone.
Giving players more time means they will find ways to utilise it. And given the nature of Lotvs economy speed, there is going to be a lot of room for more full on mechanical strategies in the early to mid. The sad truth is, the only reason to not like this route is if you have bad micro and rely on being left alone to build your army. The APM will still be spent, and the better player will still be able to win, it will just be slightly different circumstance.
|
Some people want to go really hardcore, others just want to play casually. Let people choose freely, but don't make every game cater to casuals.
Last I checked, whack-a-mole was pretty casual. And that is what SC2 macro mechanics are in a nutshell: a game of whack-a-mole that you are forced to play in order to be effective in the real game you're playing against your opponent.
I say we get rid of them so we can focus on the strategy in this RTS.
|
On August 02 2015 00:02 haiyeah wrote:
My suggestion is a small one for Terran. Emp has priority over Stim, this to me is a perfect example of a really irritating rule in the game that makes control less fluid and just awkward. EMP takes priority over Stim so you are forced to keep your ghosts completely independent of your bio army.
You see for some other people, either by choice or simply habits, EMP having priority is the good design. You're solution isn't one, it just bandaid one effect and creates another possible problem. For things like army control (e.g. unit/building selection priority) I think it should be fully customizable via the option menu. Lack of custom hotkeys was one of the reason I ditched WoL completely at launch, selection priorities aren't that big of a deal for me but I could see it putting people off. I'd agree it's something that could be "easily" fixed by Blizzard, without much impact on actual game balance or skill ceiling.
|
Nice post, I agree with pretty much everything you said.
On August 02 2015 03:58 Deathstar wrote: It's time to get with the times. A lot of macro in sc2 feels like a chore and it's boring as hell. It's like putting pieces together on an assembly line. The fun is killing your opponent with your army. Obviously there's more to it than that but streamlining the early game and removing unnecessary macro mechanics makes the game faster and allows us to focus on microing our army. That's not making the game casual and it's definitely not turning the game into a moba. This is an opinion, and I don't agree. Out macroing your opponent so your army is more efficient and you steam roll them in the battle, is a great feeling as well.
|
On August 02 2015 05:01 haiyeah wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2015 00:53 xTJx wrote: I want a real time strategy game, not a Moba, to hell with casual gamers and their lack of skill.
We should take Broodwar as the example to follow, not childish games such as LoL. Never said SC2 should be like League, was just comparing what creates the huge success it has over a game like SC2. SC2 should never be like a moba, but removing various tasks that are only logical to the design team and high level players would be a good step. I personally think auto larva inject is too much given the other races will have the same amount of macro to do. It's a huge buff/nerf for zerg (depending how you view it) and a possible good step, but I have a feeling Zerg will be tweaked a lot if they implement this change in any form.
BW was the hardest game, and it was by far the most played. You can't compare a free team game with a paid 1v1 game.
When Blizzard started making SC2, they made the mechanics much easier to encourage low level players. But what it created was a boring game where it's much easier to cheese or turtle instead of trying to play a normal game and make stuff happen. And they're making the same mistake again, focusing on getting casuals to play SC2 instead of focusing on keeping RTS fans satisfied.
I'm a Master Zerg player and can't push myself to ladder anymore, cause i'm bored to death with SC2.
|
On August 02 2015 03:06 PinheadXXXXXX wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2015 01:41 FeyFey wrote:And even then LoL has a high barrier of entry because of so many things you need to understand first. While Sc2 is rather easy to graps. Get resources kill the opponents buildings. Problem is a RTS can never be as easy as a MMO simulator err Moba. Unless the player only controls one unit and the computer the rest. But then you just made a Moba out of a RTS. The only option would be to make it slower, which again doesn't fit into the 20 min each match goal that Blizzard aims for. Which is also the main reason why they want to get rid of the macro mechanics. As they need to reduce the amount of necessary actions because of the reduced game duration. But I really hope they don't turn Sc2 into a fake Moba. Where your main army stands for a Hero you build up. And you have units that are good on a-move and they reintroduce the attack move rally of the WoL Beta . Mostly because Blizzard already as a really good Dota style game, that LotV could never surpass. So they should just give up trying to force their ideal game duration on a genre where it is just not possible, unless they increase the barrier of entry. Or in other words create objectives that force the game to end at a certain point. Otherwise it will just be enjoyable for a really small portion of players out of the rts scene. And not what they seem to hope for, a rts that everyone can enjoy. But it seems we can't change this particular goal of theirs anyway, so I'll just wait and see what comes out of it. And having low expectations can lead to more enjoyment! It's a wonder to me that CSGO does as well as it does when one of its most crucial fundamentals, controlling spray, requires so much practice. Maybe it's because lower-level CSGO games still closely resemble professional games, whereas that isn't necessarily true for Starcraft.
No, lowlev CSGO does not resemble good CS. I would say the difference is much bigger in CS as the games can be purely idiotic at lower levels. Even semi-pro games often lack in strategy and are decided by raw aiming skills when they rush B and do an A split every other round. Also spraying is not essential. You can tap and burst without special practice and only certain pros are really good at spraying.
|
|
|
|