Karune posts regarding PC, Batch 53, and YouTube (09/25/09)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skyze

um.. Thats like saying "Why make probes anymore, if they are forcing us to make probes, screw that"..

You dont HAVE to make probes, you can mine with the first 4 you get (or 6 in sc2 i think?) but if you want to have a better chance at winning, you make more.. Same as Proton charge.

---

I already said this argument is superfluous. Stating "Don't do things which lead to success if you want to succeed but don't want to do them" is hardly a profound argument. Building workers has been integral to RTS games since WarCraft 1, so has become an accepted part of them. Proton Charge, however, is not necessary and only introduces repetition as an illusion to macro decision making.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skyze

I dont understand what your issue with it is, its not that huge of an advantage anyways if people don't use it I bet. Bisu or any good protoss would still beat you easily without using it while you use it constantly.

---

Thought I maid it clear but I'll explain it again. My issue is with the monotony of the chore and the lack of decision making inherent within as it relates to success in playing the Protoss. Not sure about you guys, but I play games to escape the daily chores of life, while at the same time hoping to have fun and succeed.

Still not getting it? Allow me to break it down further:

1) Start up StarCraft 2.
2) Play a random match against another player online.
3) Choose Protoss as a race.
4) When you feel the time is right early on in the game, build an obelisk next to your Nexus.
5) Activate an internal clock in your head reminding you that from this point on you will need to periodically cast Proton Charge over your minerals every X seconds. Ingrain this in your head, and reserve a portion of your brainpower which could otherwise be used on fighting tactics. Accept the harsh reality that in order to be the best possible player you must do this every X seconds to maintain the competitive edge.
6) Realize this exact same thing will need to be done systematically in every subsequent game playing as the Protoss.
7) Close StarCraft 2.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blazur

1) Start up StarCraft 2.
2) Play a random match against another player online.
3) Choose Protoss as a race.
4) When you feel the time is right early on in the game, build a Nexus.
5) Activate an internal clock in your head reminding you that from this point on you will need to periodically MAKE PROBES over your minerals every X seconds until ~20 minutes. Ingrain this in your head, and reserve a portion of your brainpower which could otherwise be used on fighting tactics. Accept the harsh reality that in order to be the best possible player you must do this every X seconds to maintain the competitive edge.
6) Realize this exact same thing will need to be done systematically in every subsequent game playing as the Protoss.
7) Close StarCraft 2.

---

See the similarity?

I'd like to know what makes building workers accepted, and what makes proton charge rejected?

Who is in charge of accepting and rejecting RTS mechanics and features? I don't believe I saw a poll that suggests proton charge is too repetitive for a good RTS.

Why do I have to build Supply buildings(or units aka overlord) over and over... this obviously has no purpose other than it introduces repetition as an illusion to macro decision making.

I can acept the spawn larva and the mules, since there are multiple alternative ways to use them( larva offensive, scan instead of mules), but not the proton charge.
They should change atleast the proton charge, since in my opinion it's really "bad" compared to the other ones. It's the worst macro design of all the three.

Quote:

---

I'd like to know what makes building workers accepted, and what makes proton charge rejected?

---

It's essentially what D-Squid said: there are times and strategies when you stop building workers for a time. Thus, while 90% of the time you're pumping workers constantly, there is that 10% of the time when you're not, when you're doing something that really needs those 50 minerals.

PC has none of this. There is never a reason not to use it.

Also, ArcherofAiur clearly isn't conversant with Zerg play, as Zergs do not constantly build workers. They build them in fits and starts, between bouts of pumping units.

That's not to say that, in a more perfect macro-game, pumping workers wouldn't be removed in favor of something else. But it isn't nearly the obvious busywork that PC is.

Also, in SC2, pumping workers is easier. You don't need to go back to your base to make them mine. So it doesn't take your visual attention away from the map.

Quote:

---

Why do I have to build Supply buildings(or units aka overlord) over and over... this obviously has no purpose other than it introduces repetition as an illusion to macro decision making.

---

No, it doesn't. You are explicitly trading one resource (minerals) for another (supply). Further, these are on-map objects (supply-depots), and thus they are subject to attack. That is, you can attack someone's supply directly.

