Macro Mechanics Discussion Thread

Here are some working headings with which I have tried to summarise all the themes that have been discussed in this thread. Post your suggestion for each heading and try to be as brief and clear as possible. Later we will have to appoint an editor to pick the best ones or vote on them.

Suggested headings for the unified document:

-Multiplicative concern explained:

-Multiplicative concern suggested solutions:



-Concern of lack of tension explained:

-Concern of lack of tension suggested solutions:



-Concern of lack of spell competition explained:

-Concern of lack of spell competition suggested solution:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by supersonic

Yeah but then when theres so many units psi storm > everything.

I would rather keep that idea for a UMS, not that it's not good!! but just cause the formula for SC works so well, keeping the Econ tight, until 30min+ games when the all the bases on the map are taken up.

---

Well here is the thing. The closest game that approximates the current economic model was SC1.

The process of sending a SCV to mine was a Attention->units process. Progamers had to work very hard to spend all the money they made.
When they macroed correctly it was like they were given free money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rake

Here are some working headings with which I have tried to summarise all the themes that have been discussed in this thread. Post your suggestion for each heading and try to be as brief and clear as possible. Later we will have to appoint an editor to pick the best ones or vote on them.

Suggested headings for the unified document:

-Multiplicative concern explained:

-Multiplicative concern suggested solutions:



-Concern of lack of tension explained:

-Concern of lack of tension suggested solutions:



-Concern of lack of spell competition explained:

-Concern of lack of spell competition suggested solution:

---

Thats a great idea. I think the thing that everyone agrees upon is the lack of spell competition. Or the lack of tension. Can you clarify the difference.

Also can we apoint a secretary (not leader) to keep track of everyone who is going be part of this document. The secretary can put everyones name someplace and organize everyones contribution to the article.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArcherofAiur

Well here is the thing. The closest game that approximates the current economic model was SC1.

The process of sending a SCV to mine was a Attention->units process. Progamers had to work very hard to spend all the money they made.
When they macroed correctly it was like they were given free money.

---

I kinda see what you mean, and I agree about the idea of having macro'd Econs for each race because it puts people who can multi task a that much more ahead, but I would rather have it contribute 1/3 maybe 1/4, instead of the 2/3 it's giving (Protoss at least) right now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by supersonic

I kinda see what you mean, and I agree about the idea of having macro'd Econs for each race because it puts people who can multi task a that much more ahead, but I would rather have it contribute 1/3 maybe 1/4, instead of the 2/3 it's giving (Protoss at least) right now.

---

Yah I see what your saying. To be honest I think you need to play the game to truly get an appreciation for the balance of macro/micro right now. Anyway about this unified document thing. Who is in? And who wants to be secretary?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by supersonic

That and I do like the feel of micro being an important part of the game, the entire time, not just at the start or massing units at the end.

---

that is true too, but I doubt that micro would be eliminated by the end game but rather not matter as nearly as much.

The Terrans would also require something so they could compete.

lets see... the Zerg it seems can get massive amounts of units quickly. The Protoss can get massive amounts of buildings quickly. Perhaps... The terrans can get massive amounts of buildings quickly?

maybe the terran buildings can be utilised in more ways then their basic function like play a more direct role on the battlefield. so they would have more spells and abilities that make their buildings be utilized. hmm this gives me some ideas...

maybe the supply depot could be upgraded much like the terran battlecruiser
like it could be upgraded to provide more supply. It could be upgraded to be a cheaper version of a cc so that scv's can bring minerals to it (except it cant build scv's so it does have a disadvantage). Or maybe it could be upgraded to perhaps instead be able to recharge the health/energy of terran units.

As well buildings like Orbital Command and Planetary Fortress would have spells that would help out the economy/buildings. like theres already the mule and comsat but maybe there could also be an ability called revert power that uses the energy of the OC to quicken the building of a unit/building/upgrade.

The Planetary Fortress could be themed around enhancing the buildings in defensive ways like maybe adding hp to a building, or turning a building into a temperary auto-turret type thing so that it can defend it self(in this case mini guns would pop out of pannels on the building itself and shoot enemies close by). One idea I heard I thought was cool was an ability that basically gave each scv within an aoe a spider mine in which it could place somewhere, perhaps instead it would be infantry units/scv each each mine that a unit gets costs so much energy. The units would then be able to place a mine somewhere.

well thats my crazy idea of giving the terrans their own wacky macro mechanic

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArcherofAiur

Yah I see what your saying. To be honest I think you need to play the game to truly get an appreciation for the balance of macro/micro right now.

