PDA

View Full Version : Making the Macro Mechanics Permanent?



ArcherofAiur
05-20-2009, 09:40 PM
Just a simple question.

Can we improve the macro mechanics by making them more permanent?


Many people feel that it is busy work to continually go back to cast a transient spell. In Starcraft 1 macro always had a permanent effect. You made a worker and it would continue to provide benifits for the remander of the game. Same with a unit that you made using SBS. Perhaps this is part of the reason the Queens Spawn Larvae is viewed as less busy work then MULEs or Proton Charge.


Thoughts?

DemolitionSquid
05-20-2009, 09:55 PM
I fully, utterly support this. I fucking hate PC and MULES.

ArcherofAiur
05-20-2009, 10:14 PM
I fully, utterly support this. I fucking hate PC and MULES.

Would you like them better if they were more permanant?

DemolitionSquid
05-20-2009, 10:16 PM
Would you like them better if they were more permanant?

Yes, because they'd not be busywork APM sinks.

Nicol Bolas
05-20-2009, 10:26 PM
If the problem to be solved with macro is the "going back to your base at regular intervals to do something" problem, then this doesn't help.

You can't make any of the existing macro mechanics "permanent" without putting some kind of limitation on them. Mules would have to take up supply. The DP thing would have to have some limit that prevented you from just throwing it on your Probes and forgetting about it.

In short, doing this does not solve the problem that Blizzard is trying to solve.

ArcherofAiur
05-20-2009, 10:29 PM
You can't make any of the existing macro mechanics "permanent" without putting some kind of limitation on them.

Whats your reasoning behind this?

You can have a mechanic be permanant and require you to come back at regular intervals (See: Supply Depot)

Nicol Bolas
05-20-2009, 11:18 PM
Whats your reasoning behind this?

That it would be totally imbalanced?

Giving the Terrans free permanent workers isn't balanced. The current ability is balanced by the fact that, per OCC, you can only have X number of Mules in play continuously at any one time. Giving the Protoss free worker speed improvement is even worse.

And what do the Zerg get? The most you could do to Spawn Larva is have it permanently increase the rate of larva production. Which in no way balances with what the Terrans or Protoss get. A Zerg player would have to stay 2 or more expansions ahead of everyone else, and that's way imbalanced.

Even if you gave the Zerg infinite larva, it would never be balanced with what the Terrans and Protoss get.

Noise
05-21-2009, 01:29 AM
At first I was opposed to MULES but now I have come to accept them. They are not busywork, because you have to choose between getting them and scan, but of which are very important.

Proton Charge, at the moment, is just busywork and I really dislike it.

The Zerg ability is fine too, doesn't directly affect mining, and isn't busywork.

As Nicol said, making any of these permanent, whatever that means exactly, does not fix the problem, you might as well not have them.

RamiZ
05-21-2009, 01:43 AM
I would agree with Noise, i like Spawn Larvae, and Mules, but I really really dislike Proton Charge....Btw only thing that i hate about Mules is their design. It is just AWFUL! They look like some kind of Trucks and are extremely big. They are pretty painful for my Eyes :(

PsiWarp
05-21-2009, 01:49 AM
MULE's are Terranized WALL-E's, don't cha know :p

I agree with Spawn Larvae and MULE, and that Proton Charge requires further thought in its execution. A Dark Proxy Pylon isn't going to use Proton Charge any time soon without a mineral field nearby.


-Psi

MattII
05-21-2009, 01:55 AM
My suggestion for the Mule would be to make it permanent, but change it from an actual unit into a carryable object (like the Chrysalis, Crystals and Psi-emitter were in SC, but make it droppable as well) that increases the mining potential of SCVs at the cost of nearly everything else (no build, attack or repair, and takes up two garrison slots). As for Proton Charge, I'd like to replace it with Warp Resource, in which all minerals collected by selected Probes are warped back to the Nexus (leaving the Probes in place at the mineral field) for a cost of 1:2 (2:5 or 3:5 depending on balance) energy: minerals. I suspect the same could be done for the Assimilator.

