You should be able to tell Queens to auto-inject larva.
I am totally serious. I know saying this conforms to stereotype and is like actively throwing away my credibility in these circles, but yes, that is exactly the kind of thing that is not an interesting decision that I think should not require the actions it presently does.
pretty sure that anyone who has seen bethryn's tier list in the league of legends thread knows he is pro trollin
he is a pro because he uses big words
My tier list is great. I can't help that that thread is populated by people who think that Zhonya's is redundant on Janna because she has her ultimate, casters don't get a percentage of their AP added to their tower damage, Berserker's Greaves are never worth the opportunity cost, Warwick should ignore his W, and Dear God knows what else.
The pros, such as NoNy, would whole heartily disagree with your assumption. Part of being good at Starcraft is knowing what to do, and then doing it. I just think you have a basic idea of an RTS that differs vastly from what Starcraft and Starcraft 2 actually are. That's fine, I guess.
I agree with them entirely. That is exactly what the status quo is.
So, are you all done being idiots yet? I'd like to get some sleep.
the night is young yet mon frere
edit: by the way, beth, if you were at all serious, you would have gotten a lot farther arguing that queens should auto-inject rather than your ridiculous targeting-priority-based-on-armour-type-or-hair-color button. but now look what you've done. you've gone and made a foo~ool of everyone, oh sexy sadie...
The problem with what you're saying Bethryn is that it would throw the balance of the game pretty significantly out of whack without really adding anything, and it would cause a bunch of weird situations that don't really make sense.
Take the change to siege tanks in the next patch. Now they would be really fucking weird against zerg, because of the roaches and the ultralisk. Normally, they would just shoot their targets randomly, so if you attack with zerglings and roaches, a mix of zerglings and roaches get roasted. However, with your proposed change, the roaches would get shot at and the lings would just run by. And if there were ultralisks, they would be target fired and the AoE wouldn't hit any lings, so the tanks would get run over. In this case, your change is worse.
Also, think about MM against zealots and stalkers. This would help terran a ton and hurt the protoss significantly. Marauders would rip through stalkers, marines would probably shoot zealots, and terran would be happy. But the toss would be sad, because stalkers are actually pretty balls against marauders, and they would really want to shoot at the marines. But then you have to micro your units individually to shoot marines, and if you a-move, they'll hit the marauders since they have the bonus damage, and then you'd probably lose, assuming equal armies. So your change would make this situation more micro intensive and automated in a dumb way.
Then you get cases like say the terran has a bunch of vikings and banshees, and you attack with phoenixes. He can use the banshees to tank now because unless you micro your phoenixes exactly, they will auto target the banshees, and the phoenixes will get ripped to shreds unless you micro them. Of course, you could make it so the phoenixes wouldn't auto-target something they're strong against if that unit couldn't fight back, but now you're getting into weird obnoxious territory where there are exceptions all over the place and the game doesn't really act in a consistent manner, which is bad. Like with void rays, if they came upon a group of marauders and marines, they would want to shoot the marines, but they get a bonus against marauders, more exceptions.
Overall, the change you're proposing is pretty bad and terrible when you actually think about it, which apparently you haven't.
So, are you all done being idiots yet? I'd like to get some sleep.
the night is young yet mon frere
edit: by the way, beth, if you were at all serious, you would have gotten a lot farther arguing that queens should auto-inject rather than your ridiculous targeting-priority-based-on-armour-type-or-hair-color button. but now look what you've done. you've gone and made a foo~ool of everyone, oh sexy sadie...
See, I would support this. I've said plenty of times that whatever can be readily automated and requires no thought or decision-making by the player should be automated. This would typically include Spawn Larvae but not Chronoboost or MULE. Unfortunately that'd introduce a bit of an imbalance right now were it implemented—Zerg would become much easier for new players to macro with than any other race.
I can't really think of anything I'd change in the combat AI, though.
So, are you all done being idiots yet? I'd like to get some sleep.
the night is young yet mon frere
edit: by the way, beth, if you were at all serious, you would have gotten a lot farther arguing that queens should auto-inject rather than your ridiculous targeting-priority-based-on-armour-type-or-hair-color button. but now look what you've done. you've gone and made a foo~ool of everyone, oh sexy sadie...
See, I would support this. I've said plenty of times that whatever can be readily automated and requires no thought or decision-making by the player should be automated. This would typically include Spawn Larvae but not Chronoboost or MULE. Unfortunately that'd introduce a bit of an imbalance right now were it implemented—Zerg would become much easier for new players to macro with than any other race.
I can't really think of anything I'd change in the combat AI, though.
