|
Hey guys, I am a 21-year-old Hungarian Terran player. I began playing SCII in the late Beta, and it took about 4 years for me to reach GrandMaster. While it had to do a lot with improving my strategies and tactics, the improvement heavily relied on polishing my mechanics. As I have been working really hard, I was shocked to hear about the proposed changes in the macro mechanics of StarCraft, so I decided to argue against it in a short post.
The removal of macro mechanics is clearly a step towards making StarCraft beginner-friendly and easier in general. What proportion of the games played below mid-GM level are decided by the repetitive macro actions you have to perform? In my opinion, almost none. Macro mechanics only affect the highest level, where players undoubtedly deserve some advantage for the stellar macro mechanics they achieved with years of practice.
In Brood War, Flash dominated by having superior macro mechanics to everyone. In StarCraft II, Flash is nowhere as dominant as he was in BW. Why is that? Because SCII is already a more beginner-friendly game. Taking another step towards auto-casting spells, and decreasing the macro-mechanical advantages is wrong. StarCraft is not a MOBA, and should not be. StarCraft differentiates itself with in-game mechanics that reward practice with proportional advantage. StarCraft is a unique genre, and it should remain one.
StarCraft's beauty lies in (as stated by Stuichu) the complexity of the game. The winning conditions are to destroy all enemy buildings. It happens very rarely, as victory can be achieved in numerous ways. I definitely agree with the strategical and tactical approach being more spectacular than the mechanical one, but it should not be removed just because it is not visible to laic eyes. In addition, how much removing the macro mechanics will promote the preferred approaches? I think not much, because it is not the muling/chrono boosting/injecting that deprives lesser players of performing spectacular moves, but how many actions one needs to perform in general. Going further, you could argue that removing production mechanics completely (ie, auto-producing units) would lead to the game being more strategic and tactical. While that is true, do we really want a game that is almost identical to the so-common MOBA genre? StarCraft is unique with its complexity, and it should remain as it is.
I think there are alternative ways to strengthen the desired strategical and tactical side. In my opinion, there is a huge opportunity in changing some units - especially spells - to promote a more micro-oriented play (which once again, is not afflicted by having to mule/chrono boost/inject repeatedly,(especially not below the highest level). For example, Brood Lord's Broodlings work in a way that block movement, so you cannot really micro against them. They should shoot like Guardians did in Brood War, so the utility would remain mostly the same, while on the other side, more micro would be available. The other example is Psionic Storm, which in my opinion could have a delay of 1 or 2 seconds, to allow the opponent to split or retreat. The same applies to EMP and Fungal Growth. Unit speeds could be reduced by a small margin, to allow players to have more reaction time and more room to micro around (similar to BW, where it was even easier to micro (excluding the silly AI) because of the units were bigger). A good example is a game between PartinG and Life, where the game speed was unintentionally reduced. The slower game speed allowed PartinG to perform incredible micro-based play, even though the conditions clearly favored him in that scenario. I think adjusting units' movement speed could change the game that it could become more spectacular.
To sum up, I completely disagree with chainging an important pillar of StarCraft, the macro mechanics. Brood War was even more mechanics-based which made the game one-of-a-kind, and allowed BW to still be popular after more than a decade. To prove my point, I argued that muling/chrono boosting/injecting matters only at the highest level, where it adds another feature to the game: rewarding years of practice with a slight advantage. As I explained, it does not affect lesser players, as the advantages achieved are marginal, and below the highest level, one's play can be improved in numerous ways, so the removal of macro mechanics becomes disapproved. Finally, I suggested a few alternatives which could promote the strategical and tactical approach of the game, which in my opinion represent more forward-thinking than removing one great aspect of our beloved game, StarCraft.
|
Spamming injects is far different than rationing larvae and expanding up to 6 times and making multiple hatcheries. Losing these gimmick macro abilities won't make anything worse, it'll make it better. I say this as a previous BW player.
|
Game will get more complex with the removal of macro mechanics. They are responsible for quick 200/200 reaching and mostly for all-in play against terran. With the removal of macro mechanics there will be less black and white in the metagame but more shades of grey that will be harder to master.