Noise
05-21-2009, 02:00 AM
My suggestion for the Mule would be to make it permanent, but change it from an actual unit into a carryable object (like the Chrysalis, Crystals and Psi-emitter were in SC, but make it droppable as well) that increases the mining potential of SCVs at the cost of nearly everything else (no build, attack or repair, and takes up two garrison slots). As for Proton Charge, I'd like to replace it with Warp Resource, in which all minerals collected by selected Probes are warped back to the Nexus (leaving the Probes in place at the mineral field) for a cost of 1:2 (2:5 or 3:5 depending on balance) energy: minerals. I suspect the same could be done for the Assimilator.

So you remove the choice with the Mules that give the game extra depth and replace it with something awkward; and slightly change the way proton charge affects probes - but with the same result. It's still busywork with no decision.

RolleR_RATM
05-21-2009, 06:57 AM
What exactly the Dark Pylon do?
1. speeds up the Probes' speed (i mean traveling speed back and forth between the Command Center and the mineral field), or
2. speeds up the actual mining speed (in SC probes, scv's, drones mining time was longer than their travelling time).

the 2nd one can be a good tatical choice in mid-games when u have your main and expansion, and you want to quickly tech up at some point, and u decide to use the Dark Pylon to make it in less time.

n00bonicPlague
05-21-2009, 09:36 AM
What exactly the Dark Pylon do?
1. speeds up the Probes' speed (i mean traveling speed back and forth between the Command Center and the mineral field), or
2. speeds up the actual mining speed (in SC probes, scv's, drones mining time was longer than their travelling time).

the 2nd one can be a good tatical choice in mid-games when u have your main and expansion, and you want to quickly tech up at some point, and u decide to use the Dark Pylon to make it in less time.

It increases the amount of minerals each trip yields.
Probes move the same rate, and gathering takes the same amount of time, but the yield per trip is 7 minerals instead of 6.

unentschieden
05-21-2009, 12:15 PM
Iīd prefer a Permanent Mule that takes Supply. Itīs a bit of a stretch to explain itīs limited life.Its other aspects are fine imho.

Noise
05-21-2009, 12:20 PM
So how does that work? You pay energy to get a Mule permanently? Doesn't this remove the tactical decision between mules and scan?

SpiderBrigade
05-21-2009, 01:28 PM
Interesting ideas, definitely.

In terms of multitasking/decision making macro, I think this can be made to work just as well as the temporary units/boosts.

In SC/BW you only had to pay attention to the macro element when you were building a new base or expanding. Once you had worker saturation at your bases you could stop paying attentiong to them. Granted, high-level players are pretty much always trying to expand, or they have to replace workers killed in raids, so this doesn't apply to them as much. So similarly, having to go back and build more MULEs or upgrade more Probes will still be a factor even if they are permanent.

Now, of course, making the abilities permanent probably requires more balance work. MULEs are designed around the idea that you will only ever be able to have X per Orbital Command - if you can continue to accumulate them throughout the game, their benefit would probably have to be reduced. The same applies for a permanent Proton Charge. That's emimently balanceable by adjusting the costs and benefits of the ability, though. Heck, even if MULEs gain a supply cost, they still fit the enhanced macro function.

As far as decision-making goes that also is still just as important. In a situation where you will pretty much always be wanting to build new MULEs or boost more Probes (which for pros will be essentially the entire game, see above) you will not be free of having to choose between another MULE now at the cost of not saving energy for scan.

Something that I really like about this idea, especially for Protoss, is that it creates the ability to disrupt your enemy's economy extra hard if you can target and kill his super-workers. When the abilities were temporary, this is not a big deal because he is used to having to replace them anyway - if they are permanent you are really creating more work for him to do to keep up economically. That's good!

