Website Feedback
Closed Threads
IRC Web ChatTeamSpeak 3 (92 users)
Active: 8515 users | |
|
| diehilde Germany. April 27 2010 10:53. Posts 1514 | Profile # |
On April 27 2010 10:34 PanzerDragoon wrote:
Show nested quote +On April 27 2010 09:25 Liquid`NonY wrote:
Pretty much disagree with almost everything lalush is saying. The only thing I feel partial toward is that flying units should have a true "moving shot" rather than a "gliding shot." That's a good point. But a ton of the conclusions and ideas surrounding this core idea are pretty bad.
Best post in this thread there's no way you could really allow a moving mutalisk shot in this game though, with the ability to have as many as you want it'd just be too powerful.
so in 10 pages where many users took their time to post lenghty and thought-out posts you honestly think nonys 3-liner is the best post of the thread? Not that nonys post is bad but honestly, if it wouldnt be nony who posted it, ud never quote it and proclaim it as best post of the thread. Im gettin fed up with ppl getting all excited when a known good player has a similar opinion as themselves so they quote him with ridiculous claims like "best post" and think that somehow makes their own opinion/arguments superior. |
| | Savior: "I will cheat everyone again in SC2!" - SCII Beta Tester |  |
|
|
 PanzerDragoon United States. April 27 2010 10:54. Posts 822 | Profile # |
On April 27 2010 10:20 Half wrote:
Show nested quote +On April 27 2010 10:19 PanzerDragoon wrote:
Haven't there already been multiple games completely disproving the "no micro"
Reaper games, Nony's amazing Phoenix usage, Thor drop and pops, Hellion harass and flanks, etc?
You spent a whole lot of words to basically say SC2 and BW have different movement mechanics. I don't think you proved anything about how it "killed micro" just because you can't micro Mutas the same way anymore.
Compare the amount of micro needed to thor drop with the amount of micro needed to reaver drop.
It's about the same, except you don't have to spam the build scarab button. |
|
|
 rotinegg United States. April 27 2010 10:55. Posts 1717 | Profile Blog # |
On April 27 2010 10:53 diehilde wrote:
Show nested quote +On April 27 2010 10:34 PanzerDragoon wrote:
On April 27 2010 09:25 Liquid`NonY wrote:
Pretty much disagree with almost everything lalush is saying. The only thing I feel partial toward is that flying units should have a true "moving shot" rather than a "gliding shot." That's a good point. But a ton of the conclusions and ideas surrounding this core idea are pretty bad.
Best post in this thread there's no way you could really allow a moving mutalisk shot in this game though, with the ability to have as many as you want it'd just be too powerful.
so in 10 pages where many users took their time to post lenghty and thought-out posts you honestly think nonys 3-liner is the best post of the thread? Not that nonys post is bad but honestly, if it wouldnt be nony who posted it, ud never quote it and proclaim it as best post of the thread. Im gettin fed up with ppl getting all excited when a known good player has a similar opinion as themselves so they quote him with ridiculous claims like "best post" and think that somehow makes their own opinion/arguments superior.
Lalush has the right idea, but he couldnt have worded his thoughts in a worse way. The article is pretty much meant to offend Blizzard. A civilized attitude in an intellectual discussion goes a long way, and that is what this article is lacking.
edit: grammarLast edit: 2010-04-27 10:57:46 |
| |
|
| BladeRunner United States. April 27 2010 10:56. Posts 407 | Profile Blog # |
Didn't Bliz say up front they're only balancing the early game so far? So yeah, your assessment there is correct 
I agree with the summarized point that moving shot should be in for air units, and I liked the example of how it's a lot harder for a weaker army to take a stronger one in SC2, that should be looked at I agree.
But we know it's not a technological barrier; remember when hellions had moving shot, circling around the super slow to turn then Thor?Last edit: 2010-04-27 10:56:52 |
|
|
| ComradeDover Bulgaria. April 27 2010 10:57. Posts 758 | Profile # |
On April 27 2010 10:53 diehilde wrote:
Show nested quote +On April 27 2010 10:34 PanzerDragoon wrote:
On April 27 2010 09:25 Liquid`NonY wrote:
Pretty much disagree with almost everything lalush is saying. The only thing I feel partial toward is that flying units should have a true "moving shot" rather than a "gliding shot." That's a good point. But a ton of the conclusions and ideas surrounding this core idea are pretty bad.