I understand that alot of terrans are worried. They will get the most impactful change as sacrificing SCVs and relying on mules wont be available anymore. Also pure bio spamming wont be possible at all anymore (thanks god, I argued for that about 2 years).
|
muling/chrono boosting/injecting matters only at the highest level I would argue it is exactly the opposite. In the lower leagues you can basically win with whatever you want, as long as you have more stuff. And you have more stuff when for example as zerg your injects are on point. In the higher leagues the difference in performing those macro mechanics becomes smaller. Therefore you and your opponent can build roughly the same amount of stuff and it starts to matter what exactly you build, when you build it and what you do with it. With removing the macro mechanics the point where you have to start to play intelligently is lowered, which is good in my opinion.
|
You must be joking? The lower levels of Starcraft is EXACTLY where Macro is the main difference/limiting factor?
You spent 4 years polishing your Macro, now it's less important... Deal with it. There is WAY MORE complexity left, than you could ever deal with at once...
|
I would like to point out that we might expect the game to be more complex without mechanics but as i see it we just havent completely figured the game out yet. Sooner or later there will be a meta, a 'standard play' (relying on good balance of course) and then the lack of mechanics will appear in a bigger scale. Also i dont really see the allins getting weaker as both of the players are slowed down due to these changes. I would say they get a bit better even because they dont need to cause that much damage in order to be able to transition out of it (as qxc points out the worker losses have a huge impact in these settings in his article). Personally i just find the auto injects silly which only helps the lower league players.
Nice post btw :D
|
Let me explain this in an anti terran point of view. The same is true for many other scenarious tho.
The game will be more complex because decisionmaking against terran right now always includes the mule factor. This mule factor does exclude alot of options at any time.
In many situations it even narrows down the decision making to either passive/defensive pure macro or going for a full commitment all-in. This excludes alot of the low-medium commitment offensive/aggressive decisions that by default cannot deal enough damage to overcome the mule factor. So they are non existent in metagame and limit the diversity.
All-ins don't get weaker by default (at least we can't say anything about that yet). What changes is the following, let me give a simple example: ZvT, Z goes early 5 roach attack on 2 base. In the now state the commitment of zerg isn't enough to do anything but damage yourself. The option therefore is non existent as you lose every game by default with it. The only choice is to go full commitment =7+ roaches, + linge/bane followup or pure macro.
What changes: In LOTV you can attack the bunker or supply wall with 5 roaches, kill a few SCV that come to repair and then pull back without putting yourself behind. The commitment you put into getting the 5 early roaches just pays off by killing a few SCV behind the bunker as there wont be any mules anymore that make these efforts invisible compared to what you committed on this little attack. The same is true for other situations and matchups.
This is good for the metagame as it slows down the pace of the game to deathballs and 200/200 and requires alot more skill from all involved players to perform well in. The game will be decasualized.
Also due to the slower income and growth of all races, the value of every unit on the battlefield will increase. It is harder to get the unit in the first place and harder to replace it as well. Reaching 200/200 wont be the standard anymore. Therefore by default it will become much more important to micro and use your units at best practise than before.
In situations like the one above it will be much more important and impactful to get the best result out of your micro. Such as do your 5 roaches at the terran wall kill 3, 4 or maybe 5/6 scv? Those little skirmishes wont predecide games but allow players to slowly work to victory. Many of these little skirmishes within a single game will make games become more back and by default more even as it becomes more likely that small advantages/disadvantages are equalizing each other over time. The higher the number of little skirmishes in a single game get the lower the variance of the outcome is (compare markowitz). The game gets more rewarding and less punishing at the same time.
It is going to be the saving grace for SC2.
|
On August 25 2015 21:15 Psz wrote: In Brood War, Flash dominated by having superior macro mechanics to everyone. In StarCraft II, Flash is nowhere as dominant as he was in BW. Why is that? Because SCII is already a more beginner-friendly game. Taking another step towards auto-casting spells, and decreasing the macro-mechanical advantages is wrong. StarCraft is not a MOBA, and should not be. StarCraft differentiates itself with in-game mechanics that reward practice with proportional advantage. StarCraft is a unique genre, and it should remain one. Flash would dominate SC2 if he'd picked a race that fits his style, as Classic did, instead of trying to force his mechanically superior late-game-style on the midgame only race terran.
Furthermore BW has no mules, no injects or other macro spells. To be good at BW macro you just had to nail scvs and pylons. The only problematic thing is that zerg now is now kinda chillaxed but I am certain that can be taken account for in other ways.
Isn't it also funny that you say SC2 is turning into a mobo, the genre where everything has spells and abilities, when they're actually removing some spells in favour of plain old BW macro?
|
It is very sad that almost everyone looks at mules as they were a boost to the Terran economy which puts them ahead of their Protoss or Zerg counterparts. Have you ever wondered that Zerg can make multiple workers at the same time, while Protoss can chrono boost which allows them to get far ahead in worker counts rather easily? On top of that, while making the OC, you lose 2 worker-worths of time. Mules make up for not having the ability to produce multiple workers or chrono-boost, and if you mess up, you are behind.