Nicol Bolas does raise some good points about the race-vs-race balance, though. If Terrans and Protoss are both getting a permanent +resources ability, Zerg do kind of lose out since all they get is faster production. Yes, that can be used to buy more drones but it's not quite the same as a free improved gatherer unit. However as usual he is much to ready to take any sign of difficulty as a reason to stick with the status quo. Zerg could be given a new ability, or Spawn Larvae could be adjusted to give a bigger advantage. For instance, they could revert to something like the old Mutant Larva which gave a production speed boost - or even go so far as a slight production cost reduction to match the +minerals Terran and Protoss are getting. Point is this is doable.

unentschieden
05-21-2009, 01:32 PM
So how does that work? You pay energy to get a Mule permanently? Doesn't this remove the tactical decision between mules and scan?

Depends on the relative values. How much is Scan worth? The mining rate and Energy cost of the MULE just have to be adjusted.

But more likely the MULE is suposed to be a "income spike". Last we heard they offer 3 times the mining rate from normal SCVs. It also depends if they can mine simultaniously with the SCVs. If not itīs only really worth it in understaffed Expansions. With proper "full" Resource lines theyīd just be in the way.

Crazy_Jonny
05-21-2009, 01:55 PM
The reason I don't support permanent is because the macro mechanics are competing with 'spells', which are also not permanent. So if your not getting mules, your still gonna get one of the other abilities, so your still returning to survelence every certain amount of time, right?

ArcherofAiur
05-21-2009, 02:32 PM
That it would be totally imbalanced?

Giving the Terrans free permanent workers isn't balanced. The current ability is balanced by the fact that, per OCC, you can only have X number of Mules in play continuously at any one time. Giving the Protoss free worker speed improvement is even worse.

And what do the Zerg get? The most you could do to Spawn Larva is have it permanently increase the rate of larva production. Which in no way balances with what the Terrans or Protoss get. A Zerg player would have to stay 2 or more expansions ahead of everyone else, and that's way imbalanced.

Even if you gave the Zerg infinite larva, it would never be balanced with what the Terrans and Protoss get.



Would it?


Ill be honest Nicol. Ive never really worried about the cost of extra workers in mid to late game. If your income is sufficent its just a matter of remembering to buy them. They cost 50 minerals compared to 200 min and 100 gas for a Reaver. Additionally, as others have pointed out, you can put a supply cost on them to hard cap the limit.


Also, if I recall correctly you have screamed IMBA at just about every macro mechanic that has been proposed. Its begining to sound allot like the boy who cried wolf. For all we know Zerg could be insanely overpowered right now.





The reason I don't support permanent is because the macro mechanics are competing with 'spells', which are also not permanent. So if your not getting mules, your still gonna get one of the other abilities, so your still returning to survelence every certain amount of time, right?



There is another way to make Scan as useful as permanent MULEs: Lower the cost of Scan. You can either have a "free" extra worker, "free" supply or 3 scans. All are tempting offers.

unentschieden
05-21-2009, 03:14 PM
There is another way to make Scan as useful as permanent MULEs: Lower the cost of Scan. You can either have a "free" extra worker, "free" supply or 3 scans. All are tempting offers.

Last we heard Scans are at 25 Energy.

Nicol Bolas
05-21-2009, 03:25 PM
Ill be honest Nicol. Ive never really worried about the cost of extra workers in mid to late game.

And?

For X number of mineral patches, there is a set number of Drones that, beyond which you no longer gain any benefit from adding extra drones. Once you have reached saturation, you receive Y number of minerals from these patches per unit time.

Both the Terran and the Protoss have mechanics that effectively increase the quantity of minerals per unit time you receive. Terrans do it with a second type of worker, and Protoss do it by making Probes better. The Zerg mechanic only decreases the time it takes to reach saturation (while simultaneously exposing you to enemy attack, since you're using precious larva on Drones and not units). This means they have to out-expand their enemy by a substantial margin in order to have economic parity.

Each expansion will have to be defended against a much wider variety of harassment and attack vectors than SC1 had. Reapers, Medivacs, Stalkers with Blink, Warp Prisms with Warp-In, etc. The more expansions, the more that the Zerg will have to devote to defense, and thus be less able to attack with.

