PC is (presumably) out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Perfecttear
Printable View
PC is (presumably) out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Perfecttear
Just for the sake of argument , then why not have autocast on the Quenn (like the medic) and on the OC?
Nobs would have autocast, while the more skilled players would do it manualy.
Auto-cast on PC, SL, and MULE defeats their purpose.Quote:
Originally Posted by Perfecttear
Remember, micro is the utilization of resources. Macro is the accumulation of resources. Meaningful clicks on units in the field is micro. Meaningful clicks in production is macro. The point isn't to increase clicks, but to make those clicks meaningful. Auto-cast is the absence of clicks, ergo it solves nothing.
Why shouldnt everything have an autocast option?Quote:
Originally Posted by Perfecttear
Only spels that constantly repeat have autocast, and the macro mechanics are .
It could work if the autocast would be less efective than doing it manualy. Any good player would do it manualy, but the autocast would be for players who don't realy care, just something, so there wouldn't be such a difference between a player using them and a player not using them.
rallymineQuote:
Originally Posted by Perfecttear
Because mechanics designed to increase macro tend to also affect things that can very easily spiral out of control (ie: resource gathering). So you need to make sure that this does not happen in play.Quote:
What i cannot understand is that the macro mechanics are being introduced before beta.
Also, because Blizzard didn't start SC2's development with macro in mind, they basically have to improvise. There are certain things that they could have done, but simply don't have the time to do if they want to release SC2 in finite expected time. The earlier that they can do this, the better.
Lastly, your question seems predicated on whether or not SC2 actually needs macro mechanics to make it competitive. That maybe it has whatever constitutes "enough" macro already and doesn't need more.
Um, you do know that the 40 mineral Drone thing was just a typo, right?Quote:
One of the things I am most looking forward to is 40 mineral drones and super larva generation.
If both of you swear a blood oath not to use them, then you may be able to ignore them. However, why wouldn't either of you break that oath in order to win?Quote:
I mean some people say you are forced to use them or lose instantly, while some say you can just ignore them?
So which is it?
See, the question isn't whether you can just ignore them. Even a low-skill player will use them in the early game when there's just not much to do. What matters is what happens in the mid game, when they're busy microing their army and they need to spawn some larva back in their base(s).
No, what's fun is the direct competition that micro brings and macro lacks.Quote:
Macro and micro are BOTH "getting there." What's fun is the outcome.
Micro is directly confrontational: your gain is your enemy's loss. You kill units, the enemy doesn't have those units anymore. You take some high-ground; the enemy can't move there without taking substantial damage. Micro is a swordfight.
Macro is like a race; your speed really has nothing to do with their speed. Your gain is not their loss. And the more time you speed looking at their macro/speed, the less time you spend on your macro/speed.
Of course, it isn't quite as simple as that, since switching between the two is important, so one can trump the other. But when people talk about preferring micro to macro, it is because of the direct competition of micro.
StarCraft is kinda like a race, but instead of red tape at the end, there are two swords. The goal is to get to the end and stab the other guy.
The faster you run, the more likely you are to get to your sword first. Killing an unarmed man doesn't take much effort, so if you get there first you win by default. However, if you get there at the same time, you now have a viscous swordfight to fight.
If you're a swordfighter, the running part isn't interesting. If you're a runner, the sword part is really no different from the tape that you'd usually have.
The analogy isn't perfect. I guess a rush is sort of like grabbing your opponent and breaking their neck right after the start of the race. Harassment is like trying to trip your opponent.
Unfortunately you've found the barrier.Quote:
Originally Posted by Perfecttear
The macro mechanics are there to give macro players a way to play fairly against micro players, to give them the ability to compensate for all the micro in the game. If micro players can set the mechanics on auto-cast and still do their microing, the macro players have gained nothing to very little.
I know its not confirmed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas
Again thats a micro perspective. You find different things fun. I cant tell you that what you find fun out of the game isnt fun so dont try and tell me what I find fun isnt fun k.Quote:
No, what's fun is the direct competition that micro brings and macro lacks.
Micro is directly confrontational: your gain is your enemy's loss. You kill units, the enemy doesn't have those units anymore. You take some high-ground; the enemy can't move there without taking substantial damage. Micro is a swordfight.
I'm not sure you'll be forced into queens.. it may be simply building another hatchery is close to being as cost-efficient.Quote:
Originally Posted by Perfecttear