Well the problem with spawn larvae isn't that it's not automated, it's that it's a shitty skill that's boring to use.
But we have had this conversation a dozen times already.
yeah I wish zerg had something more than "do this all the time, and then when you can because you have an extra queen or you screwed up and have extra energy or just because you want it that quickly, this one time, make a tumor." poor babby zerg. how many times. have we said this. "poor zerg."
However, with your proposed change, the roaches would get shot at and the lings would just run by. And if there were ultralisks, they would be target fired and the AoE wouldn't hit any lings, so the tanks would get run over. In this case, your change is worse.
No.
The player would have the option of choosing BETWEEN letting the Siege Tanks fire randomly at whatever's nearest (or if they prefer, targetting the shots manually; does anyone do this?) AND having them prioritise a unit type of the player's choise (e.g. roaches).
Also, think about MM against zealots and stalkers. This would help terran a ton and hurt the protoss significantly. Marauders would rip through stalkers, marines would probably shoot zealots, and terran would be happy.
Surely this is indicative of the actual unit balance, since this is what would happen in that scenario if both players have perfect micro?
This seems to be a testament to balancing rather than automation.
But the toss would be sad, because stalkers are actually pretty balls against marauders, and they would really want to shoot at the marines. But then you have to micro your units individually to shoot marines, and if you a-move, they'll hit the marauders since they have the bonus damage, and then you'd probably lose, assuming equal armies. So your change would make this situation more micro intensive and automated in a dumb way.
I'm afraid I don't understand how this situation arises from my change. This doesn't seem like something the Protoss player would tell his units to do.
Again, for clarity; the hotkey I want tells the selected unit to prioritise units of the type I double click on. I am not saying, "Marauders should always auto-target things they're good against".
Then you get cases like say the terran has a bunch of vikings and banshees, and you attack with phoenixes. He can use the banshees to tank now because unless you micro your phoenixes exactly, they will auto target the banshees
Okay, definitely, see above. Again, this is not the argument I am making.
keeping that sort of thing in your checklist is part of, you know, actually playing Starcraft
Just in case it somehow wasn't clear and I'm not actually being trolled, here, yes, I know damn well what playing StarCraft is about now. I'm suggesting it would be a better game if this aspect was changed.
Well the problem with spawn larvae isn't that it's not automated, it's that it's a shitty skill that's boring to use.
See, you're saying the same thing I am, but from the other side of the issue. We both agree that it's shitty; as far as I'm concerned it makes no difference if they let you automate it or just replace it with something interesting.
"Push butan, stay in game," every 23 seconds isn't a very good gameplay element.
yeah I wish zerg had something more than "do this all the time, and then when you can because you have an extra queen or you screwed up and have extra energy or just because you want it that quickly, this one time, make a tumor." poor babby zerg. how many times. have we said this. "poor zerg."
i remember during the IEM i think or whatever day9 and JP were casting they once said
"He plays zerg."
"Poor guy."
nealcm on
0
BethrynUnhappiness is MandatoryRegistered Userregular
Bethryn you are right about the game being intentionally hard to play. That's kind of the point?
There are different ways to make a game hard to play. Some are good, some are bad.
What, for example, would you say to the changes I suggested to pirat. Specifically, simply, worker units not returning to a mineral field after each mineral has been returned?
Suppose for the sake of discussion, there were only even three workers and one mineral patch and this illogcally gave the same economy as you get in the present, so nothing else was changed. But, you had to remember to send the worker back to the mineral after every harvest.
This would make the game harder. Players with better apm and multi-tasking would do better; you're rewarding skills and punishing deficiencies.
it's pretty obvious. Anything that makes the game easier decreases its appeal as an e-sport. If you don't like that maybe you should play an RTS that isn't trying to become the premiere e-sport?
if you wanted automated play, have you tried nexus wars? that's more or less what you're advocating
No, it isn't, and it's pathetic that every time alterations to automation in Starcraft come up, people try to strawman it with these kinds of slippery slopes.
Nexus Wars has almost no depth. There is no map space to explore, no reconnaissance, no different avenues of attack to defend or exploit, there is no risk:reward to expansion, nor any balancing between economy and army, nor any use of unit abilities at critical moments.
It's just sad that people seem to think that automating small things utterly destroys all conceptual depth to a game.
I made a big post responding to Bethryn but lost it to a database error :I
Bethryn stop posting we get it it's just a dumb idea and no one has the time or heart to give you a big multi-paragraph response showing you what everyone knows
Bethryn you are right about the game being intentionally hard to play. That's kind of the point?
There are different ways to make a game hard to play. Some are good, some are bad.