In low worker count-scenarios, yes, mules can help you come back. But if you lose workers, you cannot replace them as quickly as P or Z can. It is rather simple to understand unless you are below a level where a couple hours of difference in total practice decides the game in one's favor.
Finally, I am not complaining about balance, I do not think the changes would put any race in an advantageous position at any level, my point is that it narrows down the opportunities provided in the game. For balance whining and accusations of it, please find another topic.
|
@neptunusfisk
1) In BW, simply producing units and managing your economy were about 100 times more difficult than in SC2, so it was way more mechanics-based
2) I am not saying that SCis becoming a moba, I just don't want SC to become as casual as moba's are, where players can play fairly well right away, where in SC you need to actually practice.
Hope you get my point.
|
On August 25 2015 23:43 Psz wrote: It is very sad that almost everyone looks at mules as they were a boost to the Terran economy which puts them ahead of their Protoss or Zerg counterparts. ...
For a GM player your reading comprehension is very limited. Just as limited as the strategic diversity of SC2 probably. Mules are fine in the 15 min no rush into scv pull meta in terms of balance. If you want to keep this kind of gameplay then you gotta argue for mules. If you want to have gameplay more close to BW, then you should better argue against them.
On August 26 2015 00:15 Psz wrote: @neptunusfisk
1) In BW, simply producing units and managing your economy were about 100 times more difficult than in SC2, so it was way more mechanics-based
2) I am not saying that SCis becoming a moba, I just don't want SC to become as casual as moba's are, where players can play fairly well right away, where in SC you need to actually practice.
Hope you get my point.
1. BW is way slower than SC2. It was alot more possible to do all these tasks in bw than in SC2. 2. The game is now in its casualized state for the named reasons and removing the macro mechanics is going to turn it back.
Let me go into detail: How comes that you believe the game gets casualized by removing the constraint for zerg to do 2 extra clicks per hatchery each cycle throughout the whole game? Casuals can exactly learn these type of tasks easily to a certain extend.
How comes that you think the game doesn't get casualized by the macro mechanic that allows terran to be loose with scv, scale down dmg dealt to the economy etc.
Why do you think is remaxing 200/200 as zerg into another 200/200 different unit within one cycle not casual style?
Why do you think deathball play and quickly going for 200/200 is not casual style of play?
... for me the latter is casual style of play and that is what we got.
|
1. BW is way slower than SC2. It was alot more possible to do all these tasks in bw than in SC2.
I would disagree, the main factor that made macro so much more difficult in brood war was the UI because it was so much more difficult to manage. I would argue that keeping the macro mechanics in the game is fine. Im in Diamond and using these mechanics become almost instinctive after a certain amount of time. I pride my self in having good mechanics more than anything else. This means that when I watch a VOD I can get way more out of it because I can focus purely on executing that strategy in my own game instead of having to worry about macro because it is instinctive. Now lets look at this scenario with no macro mechanics. In the new system cutting scv's for terran will be much more common place and more important to pay attention to. For a new player this is a really minute detail and it is doubtful they will pick up on this when watching a game.
|
I don't SCV-pull, I play TvP Maru-style (thank you for asking), and pretty much enjoy that I also need to drop mules while harassing in multiple places to make it possible in the first place. Also, once again, mules don't allow you to overwhelm your opponent with superior economy leading to a mid-game timing, mules make up for not having larvae or chrono.
If you play Bio Terran, you don't have any options to transiton in late game other than going for more Bio, for which yes, mules are essential. But given how ineffective Bio is vs gas heavy units, mules aren't a balance issue, and never have been. I would be happy if I had the same opportunity to get a stronger unit compositon in the late game, given I wen't for a Bio mid game.
And finally, I am bot complaining about balance. I just don't want a pillar of the game collapsed, like in the first picture in my post.
|
@LSN
Go whine about balance elsewhere. You are clearly not even close to decent level arguing vs mules and deathballs.
|
On August 26 2015 01:00 Psz wrote: @LSN
Go whine about balance elsewhere. You are clearly not even close to decent level arguing vs mules and deathballs.
Thats your only argument? You argue that the game is going to get more casual with the changes due to a single thing that might get more casual. You miss that mulitple other aspect of the game get less casual. What you say? Is it that you play terran and want to keep these things that you find convenient even tho they make the game more casual? Why having the casual debate at all then?