Best post in this thread there's no way you could really allow a moving mutalisk shot in this game though, with the ability to have as many as you want it'd just be too powerful.
so in 10 pages where many users took their time to post lenghty and thought-out posts you honestly think nonys 3-liner is the best post of the thread? Not that nonys post is bad but honestly, if it wouldnt be nony who posted it, ud never quote it and proclaim it as best post of the thread. Im gettin fed up with ppl getting all excited when a known good player has a similar opinion as themselves so they quote him with ridiculous claims like "best post" and think that somehow makes their own opinion/arguments superior.
Well, "the best" is really subjective and hard to quantify, but Nony's post is certainly one of the better ones because it's clear and succinct. He gets right to his point and doesn't bother with the frills. The fact that Nony's post is only three lines long doesn't take away from it's quality -- He only needed three line to get his thoughts across.
Although you're right too, and a certain amount of it is hero worship. |
| | Bring back 2v2s! | |
|
|
| PanzerDragoon United States. April 27 2010 10:57. Posts 822 | Profile # |
On April 27 2010 10:31 Half wrote:
Show nested quote +On April 27 2010 10:26 chongu wrote:
On April 27 2010 08:32 LaLuSh wrote:
Blizzard design philosophy pre Dustin Browder-era
“Let’s design a great engine and worry about units, graphics and art later. Hell, let’s even throw a game in the trash bin and recode it from scratch if people think it sucks.”
Blizzard design philosophy post Dustin Browder
“Hey guys let’s design awesome, cool and unique units and worry about the game and balance afterwards. We can always fix that. Sure people will think the game has flaws, but balance and time will sort that out”
LOOOOOOL. So true. But i refuse to believe Blizzard went "SCREW MOVING SHOTS" > < edit: but man... the user-made video was really really terrible and painful to watch
I honestly think that the design philosophies were the same though  . In fact, we know for a fact that the philosophy the OP presented is wrong, because they first felt that the units weren't cool or unique enough, then they figured in order to make them cool, they needed a brand new engine.] That really detracts from the point :/
Show nested quote +On April 27 2010 10:29 PanzerDragoon wrote:
On April 27 2010 09:16 JadeFist wrote:
Incredible article. I agree that SC2 is not so much about skill, but rather about strategic planning.
That may be great for some people, but I find it really frustrating that I simply lose due to my build order, even though I am far mechanically superior to my opponent.
I thought you summed it up really well when you said that weaker armies simply cannot engage stronger armies, no matter how the units are controlled on either side.
I'm already playing more BW than SC2 these days after getting my beta key a week ago lol.
Isn't strategic thinking a skill also? One that is quite important to a Real Time Strategy game?
Nobody has successfully made a strategy game centering on strategic thinking since chess and Go though :/. Not "includes strategic elements", but a pure strategy game. Almost impossible to balance with dynamic elements like different sides. Starcraft 2 won't it.
I didn't say that strategic thinking would be the only element. It can't be in a "real-time" game because by definition it requires dexterity. |
|
|
| oxxo April 27 2010 10:57. Posts 940 | Profile # |
| OP thinks that SC1 didn't have bonus damage. Why take any of it seriously? |
|
|
| PanzerDragoon United States. April 27 2010 10:58. Posts 822 | Profile # |
On April 27 2010 10:57 ComradeDover wrote:
Show nested quote +On April 27 2010 10:53 diehilde wrote:
On April 27 2010 10:34 PanzerDragoon wrote:
On April 27 2010 09:25 Liquid`NonY wrote:
Pretty much disagree with almost everything lalush is saying. The only thing I feel partial toward is that flying units should have a true "moving shot" rather than a "gliding shot." That's a good point. But a ton of the conclusions and ideas surrounding this core idea are pretty bad.
Best post in this thread there's no way you could really allow a moving mutalisk shot in this game though, with the ability to have as many as you want it'd just be too powerful.
so in 10 pages where many users took their time to post lenghty and thought-out posts you honestly think nonys 3-liner is the best post of the thread? Not that nonys post is bad but honestly, if it wouldnt be nony who posted it, ud never quote it and proclaim it as best post of the thread. Im gettin fed up with ppl getting all excited when a known good player has a similar opinion as themselves so they quote him with ridiculous claims like "best post" and think that somehow makes their own opinion/arguments superior.