What, for example, would you say to the changes I suggested to pirat. Specifically, simply, worker units not returning to a mineral field after each mineral has been returned?
Suppose for the sake of discussion, there were only even three workers and one mineral patch and this illogcally gave the same economy as you get in the present, so nothing else was changed. But, you had to remember to send the worker back to the mineral after every harvest.
This would make the game harder. Players with better apm and multi-tasking would do better; you're rewarding skills and punishing deficiencies.
But does that make it a good thing?
okay so you can take things to extreme and prove what exactly? Blizzard are trying to achieve a balance between being fun to play for joe sixpack xboxgamertag and difficult enough that the top players are like wizards with a power level of 9000.
If you could write macros that controlled what your units and buildings did in a variety of complex situations then the difference between me and Idra becomes much smaller. It's like saying I should be able to ask deep blue what my next move would be in chess. Yes it would make chess easier.
So yeah, balance. At one end you have the hardest game ever made, at the other end you have the easiest. It seems pretty obvious to me if you are trying to create an e-sport that your game would be more the former than the latter.
if you wanted automated play, have you tried nexus wars? that's more or less what you're advocating
No, it isn't, and it's pathetic that every time alterations to automation in Starcraft come up, people try to strawman it with these kinds of slippery slopes.
Nexus Wars has almost no depth. There is no map space to explore, no reconnaissance, no different avenues of attack to defend or exploit, there is no risk:reward to expansion, nor any balancing between economy and army, nor any use of unit abilities at critical moments.
It's just sad that people seem to think that automating small things utterly destroys all conceptual depth to a game.
it doesn't change the fact that the core point is exactly that
it's not a strawman, it's a plain fact; doing the necessary actions in starcraft is what makes the game the game; it's not about each individual action, it's about the sum of those actions and doing them all in the right order and at the right times that constitutes the entire experience.
there are a few other games that have similar situations that aren't automated, but don't take 'thought' or seem very 'interesting.' magic the gathering, for example, has you play and employ cards called Land that generate mana. tapping (using) them isn't particularly interesting or exciting, but it is how you get the primary resource (called mana) to play your other cards.
that's why starcraft is so deep, because there are so many little things to keep track of. if that's not your preference then that's cool, but it doesn't mean your ideas are good for the game's health.
Do you think in any way that this is the right thread to ask that particular question?
Well it's that or continue to listen to the problems terran and protoss make up about how their awful play is somehow not responsible for their losses.
that's the measurement of skill though
"Push butan, stay in game," every 23 seconds isn't a very good gameplay element.
It's funny, but I actually consider spawn larvae to be an interesting ability. On paper it is boring, but:
+ In the early game, you have to make a decision whether your queen's energy goes towards injections or tumors to connect bases.
+ Because inject is so important yet unforgiving, zerg players need to structure their whole hotkey system around injecting. So you end up seeing interesting styles like 1 hatch/key, all hatch-1 queen/key, all hatch-all queen minimap injections, or all hatch-all queen backspace injections, all of which have their pros and cons.
+ The nature of spawn larvae rewards multi-tasking moreso than other abilities. Conversely, in the meta-game it becomes more powerful to disrupt your zerg opponent's flow with unexpected aggression or unorthodox play.
+ In the late game, when you're commanding 4+ bases, you actually need to decide if queens/base or additional hatches is better.
Kambing on
@TwitchTV, @Youtube: master-level zerg ladder/customs, commentary, and random miscellany.
it's pretty obvious. Anything that makes the game easier decreases its appeal as an e-sport. If you don't like that maybe you should play an RTS that isn't trying to become the premiere e-sport?
So yes. It's not a good thing per-se, but this is how Blizzard wants it, and the majority of the fan base. However, with the whole leagues and matchmaking system, this is balanced out so people who like to play construct-a-base can play against other people who play construct-a-base, and not be destroyed by someone who has the APM to shiftclick on every single Marauder with their stalkers.
It's just sad that people seem to think that automating small things utterly destroys all conceptual depth to a game.
and it's "sad" that you don't seem to understand that some people would rather find gratification in microing efficiently and having good unit composition. the reality, whether you want to admit it or not, is that the game is balanced with a lack of automation in mind. Yes, a player with crazy apm will be able to micro well and do roundabout what you're describing, but the they could never be as fast as two clicks and a button press. also, microing always means your attention is limited to one location. you sacrifice time and energy for high apm microing and that in itself adds to the depth of the game. what you want also makes it insanely easy it seek out lynchpins in armies and sniping out the problem spots. yes, i know that's essentially what you want, but it'd ultimately be making it easier while rewarding certain races or tactics over others.
tldr: it'd affect the current balance in the game in a very negative way due to being easily exploited.