I am into RTS gaming since 1995/96, a point of time where you were about to be born. Do you really believe that you got the big picture over me with your 4/5 years of experience?
|
I'm definitely for a toning down of the macro mechanics because it'll suit the economy far better.
On the other hand, I'd really like a version with no removal but just toning down to be tested.
|
On August 26 2015 01:03 LSN wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2015 01:00 Psz wrote: @LSN
Go whine about balance elsewhere. You are clearly not even close to decent level arguing vs mules and deathballs. Thats your only argument? You argue that the game is going to get more casual with the changes due to a single thing that might get more casual. You miss that mulitple other aspect of the game get less casual. What you say? Is it that you play terran and want to keep these things that you find convenient even tho they make the game more casual? Why having the casual debate at all then? I am into RTS gaming since 1995/96, a point of time where you were about to be born. Do you really believe that you got the big picture over me with your 4/5 years of experience? Do you know what skill cap is? Do you know what balance is? This thread is about skill cap, not balance and I deeply agree with OP. If we take out these mechanics from the game we're lowering the skill cap required to play the game at the highest level, and allowing lower level players closer to beating players better than them because the better players wont have ENOUGH possibilities to best their opponents. Its like the same thing with protoss, the miniscule difference where you can really show that you are the better one. You may be playing rtses since '95 but you are still stupid and cant comprehend simple things. Ur silver tops. Please stop your damn balance whining, nobody cares about your silver level tears. Ur just a typical noob who gets rekt by mass marines in silver and goes on bnet to whine about how overpowered the other race is while most people would probably beat you by making only workers. Please refrain from posting stupid shit in the future, thank you.
|
I honestly enjoy the removal of macro mechanics. Despite blatant and obvious balance flaws, it made the game less snowbally and less about maxing out as quickly as possible to get a deathball. The OP seems to me like just a general balance whine. There are other ways to improve the game than having pointless repetitive tasks which destroy the pacing of the game to such an extreme extent.
|
On August 26 2015 01:04 [PkF] Wire wrote: I'm definitely for a toning down of the macro mechanics because it'll suit the economy far better.
On the other hand, I'd really like a version with no removal but just toning down to be tested.
I'm ok for the game to be harder by macro requiring more actions but it should not be due to macro boosters like it is right now. I would rather that Blizzard remove Automine and MBS before they bring back the macro boosters. The pacing of the game after these are removed is perfect now. In fact Blizzard should go one more step and remove injects altogether. I think a worthwhile discussion would be how to make macro harder without it providing boosts to the economy. I can get behind that.
|
On August 26 2015 04:00 actionjezuz wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2015 01:03 LSN wrote:On August 26 2015 01:00 Psz wrote: @LSN
Go whine about balance elsewhere. You are clearly not even close to decent level arguing vs mules and deathballs. Thats your only argument? You argue that the game is going to get more casual with the changes due to a single thing that might get more casual. You miss that mulitple other aspect of the game get less casual. What you say? Is it that you play terran and want to keep these things that you find convenient even tho they make the game more casual? Why having the casual debate at all then? I am into RTS gaming since 1995/96, a point of time where you were about to be born. Do you really believe that you got the big picture over me with your 4/5 years of experience? Do you know what skill cap is? Do you know what balance is? This thread is about skill cap, not balance and I deeply agree with OP. If we take out these mechanics from the game we're lowering the skill cap required to play the game at the highest level, and allowing lower level players closer to beating players better than them because the better players wont have ENOUGH possibilities to best their opponents. Its like the same thing with protoss, the miniscule difference where you can really show that you are the better one. You may be playing rtses since '95 but you are still stupid and cant comprehend simple things. Ur silver tops. Please stop your damn balance whining, nobody cares about your silver level tears. Ur just a typical noob who gets rekt by mass marines in silver and goes on bnet to whine about how overpowered the other race is while most people would probably beat you by making only workers. Please refrain from posting stupid shit in the future, thank you.
Hilarious post. :D I am only talking about game design and skill caps here unlike you. If your friend wants higher skill cap for terran, why is he denying the removal of mules? Mules lower the skill cap of terran without doubt. lol
The answer is easy: The OP and as well your post is only designed to be a balance whine. You are trying to put the focus solely on the single thing that is potentially (injecting larva = skill?) lowering the skill cap but ignoring those many more things that are going to increase the overall skill cap of the game and all races.
|
|
|
|