Well, "the best" is really subjective and hard to quantify, but Nony's post is certainly one of the better ones because it's clear and succinct. He gets right to his point and doesn't bother with the frills. The fact that Nony's post is only three lines long doesn't take away from it's quality -- He only needed three line to get his thoughts across. Although you're right too, and a certain amount of it is hero worship.
So is this entire thread, because it was written by LaLush. You have one famous player basically ranting and raving about the death of micro, and you have another player who has already demonstrated strong micro in his games saying that isn't really true at all. |
|
|
| ComradeDover Bulgaria. April 27 2010 10:59. Posts 758 | Profile # |
On April 27 2010 10:56 BladeRunner wrote:Didn't Bliz say up front they're only balancing the early game so far? So yeah, your assessment there is correct
Did they? I haven't heard that before.
On April 27 2010 10:56 BladeRunner wrote:
But we know it's not a technological barrier; remember when hellions had moving shot, circling around the super slow to turn then Thor?
Pretty sure that was a different unit from the Hellion. |
| | Bring back 2v2s! | |
|
|
| ComradeDover Bulgaria. April 27 2010 11:00. Posts 758 | Profile # |
On April 27 2010 10:58 PanzerDragoon wrote:
Show nested quote +On April 27 2010 10:57 ComradeDover wrote:
On April 27 2010 10:53 diehilde wrote:
On April 27 2010 10:34 PanzerDragoon wrote:
On April 27 2010 09:25 Liquid`NonY wrote:
Pretty much disagree with almost everything lalush is saying. The only thing I feel partial toward is that flying units should have a true "moving shot" rather than a "gliding shot." That's a good point. But a ton of the conclusions and ideas surrounding this core idea are pretty bad.
Best post in this thread there's no way you could really allow a moving mutalisk shot in this game though, with the ability to have as many as you want it'd just be too powerful.
so in 10 pages where many users took their time to post lenghty and thought-out posts you honestly think nonys 3-liner is the best post of the thread? Not that nonys post is bad but honestly, if it wouldnt be nony who posted it, ud never quote it and proclaim it as best post of the thread. Im gettin fed up with ppl getting all excited when a known good player has a similar opinion as themselves so they quote him with ridiculous claims like "best post" and think that somehow makes their own opinion/arguments superior.
Well, "the best" is really subjective and hard to quantify, but Nony's post is certainly one of the better ones because it's clear and succinct. He gets right to his point and doesn't bother with the frills. The fact that Nony's post is only three lines long doesn't take away from it's quality -- He only needed three line to get his thoughts across. Although you're right too, and a certain amount of it is hero worship.
So is this entire thread, because it was written by LaLush. You have one famous player basically ranting and raving about the death of micro, and you have another player who has already demonstrated strong micro in his games saying that isn't really true at all.
Huh? |
| | Bring back 2v2s! | |
|
|
| Senx Sweden. April 27 2010 11:00. Posts 5019 | Profile Blog # |
On April 27 2010 10:50 StaticKinetics wrote:
Show nested quote +On April 27 2010 10:24 MindRush wrote:
f
I really like the idea where, in this game, the crucial thing is the army composition.
Why ?
I tell you why. This is a RTS. Real Time Strategy.
This is not a clickfest, not guitar hero, not super mario brothers, not mortal kombat.
It shouldn't be about spamming some random command to get an advantage over your opponent. At least this is my opinion. Sc2 put the S in the RTS, so to say.
This. I just don't understand how it is so absolutely critical that you have to be a twitch FPS-style gamer with ultra fast reflexes to be good at a real time STRATEGY game. Microing is great and all, but the op is just far far exaggerating a small aspect of the game.
But is that enough?, having strategy and army composition as the only skill differential for a game that's supposed to be an esport for 10+ years? Is the depth of skill deep enough to foster that kind of longetivity?
And how can you say micro is a small aspect of the game, micro was a HUGE aspect of SC:BW and made the game great as it created different styles of players and added to the skill differential for the players that could handle both micro and macro. This should be built upon for SC2.
Why use the argument that "SC2 is a different game so everything we learned and loved about SC:BW needs to go out the window. Deal with it"
What kind of mindset is that to have? To disregard every aspect of arguably the best e-sport game of all time when making the sequal of it? Why not build upon that instead of removing it?