Balancing this is simply not worth the effort.


Additionally, as others have pointed out, you can put a supply cost on them to hard cap the limit.

Which would be a limitation and thus be exactly what I said in the beginning. My very second sentence in this thread.


Also, if I recall correctly you have screamed IMBA at just about every macro mechanic that has been proposed.

Not all of them. Just the imbalanced ones. If you stop proposing imbalanced things, I promise will stop calling them imbalanced ;)


For all we know Zerg could be insanely overpowered right now.

Which could be corrected with more reasonable means, not this nonsense.

MattII
05-21-2009, 03:40 PM
Or you could give it a channeling 'Scan' ability, for a price of say 50 energy, +3 energy/second (50 seconds maximum, 17 seconds from a half-power level). Also, I've never liked the Supply dropping ability, it always seems like a cheap ability, I'd prefer to see those things get something not related to Supply, like maybe becoming two-space Bunkers or something (with an upgrade).


Last we heard Scans are at 25 Energy.

Where'd you hear that?

unentschieden
05-21-2009, 04:49 PM
Where'd you hear that?

I donīt remember exactly unfortunately. I agree on the booring supply drop though. Even if it works itīs kind of dull.

ArcherofAiur
05-21-2009, 05:04 PM
The supply drop is great for new players who havnt learned the timing for supply yet. Remember Blizzards mantra "Easy to learn, Hard to master."



And?

For X number of mineral patches, there is a set number of Drones that, beyond which you no longer gain any benefit from adding extra drones. Once you have reached saturation, you receive Y number of minerals from these patches per unit time.

Both the Terran and the Protoss have mechanics that effectively increase the quantity of minerals per unit time you receive. Terrans do it with a second type of worker, and Protoss do it by making Probes better. The Zerg mechanic only decreases the time it takes to reach saturation (while simultaneously exposing you to enemy attack, since you're using precious larva on Drones and not units). This means they have to out-expand their enemy by a substantial margin in order to have economic parity.


On the front page of these forums we have two threads on roach regeneration being overpowered. Well if Protoss get more minerals maybe that can balance it out. Or you can make zerglings faster or buff the infestor (100 damage plague plz) or give ultralisk more armour or hatcheries cheaper or any of a myriad of options at your disposal.

OR you could lower the costs of hydralisks and roachs so the zerg have more units (which is very zerglike). A blue just posted on the korean forums about how the roach and hydralisk arnt as mass-able as they should be.

The point is that the macro mechanics dont have to be perfectly balanced. The sumation of all the races Strengths and Capabilities is what needs to be balanced. Zerg in SC1 could expand faster than the other races and it actually added to the awesomeness of the game. So stop looking at one thing in issolation and going "oh that imbalanced". If we all did that we would never have any progress.




Balancing this is simply not worth the effort.


Having a fun mechanic is always worth the effort. (and most of the people in this thread attest that a permanant effect would be funner).

Nicol Bolas
05-21-2009, 05:37 PM
On the front page of these forums we have two threads on roach regeneration being overpowered.

No, we have rampant speculation founded in ignorance about the Roach being overpowered. That people who aren't playing current builds of the game think that something is overpowered is not evidence that it is.


A blue just posted on the korean forums about how the roach and hydralisk arnt as mass-able as they should be.

No, that was a blue poster clarifying what someone else said. This was not the opinion of Blizzard or anyone working at Blizzard.


and most of the people in this thread attest that a permanant effect would be funner

Again, if the problem is that there is no need to regularly return to your base, this is not an effective solution for that. That doesn't mean that there aren't better solutions than the one Blizzard came up with, but this is making it less effective at solving the actual problem.

More importantly, even if you ignore the other issues with it, if you want a mechanic that doesn't have the "busywork" component to it, there are better ways to go about it than hijacking a mechanic that was never intended to be used in that fashion.

unentschieden
05-21-2009, 05:40 PM
More production capacity is a valuable ability for the Zerg. For them it is a bottleneck for both economy and Unit production and indirectly even Teching (since Building uses up units[Drones]).