Guek on
0
0Replace4DisplaceThe best girls are ships and guns.Registered Userregular
Posts
PSN: Robo_Wizard1
I am totally serious. I know saying this conforms to stereotype and is like actively throwing away my credibility in these circles, but yes, that is exactly the kind of thing that is not an interesting decision that I think should not require the actions it presently does.
Sadly, the world continues to turn.
My tier list is great. I can't help that that thread is populated by people who think that Zhonya's is redundant on Janna because she has her ultimate, casters don't get a percentage of their AP added to their tower damage, Berserker's Greaves are never worth the opportunity cost, Warwick should ignore his W, and Dear God knows what else.
I agree with them entirely. That is exactly what the status quo is.
Edit: Nope I didn't save it
the night is young yet mon frere
edit: by the way, beth, if you were at all serious, you would have gotten a lot farther arguing that queens should auto-inject rather than your ridiculous targeting-priority-based-on-armour-type-or-hair-color button. but now look what you've done. you've gone and made a foo~ool of everyone, oh sexy sadie...
Take the change to siege tanks in the next patch. Now they would be really fucking weird against zerg, because of the roaches and the ultralisk. Normally, they would just shoot their targets randomly, so if you attack with zerglings and roaches, a mix of zerglings and roaches get roasted. However, with your proposed change, the roaches would get shot at and the lings would just run by. And if there were ultralisks, they would be target fired and the AoE wouldn't hit any lings, so the tanks would get run over. In this case, your change is worse.
Also, think about MM against zealots and stalkers. This would help terran a ton and hurt the protoss significantly. Marauders would rip through stalkers, marines would probably shoot zealots, and terran would be happy. But the toss would be sad, because stalkers are actually pretty balls against marauders, and they would really want to shoot at the marines. But then you have to micro your units individually to shoot marines, and if you a-move, they'll hit the marauders since they have the bonus damage, and then you'd probably lose, assuming equal armies. So your change would make this situation more micro intensive and automated in a dumb way.
Then you get cases like say the terran has a bunch of vikings and banshees, and you attack with phoenixes. He can use the banshees to tank now because unless you micro your phoenixes exactly, they will auto target the banshees, and the phoenixes will get ripped to shreds unless you micro them. Of course, you could make it so the phoenixes wouldn't auto-target something they're strong against if that unit couldn't fight back, but now you're getting into weird obnoxious territory where there are exceptions all over the place and the game doesn't really act in a consistent manner, which is bad. Like with void rays, if they came upon a group of marauders and marines, they would want to shoot the marines, but they get a bonus against marauders, more exceptions.
Overall, the change you're proposing is pretty bad and terrible when you actually think about it, which apparently you haven't.
I can't really think of anything I'd change in the combat AI, though.
keeping that sort of thing in your checklist is part of, you know, actually playing Starcraft
if you wanted automated play, have you tried nexus wars? that's more or less what you're advocating
Well the problem with spawn larvae isn't that it's not automated, it's that it's a shitty skill that's boring to use.
But we have had this conversation a dozen times already.
Stalife Drop - Dropping Marauders onto an attacking Zerg force's Banelings as they close on your army to mitigate their damage.
but now i need to transfer that timing on my spawn larvas with my creep tumors
i generally get 1 or 2 down and they don't go much further than that
I tend to right click my banelings on the marines. They don't need do anything else besides chase them really.
The player would have the option of choosing BETWEEN letting the Siege Tanks fire randomly at whatever's nearest (or if they prefer, targetting the shots manually; does anyone do this?) AND having them prioritise a unit type of the player's choise (e.g. roaches).
Surely this is indicative of the actual unit balance, since this is what would happen in that scenario if both players have perfect micro?
This seems to be a testament to balancing rather than automation.
I'm afraid I don't understand how this situation arises from my change. This doesn't seem like something the Protoss player would tell his units to do.
Again, for clarity; the hotkey I want tells the selected unit to prioritise units of the type I double click on. I am not saying, "Marauders should always auto-target things they're good against".
Okay, definitely, see above. Again, this is not the argument I am making.
https://medium.com/@alascii
lol quotin dis
"Push butan, stay in game," every 23 seconds isn't a very good gameplay element. Let's do the time warp again!
i remember during the IEM i think or whatever day9 and JP were casting they once said
"He plays zerg."
"Poor guy."
What, for example, would you say to the changes I suggested to pirat. Specifically, simply, worker units not returning to a mineral field after each mineral has been returned?