Also, it's strategic in nature. You do not have to build supply stuff unless you need supply. And the rate of needing supply is entirely dependent on the strategy you're employing. So it isn't a fixed "I must build a depot every X seconds;" it varies throughout the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas

Also, ArcherofAiur clearly isn't conversant with Zerg play, as Zergs do not constantly build workers. They build them in fits and starts, between bouts of pumping units.

---

Thats a good point but I actually started comparing PC to making probes. I probably shouldnt have generalized to workers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas

It's essentially what D-Squid said: there are times and strategies when you stop building workers for a time. Thus, while 90% of the time you're pumping workers constantly, there is that 10% of the time when you're not, when you're doing something that really needs those 50 minerals.

PC has none of this. There is never a reason not to use it.

Also, ArcherofAiur clearly isn't conversant with Zerg play, as Zergs do not constantly build workers. They build them in fits and starts, between bouts of pumping units.

That's not to say that, in a more perfect macro-game, pumping workers wouldn't be removed in favor of something else. But it isn't nearly the obvious busywork that PC is.

Also, in SC2, pumping workers is easier. You don't need to go back to your base to make them mine. So it doesn't take your visual attention away from the map.

---

I think where the benefit for casual players comes in to thing is that you wont need as many probes just to boost your resource harvesting. Rather than including probe production into your macro you could instead use the obelisk to cast proton charge a couple times on the minimap.

Considering you have to tap the key 1 time for every unit, you are tapping 1 key to get to your hotkey, then as many as 3, 6, or 9 times to build at 3 expansions. While in comparison, you can simply tap 1 hotkey, press the hotkey for PC, then select the mineral fields you are harvesting from on the minimap.

Building workers:
- Tap hotkey
- Tap worker key 9 times for 3 workers at each base (3 bases)

10 actions

Cast pc:
-Tap hotkey for 3 obelisks
- Tap PC hotkey
- Click spot 1
- Tap PC hotkey
- Click spot 2
- Tap PC hotkey
- click spot 3

7 actions..

I think they are comparable in immediate benefit, and in the long run save you much more time than building workers. Building workers will eventually have a bigger benefit, but for the casual player this may be a good trade off. Less time macroing and more time doing micro.

Quote:

---

Why do I have to build Supply buildings(or units aka overlord) over and over... this obviously has no purpose other than it introduces repetition as an illusion to macro decision making.

---

Wow bringing this up again? This argument is going nowhere, this was brought up already before and argued and now it's being brought up again?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pandonetho

Wow bringing this up again? This argument is going nowhere, this was brought up already before and argued and now it's being brought up again?

---

No offense, but simply saying something has been brought up before and argued doesn't mean a damn thing. I haven't brought it up before, nor have I argued it. So, maybe you've argued with someone else about it, but if they lost the argument or didn't lose the argument, that has absolutely nothing to do with me.

Now, if you actually have a real point to make, instead of just claiming something has been discussed and thrown out, please do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nicol

No, it doesn't. You are explicitly trading one resource (minerals) for another (supply). Further, these are on-map objects (supply-depots), and thus they are subject to attack. That is, you can attack someone's supply directly.

Also, it's strategic in nature. You do not have to build supply stuff unless you need supply. And the rate of needing supply is entirely dependent on the strategy you're employing. So it isn't a fixed "I must build a depot every X seconds;" it varies throughout the game.

---

Trading one resource (energy) for more resources (Minerals), is no different than trading minerals for supply. You are forced every 8 supply to build a new supply building or an overlord. There is no strategic decision in that process, as you either build it, or you cant build any units, aka causing you to lose the game. In PC you either cast it, or you don't get an increase in resource harvesting, however, that alone wont cost you the game.

I believe it was ArcherofAiur who had made that point a while ago.

Quote:

---

Trading one resource (energy) for more resources (Minerals), is no different than trading minerals for supply. You are forced every 8 supply to build a new supply building or an overlord. There is no strategic decision in that process, as you either build it, or you cant build any units, aka causing you to lose the game.

---

And you fail to realize that building supplies actually have other variables. They very largely affect build orders, supplies can act as walls or barricades, pylons allow for things such as building a gateway up a cliff and includes warp-in functionality, and producing overlords is part of producing units, which I believe Nicol brought up earlier is the important part of macro. Overlords have more than one purpose, so do supply depots in SC2, so do Pylons in SC2. What's your point? That it's just as monotonous as building workers? Well you're wrong.