---

lol or lack there of.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RODTHEGOD

maybe the supply depot could be upgraded much like the terran battlecruiser like it could be upgraded to provide more supply. It could be upgraded to be a cheaper version of a cc so that scv's can bring minerals to it (except it cant build scv's so it does have a disadvantage). Or maybe it could be upgraded to perhaps instead be able to recharge the health/energy of terran units.

---

The supply depot upgrade is already at the OC =P I dunno about getting cheap CC, being able to make them in the safety of your base is pretty good already, and it's a big balancing point to have the CC, Nexus etc, cost a lot and take a long time to build.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArcherofAiur

Thats a great idea. I think the thing that everyone agrees upon is the lack of spell competition. Or the lack of tension. Can you clarify the difference.

---

I should have written it as:

-Concern of lack of energy tension explained:

-Concern of lack of energy tension suggested solutions:

Also known as the dedicated pylon problem.


The lack of tension problem means that you can have a dedicated pylon in your base for minerals and a dedicated pylon at your entrance for (say) defence and you will never have to weigh one ability against the other because the energy pools for both are different.

The lack of spell competition means that even if you had to choose, the other ability is not good enough to ever compete with PC.

This might sound like a really dumb idea, but its a simple enough idea...


1) How about each starting position start out with a number of "special" minerals, say 1/3rd of the minerals, that give a higher output? And then make it so that when harvesters auto-mine, they go to a random crystal to harvest, so that players who want to maximize their production need to micromanage their first couple of SCV's to the right crystals.

Pros:
1)Early game, players can micromanage their harvesters to mine these specific crystals, giving them a small mineral edge early on.
2)It's really not that required to still be competitive, unless you're playing at very high levels.

Cons:
1)It's really nitpicky and the payoff isn't that great
2)Once you hit a certain harvester/crystal ratio, you don't need to think about it anymore. Or maybe there's a way you can.


2)Harvester assist mining - Mining units can assist each other on each crystal so that you can have up to 2 (or X) amount of units working per crystal. Assisted mining follows a formula that it is 1.5 (or Y) times more advantageous than having each miners with their own crystal. Using a rallying point to a crystal for workers prioritizes a single worker to a single crystal.

If you don't like the mechanic working this way, you can reverse it for a similar early-game result, different end game though. (e.g. prioritize two workers per crystal, but make the single worker per crystal more efficient, which could also have long-term effects with worker saturation)

Pros:
1) Micromanaging is unnecessary, but advantageous
2) Flexible mechanic - Currently, it rewards having lots of worker (or increasing gains per worker). If you reverse the mechanic, you have decreasing gains per worker after a certain point.

Cons:
1) Again, its nitpicky, with possibly little effect on the whole game (depends on Y)
2) It might only effect the early game


Hell, here's another idea, just for the hell of it.

3) Gas Refinery Overload - the refineries gain the ability to push their limits in terms of collecting gas, but the higher output demands higher maintenance. Each harvester gains X more gas, but cost X amount of minerals each trip. (probably just 1 or 2 each)

Pros:
1) If you're a race that needs gas, and you have tons of minerals, you can do something to help even things out.
2) Gives players a choice if they want to tech up.

Cons:
1) Might not be used much if mineral based units are more useful than gas based ones
2) Might make gas too accessible

Just some wrenches to throw in the ol brain, I apologize if these were already suggested. :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArcherofAiur

Imagine if they took out making workers completly (or automated it like they have now).
Then they give each race a "special economic power"

So for zerg its like you can have as many units as you want. The only thing limiting how fast you want your army to grow is your ability to use the mechanic.

For Protoss its like they have a "unlimited minerals power." They can have as many minerals as they want as long as they can remember to cast it. At some point the equilibrium shifts and you find that making production buildings becomes the limiting factor to army size.

Its like a game where you can turn your mental concentration into army fuel.

---

So basically they want a fastest map?