The two obvious sides to take on this topic are:
1) To make the game easier for casuals to play.
2) To maintain a high skill-ceiling for competitive play.
Although these two sides seem to contradict each other, it is possible to create a game that is easy to play, but difficult to master.
Let's list a few basic reasons why LotV is more difficult to play:
1) 12 starting workers
2) Less resources per base
3) New units and abilities
Combine all these factors together and several minutes into the game, you already find yourself trying to macro off two or more bases, scouting for all the new options your opponent has, and trying to decide what you want to do. This all happens very fast.
Throw in the new macro mechanics and you don't even have time to think.
Normal way to macro: make more workers, make more hatcheries, make more barracks, and make more gateways.
- You are steadily increasing your ability to macro.
New way to macro: inject larva, call mules, chronoboost, research warpgate, and add reactors.
- You are constantly making actions to maintain your macro.
In order to macro optimally, not only do you have to produce units, but you have to move your screen and spend mouse-clicks to call mules, chronoboost buildings, warp-in units, queue up workers, and inject larva. Your potential to macro is limited by your apm.
Compare this to increasing your macro by simply building more buildings. You still have to input actions to produce, but your potential to macro is not limited by your apm.
Less time spent moving screens and clicking for macro means more time moving screens and clicking for harass and army micro.
Blizzard has proposed two options:
1) Remove the macro-mechanics.
2) Keep the macro-mechanics, but make them easier.
Both of these options are a good way to make the game easier, but it also lowers the skill-ceiling. I think we can achieve both.
Make the new macro-mechanics a tech choice
Increase the investment required to unlock new macro-mechanics. The choice becomes:
a) spend gas on new macro mechanics to make more mineral-heavy buildings/units?
b) spend minerals on normal macro mechanics and save gas for tech buildings/units?
Some potential examples of changes to increase the difficulty of acquiring new macro mechanics:
- increasing the gas cost for orbitals, warpgate, and reactors
- add another requirement to research warpgate
- add a gas cost to each gateway changed to warpgate
- larva inject needs an additional requirement to unlock
- lairs and hives have additional larva capacity
I know it sounds very expensive, but the cost versus the benefits can be tweaked to balance.
Easy to play, difficult to master.
Casual players no longer feel obligated to use the new macro-mechanics. If it's too hard, or if they want to play differently, they can choose to.
- Some people like out-macroing their opponent and just making more units.
- Some people like out-microing their opponent and gain advantages through harass.
- Some people like out-strategizing their opponent by choosing the right tech path.
All these options are available. Players don't have to do everything, all the time. They can choose to tailor their build according to the playstyle that is the most fun for them.
What about normal-macro vs new-macro balance?
I argue that it doesn't have to be completely balanced. New-macro can be better from a competitive stand-point. However, the difference between normal macro vs new macro right now is completely one-sided. It is always better to play with new-macro at all skill levels. I think this makes the game much harder for casual players.
I hope I was clear and concise, but in-case my suggestions are terrible, I hope my intention and approach to the new macro-mechanics is understood. Make it standard for players to macro the "normal way", and introduce the "new way" of macro as a tech choice. I'm not the first to suggest this, but I hope I've presented a strong enough case for it to be considered.