Quote:

---

In PC you either cast it, or you don't get an increase in resource harvesting, however, that alone wont cost you the game.

---

It's a huge variable and if you lose you can bet that not using PC was one factor.

I table a motion for word filters on 'proton charge', 'pc', 'mule', 'spawn larva', and 'macro mechanics' between now and the start of beta.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Santrega

I'd like to know what makes building workers accepted, and what makes proton charge rejected?

Who is in charge of accepting and rejecting RTS mechanics and features? I don't believe I saw a poll that suggests proton charge is too repetitive for a good RTS.

Why do I have to build Supply buildings(or units aka overlord) over and over... this obviously has no purpose other than it introduces repetition as an illusion to macro decision making.

---

Building workers is an strategic decision. You pay 50 minerals now to slightly upgrade the amount of minerals/second you're going to harvest for the rest of the game.

Forget it Santrega. Ive had this arguement many times before with them. What they do is continually bring up differences until the have convinced themselves that making workers or supply is not a repetitive activity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArcherofAiur

Forget it Santrega. Ive had this arguement many times before with them. What they do is continually bring up differences until the have convinced themselves that making workers or supply is not a repetitive activity.

---

They are repetitive. But they're also not. You have to do them, but its not at a set rate. You don't have to build supply depots every 30 seconds. But you do have to build them eventually. PC has to be every X seconds.

PC: Must be done, every X seconds
Everything Else: Must be done, at random intervals

Why is that so hard for you to understand?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArcherofAiur

Forget it Santrega. Ive had this arguement many times before with them. What they do is continually bring up differences until the have convinced themselves that making workers or supply is not a repetitive activity.

---

I don't see it as repetitive or inane. Workers are borderline monotonous, but the fact that it's not done constantly throughout the game makes it tolerable. There comes a point where your peon line is fully saturated, and you no longer need additional workers unless you're Zerg or are expanding. Plus there's some decision making involved (do I buy another peon or save up for a building/combat unit?).

With supply there's some creativity and strategic options as well. Terrans can wall off chokes and protect buildings with depots. Protoss need to tactfully lay out their base to maximize the pylon power. Zerg are training flying units which can be mobilized to take advantage of their benefits.

Proton Charge has one action: Cast on minerals every X seconds. There's little drawback in doing it since the other abilities are crap (at least when in close proximity to your Nexus) and you can easily build another if you need it. No other component of this game requires you to cast it every X seconds for the entire duration. Not even supply or peon building.

I see where you're going with this argument of yours, but I really think you have no weight in it. Proton Charge is the weakest aspect of SC2 right now, and doesn't bode well for Protoss players if it remains in its current form. I firmly believe that this will detract from the overall enjoyment of playing this game.

My prediction: after one month of non-stop PC spam every 30 seconds, Archer will finally understand what repetition means, and shoot himself out of self loathing for promoting this disgusting mechanic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DemolitionSquid

My prediction: after one month of non-stop PC spam every 30 seconds, Archer will finally understand what repetition means, and shoot himself out of self loathing for promoting this disgusting mechanic.

---

Agreed. I can't believe this guy... We should creat a ums to make him understand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sandwich_bird

Agreed. I can't believe this guy... We should creat a ums to make him understand.

---

Ha. Lets build a game like Donkey. Every 30 seconds you have to click a button, and if you don't click it within 2 seconds, you get a letter. If you spell Donkey, you lose. But we'll make it so you also have to micro a marine around lurkers, and if it dies you lose that way too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DemolitionSquid

My prediction: after one month of non-stop PC spam every 30 seconds, Archer will finally understand what repetition means, and shoot himself out of self loathing for promoting this disgusting mechanic.

---

If you're stupid all you can do is repetition

Quote:

---

Rather than including probe production into your macro you could instead use the obelisk to cast proton charge a couple times on the minimap.

---

Probe production is far easier. It's just pressing a hotkey; it doesn't require clicking at all. Also, you can queue up probe production, so you don't have to be so exact with the timing.

Quote:

---

Trading one resource (energy) for more resources (Minerals), is no different than trading minerals for supply.

---

Except that it is. Energy is an inexhaustible resource. It is also a resource that is beyond your control: you will get X energy per Y units of time and there is nothing you can do about it.