Protoss and Terran have the "advantage" of seperated Civilian and Military production. Their respective expansion in the categories Economy/Military/Technology limit each other only via the Resources.


@Archer: That would be the worst case. They definetly shouldnīt include a mechanic that is underpowerd AND teaching wrong behavior. Supply drop, should it be in the final game needs to be a REAL asset and not a noobtrap.
In essence itīs like the Mule, more resources. But since they are more limited in application they would need to be worth more in raw minerals to be used by anyone.

ArcherofAiur
05-21-2009, 05:50 PM
No, we have rampant speculation founded in ignorance about the Roach being overpowered. That people who aren't playing current builds of the game think that something is overpowered is not evidence that it is.

No, that was a blue poster clarifying what someone else said. This was not the opinion of Blizzard or anyone working at Blizzard.


Lol are you trying to prove my point that talking about balance on a forum is pointless?




@Archer: That would be the worst case. They definetly shouldnīt include a mechanic that is underpowerd AND teaching wrong behavior. Supply drop, should it be in the final game needs to be a REAL asset and not a noobtrap.
In essence itīs like the Mule, more resources. But since they are more limited in application they would need to be worth more in raw minerals to be used by anyone.


I agree. No reason it cant be a valuable asset and a noob saver.

Nicol Bolas
05-21-2009, 05:51 PM
In essence itīs like the Mule, more resources. But since they are more limited in application they would need to be worth more in raw minerals to be used by anyone.

There is a strict limit on the utility of supply drop: 200 supply. Once you hit the cap, it instantly becomes useless. So it can be more effective than Mules, since it won't always be valuable.

There's also the issue of time. Mules take time to kick in, whereas supply drop gives you an instant benefit. For example, if Mules mine 100 minerals in a minute and last for 3 minutes, supply drop is better than Mules for the first minute. Also, a Supply Depot costs an SCV mining time, not to mention the production time it takes to build it. If there is a critical time window when you need that supply (for your BC fleet, for example), then it serves a purpose beyond being a "noob trap."

I can see it being used in such a fashion for specific timing builds.


Lol are you trying to prove my point that talking about balance on a forum is pointless?

Saying that it is imbalanced to have a race that needs substantially more expansions than another to function adequately in a game that has lots of options for quick harassment and mobility is a far cry from stating "facts" (like the specific regen rate of Roaches) that are not merely dubious, but demonstrably wrong. One of them is theorycrafting and the other is an inference based on information that is known to be incorrect.

So unless you can show that either SC2 doesn't have lots of options for quick harassment, or that the Zerg have specific abilities that would allow them to effectively defend substantially greater territory than their enemy, then we're talking about two different things here.

ArcherofAiur
05-21-2009, 06:12 PM
or that the Zerg have specific abilities that would allow them to effectively defend substantially greater territory than their enemy,

Spine Crawler, Spore Crawler, Transfusion, lurker (9 range), speed bonus on creep, nydus worms, razor swarm...

unentschieden
05-21-2009, 06:19 PM
There is a strict limit on the utility of supply drop: 200 supply. Once you hit the cap, it instantly becomes useless. So it can be more effective than Mules, since it won't always be valuable.

There's also the issue of time. Mules take time to kick in, whereas supply drop gives you an instant benefit. For example, if Mules mine 100 minerals in a minute and last for 3 minutes, supply drop is better than Mules for the first minute. Also, a Supply Depot costs an SCV mining time, not to mention the production time it takes to build it. If there is a critical time window when you need that supply (for your BC fleet, for example), then it serves a purpose beyond being a "noob trap."

I can see it being used in such a fashion for specific timing builds.


Agreed.



Saying that it is imbalanced to have a race that needs substantially more expansions than another to function adequately in a game that has lots of options for quick harassment and mobility is a far cry from stating "facts" (like the specific regen rate of Roaches) that are not merely dubious, but demonstrably wrong. One of them is theorycrafting and the other is an inference based on information that is known to be incorrect.