Strategy and macro is already there, its fine.What we need to worry about is the depth of the gameplay. Micro would make that depth alot deeper.Last edit: 2010-04-27 11:01:10 |
| | "trash micro but win - its marine" MC commentary during HSC 4 |  |
|
|
| ploy United States. April 27 2010 11:01. Posts 412 | Profile # |
On April 27 2010 10:57 oxxo wrote:
OP thinks that SC1 didn't have bonus damage. Why take any of it seriously?
Was thinking the same thing... so many posts like this mention how stupid/bad having bonus dmg/armor system in the game is...... |
|
|
| ethos Korea (South). April 27 2010 11:01. Posts 26 | Profile # |
Thanks for the article.
This is definitely something I've felt since the beginning of the game; SC has lost its dance.
I'm beginning to wonder if part of the design philosophy of the game is to cap the skill level to keep it noob friendly. |
|
|
| Rice United States. April 27 2010 11:03. Posts 1220 | Profile Blog # |
| I do agree about that drone attack thing, its the most frustrating thing ever no matter how you micro your drones you cant get a hit on a moving enemy worker |
| | Freedom will be defended at the cost of civil liberties. |  |
|
|
| bokchoi Korea (South). April 27 2010 11:03. Posts 5342 | Profile Blog # |
| EXCELLENT READ. Great analysis and comparison. I LIKE. |
| |
|
| rotinegg United States. April 27 2010 11:05. Posts 1717 | Profile Blog # |
On April 27 2010 11:00 Senx wrote:
Show nested quote +On April 27 2010 10:50 StaticKinetics wrote:
On April 27 2010 10:24 MindRush wrote:
f
I really like the idea where, in this game, the crucial thing is the army composition.
Why ?
I tell you why. This is a RTS. Real Time Strategy.
This is not a clickfest, not guitar hero, not super mario brothers, not mortal kombat.
It shouldn't be about spamming some random command to get an advantage over your opponent. At least this is my opinion. Sc2 put the S in the RTS, so to say.
This. I just don't understand how it is so absolutely critical that you have to be a twitch FPS-style gamer with ultra fast reflexes to be good at a real time STRATEGY game. Microing is great and all, but the op is just far far exaggerating a small aspect of the game.
But is that enough?, having strategy and army composition as the only skill differential for a game that's supposed to be an esport for 10+ years? Is the depth of skill deep enough to foster that kind of longetivity? And how can you say micro is a small aspect of the game, micro was a HUGE aspect of SC:BW and made the game great as it created different styles of players and added to the skill differential for the players that could handle both micro and macro. This should be built upon for SC2. Why use the argument that "SC2 is a different game so everything we learned and loved about SC:BW needs to go out the window. Deal with it" What kind of mindset is that to have? To disregard every aspect of arguably the best e-sport game of all time when making the sequal of it? Why not build upon that instead of removing it? Strategy and macro is already there, its fine.What we need to worry about is the depth of the gameplay. Micro would make that depth alot deeper.
OP's argument is badly worded. I think he is trying to say player should be able to overcome initial economic disadvantages in the early game through tactics and micro, adding an element of skill and surprise to the game, and none of that is existent in SC2. OP is looking at a small portion of the game mechanics that mar SC2, and I certainly agree that adding in moving shot like BW would enhance gameplay experience. However, OP went in too deep with just that one point, making parts of the article sound repetitive. The lack of high ground advantage and ambiguity of advantages coming from a contain are some examples mentioned in previous articles that show the lack of importance of tactics and unit positioning which make SC2 less exciting to watch than its predecessor.Last edit: 2010-04-27 11:08:49 |
| |
|
 da_head Canada. April 27 2010 11:07. Posts 3129 | Profile Blog # |
| sum things i disagree with but overall good article. i do miss my moving shot. |
| | When they see MC Probe, all the ladies disrobe. |
|
|
| diehilde Germany. April 27 2010 11:07. Posts 1514 | Profile # |
On April 27 2010 10:58 PanzerDragoon wrote:
Show nested quote +On April 27 2010 10:57 ComradeDover wrote:
On April 27 2010 10:53 diehilde wrote:
On April 27 2010 10:34 PanzerDragoon wrote:
On April 27 2010 09:25 Liquid`NonY wrote:
Pretty much disagree with almost everything lalush is saying. The only thing I feel partial toward is that flying units should have a true "moving shot" rather than a "gliding shot." That's a good point. But a ton of the conclusions and ideas surrounding this core idea are pretty bad.