Oh, and the supply buildings/units do other things too: walls; fly, drop Creep, and become Overseers; provide Psi.

Quote:

---

What they do is continually bring up differences until the have convinced themselves that making workers or supply is not a repetitive activity.

---

They are repetitive in the sense that you have to do it frequently. However, in the case of supply, you clearly build them as needed, not as fast as possible. Thus, the frequency is defined by you, not by an arbitrary time built into the mechanic.

And in the case of workers, it isn't even an issue in SC2, because you don't have to go to your base to do it. It's a simple "1sd" or "1s" or whatever. Even if you did have to build workers continuously (which, as has been pointed out, is a strategic decision), it's only a small annoyance. Oh, and workers cost both minerals and supply, which are resources. Real resources, not like energy.

Differences are different. If you use an analogy of two things that are different in meaningful ways, then it's a false analogy. Thus if you use a false analogy, expect the primary argument against it to show the meaningful ways in which the two things are different.

If you don't like hearing that kind of argument, stop providing false analogies.

Sigh why do you guys keep acting like I like Proton Charge? Thats never been my arguement. You guys just keep fanatically argueing against everything to the point that now your claiming making workers is at random intervals.

Having been repeatedly reminded of a certain area of things, where one soon finds annoyance of, does that to people sometimes. Shame this macro issue hasn't been beaten to death yet, such a tiresome and repetitive thing as all of the mechanics now stand.


-Psi

Quote:

---

hame this macro issue hasn't been beaten to death yet,

---

I wonder why... *looks at Archer*

Its all...

part of the plan...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DemolitionSquid

They are repetitive. But they're also not. You have to do them, but its not at a set rate. You don't have to build supply depots every 30 seconds. But you do have to build them eventually. PC has to be every X seconds.

PC: Must be done, every X seconds
Everything Else: Must be done, at random intervals

Why is that so hard for you to understand?

---

Why does PC have to be done every X seconds? In the third battle report there were several occasions where probes weren't charged. In the 2on2s recently updated there were several occasions where probes werent charged.

The point is, it doesnt have to be done every X seconds. To use PC perfectly, you would do it instantly every time it wore off. But, we aren't talking about using it perfectly, we are talking about forced repetition. I see PC, mule, and larva injection as something you use when you are running out of minerals or units (in the case of larva injection).

Heres my problem DS, nicol, and blazur.

If I am currently gathering more minerals than I can spend at a point in time, why would I waste time casting PC, or mule, or larva injection for drone purposes? It makes absolutely no sense to continue to use it if I am not having a problem with my production. Yes, I could use it anyway, and plan for the future of the game where I may or may not need the resources, however that is a choice, not a requirement.

Say I am at 180/200 on supply, and I have killed off 2 of my opponents 3 bases, and most of his army. I could spend time with a bit of macro to max my supply, I could expand again to make sure I have enough resources, or I could just attack and hope that he doesn't pull off some crazy miracle and get back into the game. Those are choices not something forced on you.

If I have 5000 minerals per minute coming in (without PC, mule, or additional drones), and I am only spending 3000 minerals per minute with my production, why would I feel the need at that moment to use PC? If you wouldn't, wouldnt that make PC situational? I could choose to use PC and try to gather much more resources, however, if I feel I am already ahead economically, say because I have successfully harassed my opponent, or I have killed one of his bases, or I have more bases, I may choose to spend all my time on the attack, thats a choice.

Quote:

---

If I am currently gathering more minerals than I can spend at a point in time,

---

When is this EVER the case? You can never have more minerals than you can spend. If you're already producing units, either build more workers, tech, expand, build supplies, or create more production buildings.

Quote:

---

why would I waste time casting PC, or mule, or larva injection for drone purposes?

---

Because your obelisk is useless for everything else? Why WOULDN'T you cast PC, if you have more money than you can spend as you say? If you did have that much money, you'd already have other obelisks taking care of casting the other spells that it uses. As for the larva injection, who said it was bad because it was only used for drone injection? It's only used because it's too useful not to be used. MULE is the only one that has a competitor which is scan, a scan is always useful.

Quote:

---

Yes, I could use it anyway, and plan for the future of the game where I may or may not need the resources, however that is a choice, not a requirement.

---

Er, neither is building workers... what happens when you don't build workers and your opponent does? He gets ahead of you in economy... what happens when you decide not to use PC (for whatever reason) and your opponent does? He gets ahead of you.