So unless you can show that either SC2 doesn't have lots of options for quick harassment, or that the Zerg have specific abilities that would allow them to effectively defend substantially greater territory than their enemy, then we're talking about two different things here.

Just to throw in some points of interest. Zerg get the Nydus Network and Creepmovement as exceptional defensive advantages. Their defense isnīt necesserly "better" but definetly more mobile. Even if they have to cover more ground, they also have an easier time doing that.

MattII
05-21-2009, 06:51 PM
A while back I suggested giving the Lair and Hive advantages whereby they produced an extra Larva each (4 for Lair with a +33% spawning rate, 5 for Hive with a +50%), but at the cost of a bit of strength (drop their Hp to 1,500 and 2,000 respectively).

Nicol Bolas
05-21-2009, 10:22 PM
Spine Crawler, Spore Crawler, Transfusion, lurker (9 range), speed bonus on creep, nydus worms, razor swarm...

Crawlers are essentially immobile off the Creep. And if you're having to shift them around, by the time you have done so, any real harassment will have achieved its ends and left.

Lurkers are Hive-tech; you will never reach them without being able to defend adequately.

The creep speed bonus only matters within a base.

Nydus Worms are Tier 2, as are Razor Swarm and Transfusion. Reapers by contrast are Tier 1.

With the exception of the Nydus Worm, all of these means rely on having units/defenses already present at that location. If it costs X amount to defend a base, then the Terrans are only spending 2X, while the Zerg are spending 3-4X.

ArcherofAiur
05-22-2009, 12:19 AM
Crawlers are essentially immobile off the Creep. And if you're having to shift them around, by the time you have done so, any real harassment will have achieved its ends and left.

Lurkers are Hive-tech; you will never reach them without being able to defend adequately.

The creep speed bonus only matters within a base.

Nydus Worms are Tier 2, as are Razor Swarm and Transfusion. Reapers by contrast are Tier 1.

With the exception of the Nydus Worm, all of these means rely on having units/defenses already present at that location. If it costs X amount to defend a base, then the Terrans are only spending 2X, while the Zerg are spending 3-4X.


You, Sir, are the Master of Excuses.

RamiZ
05-22-2009, 05:14 AM
You, Sir, are the Master of Excuses.
LOL so true :D

Nicol Bolas
05-22-2009, 12:13 PM
You, Sir, are the Master of Excuses.

Wow, that was such an effective intellectual counter to my points. The evidence you provided to counter my argument, and the logic you used was irrefutable. Sir, your debate skills are legendary. :rolleyes:

ArcherofAiur
05-22-2009, 03:59 PM
Your arguements are ridiculous.

Creep bonus only matters within a base? What about overlord creep dropping?

MattII
05-22-2009, 04:15 PM
Oh, right, so you go and put a valuable transport and support unit in the middle of a war zone to give some of your units a bit of extra speed, brilliant. Besides, Excrete Creep is a Lair ability, not a Hatchery one.

ArcherofAiur
05-22-2009, 04:17 PM
Oh, right, so you go and put a valuable transport and support unit in the middle of a war zone to give some of your units a bit of extra speed, brilliant. Besides, Excrete Creep is a Lair ability, not a Hatchery one.


Whats your point? And yes they expect you to use creep dropping. Thats why they put it in the game.


Anyway this is all just a crazy side track. The real issue is the macro mechanics and how to make them feel worth the effort.

Nicol Bolas
05-22-2009, 04:46 PM
Creep bonus only matters within a base? What about overlord creep dropping?

So you're saying that, in order for them to defend 3-4 bases with the same cost that other races spend on 2, the Zerg must drop a line of creep from each base to each other base. Admittedly, Creep is at least free (relatively) in this game, but that still requires either a lot of Queen work with Creep Tumors (and thus time/energy not spent making precious larva) or Tier 2 and a lot of stationary Overlords.