Best post in this thread there's no way you could really allow a moving mutalisk shot in this game though, with the ability to have as many as you want it'd just be too powerful.
so in 10 pages where many users took their time to post lenghty and thought-out posts you honestly think nonys 3-liner is the best post of the thread? Not that nonys post is bad but honestly, if it wouldnt be nony who posted it, ud never quote it and proclaim it as best post of the thread. Im gettin fed up with ppl getting all excited when a known good player has a similar opinion as themselves so they quote him with ridiculous claims like "best post" and think that somehow makes their own opinion/arguments superior.
Well, "the best" is really subjective and hard to quantify, but Nony's post is certainly one of the better ones because it's clear and succinct. He gets right to his point and doesn't bother with the frills. The fact that Nony's post is only three lines long doesn't take away from it's quality -- He only needed three line to get his thoughts across. Although you're right too, and a certain amount of it is hero worship.
So is this entire thread, because it was written by LaLush. You have one famous player basically ranting and raving about the death of micro, and you have another player who has already demonstrated strong micro in his games saying that isn't really true at all.
The difference is, Lalush posted extensive and detailed reasoning for his opinion while Nony posted his opinion but no reasoning for it at all. If you read it again, all he posted is that he disagrees on most points, but agrees on one point. The reasoning if you wanna say so is "that the conclusions and ideas surrounding this core point are pretty bad"
You basically took all your own reasoning and opinion and projected it into a simple "are pretty bad" by a more respected poster. |
| | Savior: "I will cheat everyone again in SC2!" - SCII Beta Tester | |
|
|
| Mr.Pyro Denmark. April 27 2010 11:07. Posts 951 | Profile Blog # |
| Totally agree with every single point in this article. Thumbs up. |
| | P⊧[1]<a>[2]<a>[3]<a>tt | P ≝ 1.a.2.a.3.a.P |  |
|
|
| Captain Peabody United States. April 27 2010 11:08. Posts 1620 | Profile Blog # |
You make several very good point in this article...but it's buried under 1000+ words of insults, invective, and general trolling. Which really is a shame.
When I started reading the article, I thought it was a little brusque, but I found myself intrigued and at the least interested in what you had to say; by the time I got three-quarters in, I was shaking my head and silently wishing you would stop making stupid ad hominems, over-the-top assertions, bad suggestions, and stupid, childish insults and actually argue your thesis.
Nevertheless, while most of what you said about game design philosophy, many of your unit suggestions, and especially your method of argumentation I find shallow, annoying, and frankly insulting, you do highlight several important points, and your insights on balance especially I find very enlightening. Thank you.
However, you very much overstate your case. After reading what you have written, you have convinced me that ease and general level of unit control is very much crucial to SC2's success as a game and an e-sport. The most important "solution" here, I think, would just be a reduction in latency to LAN-like levels; following on that, a reduction in some units' attack animation time intervals to allow for a more on-the-go SC1 approach to micro would also be a positive change.
The thing is, though, even in its current state, SC2 does have a great deal of micro; however, the chief difference between the two games at this point is that SC2 right now has more "deliberate" micro, micro based around a few, very deliberate actions of the player, casting spells, moving and stopping to shoot, using Graviton beam on the right targets, force fielding in the right spots at the right time, keeping your Infestors alive after Neural Parasiting a unit, etc...whereas SC1 has a lot more general control-oriented micro, little things like Vulture patrol-move, Muta micro, Dragoon dancing, etc, control based not around a few deliberate actions of the player, but just finessed control of individual units on a very "micro" level.
Of course, this is not to say that SC1 doesn't have the former type of micro, and SC2 doesn't have the latter; both do to some extent.
However, I think we can all agree that SC2 in its current state would be improved by gaining more control-type micro. This much, at least, I can agree with in your article.
So thanks...Last edit: 2010-04-27 11:15:27 |
| | Dies Irae venit. youtube.com/SnobbinsFilms |  |
|
|
| Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 Next | |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