Quote:

---

Say I am at 180/200 on supply, and I have killed off 2 of my opponents 3 bases, and most of his army.

---

Why such a terrible example? You've already won at this point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pandonetho

When is this EVER the case? You can never have more minerals than you can spend. If you're already producing units, either build more workers, tech, expand, build supplies, or create more production buildings.

---

What in the world are you on? Show me a replay where you personally always keep your minerals under 1k the entire game, I bet you that you dont have any like that.

Most casual players rarely spend their resources as they get them, rarely. So the resources simply pile up. If I have 10k extra minerals just sitting there, and I simply expand like normal, what in the world would possess me to cast PC?

I want to add that im not arguing that there doesnt need to be something more given to the obelisk as a competitive ability, giving more choice. I think PC as it is being the only option is boring as well. However, I dont believe it needs to be always used. It wont be always used as it is now, even as the only thing, it simply will be the only thing used when you do need faster resource harvesting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Santrega

What in the world are you on? Show me a replay where you personally always keep your minerals under 1k the entire game, I bet you that you dont have any like that.

---

Stop living in the real world. You cant design games like that.

Quote:

---

If I am currently gathering more minerals than I can spend at a point in time, why would I waste time casting PC, or mule, or larva injection for drone purposes? It makes absolutely no sense to continue to use it if I am not having a problem with my production.

---

If you are making more money than you can spend, the answer is obvious: build more production infrastructure. Clearly you need more Gateways/etc or Barracks/Factories/StarPorts. The correct answer is almost never to stop getting more money.

Quote:

---

Say I am at 180/200 on supply, and I have killed off 2 of my opponents 3 bases, and most of his army.

---

Then you've already won and a 5-year-old can finish the game for you.

Quote:

---

Most casual players rarely spend their resources as they get them, rarely.

---

We're not talking about what "most casual players" would do. "Most casual players" would pulse PC occasionally instead of regularly and will often forget to build workers.

That people can make the wrong decisions doesn't make those decisions any less wrong.

Quote:

---

What in the world are you on? Show me a replay where you personally always keep your minerals under 1k the entire game, I bet you that you dont have any like that.

Most casual players rarely spend their resources as they get them, rarely. So the resources simply pile up. If I have 10k extra minerals just sitting there, and I simply expand like normal, what in the world would possess me to cast PC?

I want to add that im not arguing that there doesnt need to be something more given to the obelisk as a competitive ability, giving more choice. I think PC as it is being the only option is boring as well. However, I dont believe it needs to be always used. It wont be always used as it is now, even as the only thing, it simply will be the only thing used when you do need faster resource harvesting.

---

Casual gamers don't count because you can't play starcraft multiplayer mode casually and win. So PC doesn't affect casual players that much. If you want to win at StarCraft you have to either play a bit each day or play a lot at irregular intervals, all of this without falling in the hardcore category. So lets call the category between casual and hardcore "standard". Those are the players (with the hardcore category) that will play multiplayer the most and trust me no standard player would end with 1k for more than 15-25 sec except in late game or if they are playing against a casual player. At this level of play PC would really be a deciding factor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas

If you are making more money than you can spend, the answer is obvious: build more production infrastructure. Clearly you need more Gateways/etc or Barracks/Factories/StarPorts. The correct answer is almost never to stop getting more money.



Then you've already won and a 5-year-old can finish the game for you.



We're not talking about what "most casual players" would do. "Most casual players" would pulse PC occasionally instead of regularly and will often forget to build workers.

That people can make the wrong decisions doesn't make those decisions any less wrong.

---

So who are you arguing for? You? You telling me that you will always use PC? This is why we need to wait for beta, I'd love for you to show me you always using PC... I sure as hell haven't seen anyone else always use PC, and even david Kim didnt always use PC.

I think there is a major disconnect from reality here. Obviously you guys have some sort of "im going to play like a pro gamer" syndrome and you think you are going to be so good at the game you will always use PC as soon as its available. Thats a joke...

I know why DS is upset about this, I know where he is coming from... He simply hates the macro mechanics anyway, because you have to do them repetitively to use them. If they were autocasted, the guy wouldnt even complain a bit, however, the game would then be too fricken boring, not repetitive, just plain boring.