Creep movement speed is simply not an effective way for the Zerg to defend multiple bases from predation with fewer units/resources per-base than other races use. Creep movement can help a bit for a main and its natural, depending on geography, but it will do nothing for bases that are meaningfully distant from oneanother.


The real issue is the macro mechanics and how to make them feel worth the effort.

I don't think anyone has said that they aren't worth the effort now. The concern has been that they are busywork. My point is that if you want non-busywork macro mechanics, these aren't the ones to go with. Modifying these isn't the way to go; creating others from whole cloth is.

ArcherofAiur
05-22-2009, 05:03 PM
I don't think anyone has said that they aren't worth the effort now. The concern has been that they are busywork.

Busywork-Noun, active work of little value
http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=busywork

As in not worth the effort.



Do you have ideas for non-busywork macro mechanics Nicol?

Nicol Bolas
05-22-2009, 05:37 PM
Busywork-Noun, active work of little value

Value to the gameplay, not to whether you win or lose. Stop macroing in SC1, and see how far that gets you.

The point being that it shouldn't be something that you just have to do, but instead something that provides choices for you.


Do you have ideas for non-busywork macro mechanics Nicol?

None that don't involve ransacking the entire StarCraft economic model, which is certainly not something that is on the table for Blizzard.

That fact however doesn't preclude me from pointing out poorly thought out macro mechanics.

unentschieden
05-22-2009, 08:18 PM
So you're saying that, in order for them to defend 3-4 bases with the same cost that other races spend on 2, the Zerg must drop a line of creep from each base to each other base.

You donīt get why the creep speedup is awesome do you? 30% can easyly turn battles. Not because you can walk faster across the map but because combat efficiency raises significantly. I really donīt know how to explain why movementspeed is good for melee units if you donīt get it already.

ArcherofAiur
05-22-2009, 08:24 PM
We could loan him a copy of Starcraft. I think i have a few lying around :P

Nicol Bolas
05-22-2009, 09:10 PM
I really donīt know how to explain why movementspeed is good

Movement speed being good is irrelevant to defending multiple separate locations. This is a question of how creep movement allows the Zerg to defend 4 bases with the same resources other races use to defend 2. Movement speed would only allow this if it allowed defensive units to move from base to base more effectively, thus allowing units to defend multiple bases effectively.

unentschieden
05-23-2009, 04:09 AM
Movement speed being good is irrelevant to defending multiple separate locations. This is a question of how creep movement allows the Zerg to defend 4 bases with the same resources other races use to defend 2. Movement speed would only allow this if it allowed defensive units to move from base to base more effectively, thus allowing units to defend multiple bases effectively.

The very idea behind Base defense is the defenders advantage. The defender needs less resources than the attacker to win a battle at the base site.

That means the bigger your defensive advantage the less units you need to hold of the attacker or rather the more time your reinforcements have to arrive.

In that regard Zerg are best off. Creep is "free", they get the 30% advantage simply because itīs Zerg Terretory. Protoss and Terran have to explictably invest to have an advantage.

Shure it doesnīt improve map mobility (unless you make creephighways)but thats what the nydus network is for.

RamiZ
05-23-2009, 07:21 AM
Oh, right, so you go and put a valuable transport and support unit in the middle of a war zone to give some of your units a bit of extra speed, brilliant. Besides, Excrete Creep is a Lair ability, not a Hatchery one.
Well Yeah? LOL Epic comment :D
Well there isnt other reason they include that in game ^^

Kimera757
05-23-2009, 09:10 AM
I avoided the thread due to the high temperatures. All I can say is I don't think making them permanent would work.

The macro mechanic is designed to please two disparate factions of the fanbase. One faction - the group that loves going back to their base and doing stuff - will hopefully like and use the mechanic.* The other faction - the group that doesn't want to do busywork - can (hopefully) completely ignore the mechanic and play for fun.

Making the mechanic non-permanent makes things worse for the first group.

*When they make the dark pylon require actual thought to use, I would assume.