Suppose for the sake of discussion, there were only even three workers and one mineral patch and this illogcally gave the same economy as you get in the present, so nothing else was changed. But, you had to remember to send the worker back to the mineral after every harvest.
This would make the game harder. Players with better apm and multi-tasking would do better; you're rewarding skills and punishing deficiencies.
But does that make it a good thing?
https://medium.com/@alascii
Nexus Wars has almost no depth. There is no map space to explore, no reconnaissance, no different avenues of attack to defend or exploit, there is no risk:reward to expansion, nor any balancing between economy and army, nor any use of unit abilities at critical moments.
It's just sad that people seem to think that automating small things utterly destroys all conceptual depth to a game.
That's how you know it's working. 8-)
edit: how the hell did my page load back on page 38?
Bethryn stop posting we get it it's just a dumb idea and no one has the time or heart to give you a big multi-paragraph response showing you what everyone knows
Do you think in any way that this is the right thread to ask that particular question?
okay so you can take things to extreme and prove what exactly? Blizzard are trying to achieve a balance between being fun to play for joe sixpack xboxgamertag and difficult enough that the top players are like wizards with a power level of 9000.
If you could write macros that controlled what your units and buildings did in a variety of complex situations then the difference between me and Idra becomes much smaller. It's like saying I should be able to ask deep blue what my next move would be in chess. Yes it would make chess easier.
So yeah, balance. At one end you have the hardest game ever made, at the other end you have the easiest. It seems pretty obvious to me if you are trying to create an e-sport that your game would be more the former than the latter.
https://medium.com/@alascii
Handmade Jewelry by me on EtsyGames for sale
Me on Twitch!
what are you guys talking about in this thread sup
it doesn't change the fact that the core point is exactly that
it's not a strawman, it's a plain fact; doing the necessary actions in starcraft is what makes the game the game; it's not about each individual action, it's about the sum of those actions and doing them all in the right order and at the right times that constitutes the entire experience.
there are a few other games that have similar situations that aren't automated, but don't take 'thought' or seem very 'interesting.' magic the gathering, for example, has you play and employ cards called Land that generate mana. tapping (using) them isn't particularly interesting or exciting, but it is how you get the primary resource (called mana) to play your other cards.
that's why starcraft is so deep, because there are so many little things to keep track of. if that's not your preference then that's cool, but it doesn't mean your ideas are good for the game's health.
Well it's that or continue to listen to the problems terran and protoss make up about how their awful play is somehow not responsible for their losses.
last 3 ladder matches, like requested Clickz.
Joe's Stream.
My impossible to beat 4 gate somehow lost!
joe
i cant look at that sig anymore. its boggling my mind
It's funny, but I actually consider spawn larvae to be an interesting ability. On paper it is boring, but:
+ In the early game, you have to make a decision whether your queen's energy goes towards injections or tumors to connect bases.
+ Because inject is so important yet unforgiving, zerg players need to structure their whole hotkey system around injecting. So you end up seeing interesting styles like 1 hatch/key, all hatch-1 queen/key, all hatch-all queen minimap injections, or all hatch-all queen backspace injections, all of which have their pros and cons.
+ The nature of spawn larvae rewards multi-tasking moreso than other abilities. Conversely, in the meta-game it becomes more powerful to disrupt your zerg opponent's flow with unexpected aggression or unorthodox play.
+ In the late game, when you're commanding 4+ bases, you actually need to decide if queens/base or additional hatches is better.
And then:
So yes. It's not a good thing per-se, but this is how Blizzard wants it, and the majority of the fan base. However, with the whole leagues and matchmaking system, this is balanced out so people who like to play construct-a-base can play against other people who play construct-a-base, and not be destroyed by someone who has the APM to shiftclick on every single Marauder with their stalkers.
and it's "sad" that you don't seem to understand that some people would rather find gratification in microing efficiently and having good unit composition. the reality, whether you want to admit it or not, is that the game is balanced with a lack of automation in mind. Yes, a player with crazy apm will be able to micro well and do roundabout what you're describing, but the they could never be as fast as two clicks and a button press. also, microing always means your attention is limited to one location. you sacrifice time and energy for high apm microing and that in itself adds to the depth of the game. what you want also makes it insanely easy it seek out lynchpins in armies and sniping out the problem spots. yes, i know that's essentially what you want, but it'd ultimately be making it easier while rewarding certain races or tactics over others.
tldr: it'd affect the current balance in the game in a very negative way due to being easily exploited.
Glorious.
He managed to find a gamebreaking bug all by himself that nobody else has experienced.