The ability to boost your production through faster resource harvesting or faster larva production is better for the game over all. It will allow faster armies, more fighting, and less down time after attacks. However, you can't just allow that to happen all the time, or else the need to play the game the way it should be played is no longer required. After a while you wont need to expand, because you'll have enough resources to keep a fight going, and the game will go to whoever won the massive war and got in to the opponents base. It would be like a fastest/BGH game all the time. So, in order to combat that, and give a boost to the action in the game, you give timed production boost mechanics, such as mule, PC, and larva injection.

You guys are fighting ridiculously hard because you don't believe you can use PC continuously through the game, whether because you are lazy, you have memory issues, or you simply don't have the speed in your hands. You aren't fighting the ability based on its effectiveness, but because its an APM sink. You aren't fighting repetition, you are fighting repetition which is hard to do. As the casual players I know you guys are, you wont use PC all the time, because you won't need to.

You guys are fighting as hard for no PC as TL.net was fighting for no MBS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sandwich_bird

Casual gamers don't count because you can't play starcraft multiplayer mode casually and win. So PC doesn't affect casual players that much. If you want to win at StarCraft you have to either play a bit each day or play a lot at irregular intervals, all of this without falling in the hardcore category. So lets call the category between casual and hardcore "standard". Those are the players (with the hardcore category) that will play multiplayer the most and trust me no standard player would end with 1k for more than 15-25 sec except in late game or if they are playing against a casual player. At this level of play PC would really be a deciding factor.

---

Rofl, Sandwich, if you are fighting for the competitive/pro crowd, believe me, they dont have a problem with repetition. They did play starcraft after all, where you had to go back to your base constantly to build workers and units. This has to be a casual issue, which its not an issue because casual players can't spend more resources than they harvest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pandonetho

Er, neither is building workers... what happens when you don't build workers and your opponent does? He gets ahead of you in economy...

---

Except that by training workers, you can expend minerals faster than it's advisable. A single worker needs like 50 seconds just to mine his own cost, so for 50 seconds you're going to have less minerals than you would if you didn't built him.

That's why the build orders gets analyzed a lot. If you queue that extra worker, you won't have the 100 minerals at the right time to build that first Pylon, or the extra supply you need before you run out of it.


.

I think Santrega has a very (choosing words carefully) realistic point of view. People here like to look at stuff and slice it up into good parts and bad while ignoring the big picture. I wouldnt be surprised if Santregas perspective was shared by the developers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Santrega

You guys are fighting ridiculously hard because you don't believe you can use PC continuously through the game, whether because you are lazy, you have memory issues, or you simply don't have the speed in your hands.

---

Trust me when I say I'm not arguing PC because of any concerns of shortcomings. I'm quite capable of mastering the simple tasks needed to succeed in most games, provided there's a level of interest and willingness to practice. My argument is a simple distaste for the notion that I'll begrudgingly feel forced to do something on a routine basis to maintain a competitive edge.

Let's be honest, even the best Protoss players will forget the occasional PC or offset the casting in an optimized timing. However, given two players of equal skill, the one who's most in tune with casting PC has a higher guarantee of success. Therefore it behoove's them to stay regular on the casting...no matter how monotonous the task is.

Arrogance aside, I'm all for adding complexity and depth to this game. I've been arguing for more since day one. More micro potential, more options available to players, more strategic depth. But never something as contrived as PC which generally doesn't sound fun.

It's bad enough we have to do considerable chores in our daily routines, but I'll be damned if I welcome the same in my most anticipated game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Santrega

Rofl, Sandwich, if you are fighting for the competitive/pro crowd, believe me, they dont have a problem with repetition. They did play starcraft after all, where you had to go back to your base constantly to build workers and units. This has to be a casual issue, which its not an issue because casual players can't spend more resources than they harvest.

---

Yeah repetitions that include a strategic background like repeting the same b/o to master it or similar stuff but PC doesn't involve any strategy.

For all you pro PC, this is really a lost fight. None of you would agree yourself that the mechanic is fun or involve any depth so why defend it so much?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sandwich_bird

pro PC

---

Again who is supposed to be pro PC?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sandwich_bird

Yeah repetitions that include a strategic background like repeting the same b/o to master it or similar stuff but PC doesn't involve any strategy.

---

If it didnt provide any strategy, there wouldn't be any reason to use it. The strategy is obviously to boost resource harvesting based on a need, whether its foresight of a future need, or the sudden realization of a current need. Maybe you just lost your army and you think they are coming to get you, so you want to double pump units or quickly dish out as many as you can... then you'd want to boost your resources and hope you can gain enough ground back to defend yourself. That is strategy.

Now, if you mean it doesn't give you a choice on what to use the energy on, then I agree. I simply disagree that you are forced to use it constantly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sandwich_bird

For all you pro PC, this is really a lost fight. None of you would agree yourself that the mechanic is fun or involve any depth so why defend it so much?

---

I think its more so a lost fight because you guys simply choose not to acknowledge valid points on the other side. Archer and I have both agreed that PC can be better, we simply don't agree with the reasoning you guys use that PC sucks.

I dont believe PC has to be removed, but instead altered, not an added disadvantage, but an added alternative.

I still believe that you can add something to increase warp in time of buildings, and units... Here is an idea...

Ability: Power Surge
Used on : Pylons (can cast on one pylon at a time per obelisk).
What ability does: Speeds up warp in time of buildings and units within the pylon's energy radius. The boost to building warp in time would be something like 15-20%, and the boost to unit warp in time would be 10-15%. The boost would provide enough of a production lift to create a strategic decision whether to use this, or use PC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Santrega

I think its more so a lost fight because you guys simply choose not to acknowledge valid points on the other side.

---

That's because there are none.

I'm going to quote a part of my editorial that's extremely relevant.

Quote:

---

What we arrive with is a mechanic that is strategically void. Proton Charge provides no choice; if you do not use it, it serves no purpose, and is wasted. A Protoss Zealot standing in your base can still be used to defend if you are attacked. A High Templar not casting Psionic Storm is saving that energy for when it is needed and useful because Psionic Storm has variable uses and times to use it. Neither the Zealot or Psionic Storm is reaching their full potential by being idle, but they still retain potential itself. An Obelisk not casting Proton Charge is wasting the ability, because it only serves one purpose, at only one time. APM sinks are mindless. There is no choice to them other than either you do the required task every X seconds, or you don’t. If you don’t, your chances of losing increase the longer you do not use them. They promote tedious repetition. You cannot use them to provide benefit because everyone is using them, but if you don’t use them you will suffer. The reason StarCraft survives even with spell-based mass effect is because spells have a chance to fail and have counters. Proton charge has neither drawback in any great quantity. What we end up with is a mechanic that offers nothing substantial to the game, but consumes time that could be better used on actual strategic action, and promoting real skill.

---

This part made me laugh the hardest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DemolitionSquid

StarCraft survives even with spell-based mass effect is because spells have a chance to fail and have counters. Proton charge has neither drawback in any great quantity.

---

We will ignore for now the part were you say Starcraft barely survives with the incredible burden of (scary voice) mass effect spells. But did you really mean to suggest that people wont be Obelisk sniping? Recent feedback says that Muta harass is really good for taking out obelisks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Santrega

If it didnt provide any strategy, there wouldn't be any reason to use it. The strategy is obviously to boost resource harvesting based on a need, whether its foresight of a future need, or the sudden realization of a current need. Maybe you just lost your army and you think they are coming to get you, so you want to double pump units or quickly dish out as many as you can... then you'd want to boost your resources and hope you can gain enough ground back to defend yourself. That is strategy.

Now, if you mean it doesn't give you a choice on what to use the energy on, then I agree. I simply disagree that you are forced to use it constantly.

---

It doesn't give a choice and you are forced to use it constantly unless you already have a big advantage over your enemy. It's quite easy to prove also. I could just do a ums putting 2 AI against each other (so that they have exactly the same level of skill instead of using humans) and give more minerals to one AI on a definite regular interval and give the same amount of mineral boost to the other AI on an irregular interval. Now if I run this test 20 times on a symmetric map, would that settle the argument once and for all? The AI receiving the regular boost would no doubt win most of the time.

Tbh I shouldn't have to do this because the results are so obvious. If you put skill aside, the chance of winning is only determined by an unknown factor of luck (made by possible imperfection in the AI and the impossibility of having a perfectly symmetric map). If you give more minerals to one AI he obviously have more chance on his side since this is major factor compared to the luck factor previously mentioned.