New Year Macro Resolutions

[don]

You forgot upgrading/researching... thats probably best in macro... it certainly isnt micro...

I meant it to be included in 3. Tech Choices.

Define "minimal amount of macro in the game". I find it very hard to see how you could create macro playstyles by decreasing the amount of macro in the game (even more than its already been decreased). But Ill let you explain your side first.
answer.

Well what I meant about minimal is the state the game was in before macro mechanics went in. I meant "minimal macro in Starcraft terms".

Macro went down from SC1 to pre-macro mechanics SC2 and we are trying to bring it back to SC1 levels correct?

Well, my statement means that whatever mechanic/s that get put into the game should be optional. That if a player does not use it an allows his game to dip in the macro part, that player must be able to compensate in other parts of the game (micro, mindgames, etc) and that if possible there be more than one macro mechanic that brings macro skill to SC1 levels.

Options are really just illusions. The best option for any given situation will ultimately be figured out, and those who stick to the program will win, and those who don't will not. This happens in every game Blizzard makes. There is always a "best way". It's inevitable.

Well, its not like SC2 = Tetris right?

True, but you won't always have control over which situation you're going to be in, so you'll still have to think about what to do.

Plus, a "bad choice" is only a bad choice if it is exploited by your enemy.
Say a guy decides to mass banelings in an island expansion. He freaking makes 100 supply worth of them. Its a "stupid strategy" right? But his enemy never scouted it. He suddenly upgrades overlords and drops them all in a very decisive place. He could win right? And its a fun way to win if I may add. When I say options, I mean "fun options" not only strategic choices.

"The Best Way" is reserved for SC2 world champ imo. What im proposing is that there be lots and lots of "Semi-Best Ways".

[Norfindel]

Options are really just illusions. The best option for any given situation will ultimately be figured out, and those who stick to the program will win, and those who don't will not. This happens in every game Blizzard makes. There is always a "best way". It's inevitable.

That depends on the number of options and their viability. If you have more than 1 reasonable path to go for the same situation, you can still choose. The more units that are usable in a matchup, the better this could get.

[ArcherofAiur]

Well what I meant about minimal is the state the game was in before macro mechanics went in. I meant "minimal macro in Starcraft terms".

Macro went down from SC1 to pre-macro mechanics SC2 and we are trying to bring it back to SC1 levels correct?

Well, my statement means that whatever mechanic/s that get put into the game should be optional. That if a player does not use it an allows his game to dip in the macro part, that player must be able to compensate in other parts of the game (micro, mindgames, etc) and that if possible there be more than one macro mechanic that brings macro skill to SC1 levels.

What do you mean by optional? Are making workers optional? Are making marines optional? Are making production buildings optional?

I agree that having multiple macro mechanics is superior to just one macro mechanic. However the macro mechanics shouldn't be optional like say getting DTs is optional.

[don]

What do you mean by optional? Are making workers optional? Are making marines optional? Are making production buildings optional?

I agree that having multiple macro mechanics is superior to just one macro mechanic. However the macro mechanics shouldn't be optional like say getting DTs is optional.

I think we are not on the same page.

When I talk about macro process below, i refer to all things macro related like harvesting, building units, building buildings, decision making from scout info, teching etc. When I talk about micro process, i mean putting units in groups, arranging units, maximizing low health units, drops etc.

Lets say, that an SC2 1v1 game progresses as follows:

5 macro processes early game, 10 mid game and then 20+ end game.
Micro would then be 2 processes in scouting, 10 in a medium battle, 30 in battles in multiple locations and 50+ at full food and multiple scattered skirmishes.

Lets say, a newb player can manage 20 processes at a time. And say, a word class player can manage 50+.

When I say "optional" I mean that there should be a minimum of 5~10 macro processes a player has to maintain and is required for decent play and then you have the "option" to use macro mechanics and bump up the macro processes you have to manage to 10~15. And if you are world class, you 20~25.

But then a player with 5 macro, 20 micro should be a roughly the same as a player with 10 macro and 15 micro. As opposed to a scenario where macro mechanics are so effective that it is no longer "optional" and each player would have to manage that 10 macro always.

[Norfindel]

What do you mean by optional? Are making workers optional? Are making marines optional? Are making production buildings optional?

I agree that having multiple macro mechanics is superior to just one macro mechanic. However the macro mechanics shouldn't be optional like say getting DTs is optional.

Why not? They're supposed to be a boost, to allow macro players to show their skill, and to raise the skill level for players that can reach the skill ceiling without them. If the mechanics can make that possible, i don't see how it would pay for the lower skilled players to use them.

Terran players get MULEs basically for free with their Comsat, and MULEs are more forgiving to use, while Protoss and Zerg must invest resources to get them. So, for begginers, MULEs are probably much more attractive to use than the other two macro mechanics.

[ArcherofAiur]

When I say "optional" I mean that there should be a minimum of 5~10 macro processes a player has to maintain and is required for decent play and then you have the "option" to use macro mechanics and bump up the macro processes you have to manage to 10~15. And if you are world class, you 20~25.

But then a player with 5 macro, 20 micro should be a roughly the same as a player with 10 macro and 15 micro. As opposed to a scenario where macro mechanics are so effective that it is no longer "optional" and each player would have to manage that 10 macro always.

Again there is this very fuzzy definition of optional and maintain. Is choosing to get high templar "optional"? Once you get the High Templar is casting psi storm with them "optional" or something you have to maintain?

Terran players get MULEs basically for free with their Comsat, and MULEs are more forgiving to use, while Protoss and Zerg must invest resources to get them. So, for begginers, MULEs are probably much more attractive to use than the other two macro mechanics.

Free here is a matter of perspective. Macro energy is a resource like any other. Imagine if you had a third resource. We will call it "Oil". Now each race gets a building or unit that generates oil over time (OC, Obelisk, queen). Then you spend "Oil" on the macro mechanics.

[Eligor]

Again there is this very fuzzy definition of optional and maintain. Is choosing to get high templar "optional"? Once you get the High Templar is casting psi storm with them "optional" or something you have to maintain?

You confuse option and necessity. Something optional is just that, something that is not absolutely necessary for the achievement of victory. How necessary something is (High Templar in your case) depends on what your enemy is doing.

[ArcherofAiur]

You confuse option and necessity. Something optional is just that, something that is not absolutely necessary for the achievement of victory. How necessary something is (High Templar in your case) depends on what your enemy is doing.

I get what your saying but apply it to the examples I gave and youll see its allot trickier.

[Eligor]

I get what your saying but apply it to the examples I gave and youll see its allot trickier.

Actually the only things that are not optional in StarCraft are: producing workers, gathering resources, building production buildings, producing fighting units (unless of course you employ the SCV rush, but it's neither particularly fun nor particularly interesting). Everything else is specifics (and hard prequisites of the "build building y to produce unit x" type).

As for macro mechanics... They definitely shoudn't be as specifically situational as Dark Templar... I'd love to see a suggestion for a simple mechanic that would allow a considerable margin for misuse and mistakes, something in the use of which the player must exercise his judgment and take risks (even if that doesn't seem to be what Blizzard is shooting for, otherwise they'd have ditched Proton Charge long ago). Maybe something defense oriented? What about a Pylon ability that when activated would make the psi field of that specific Pylon deadly for all the units in it (yours as well as the enemy's)? Furthermore, that ability, instead of being energy based would instead put a considerable drain on your resources for the period of its activity (something like eating 10 or 20 minerals per second). Not only would it give one more potential task during base defense, but would also require great care in using it and involve making strategically important decisions in the matter of seconds.

[ArcherofAiur]

I'd love to see a suggestion for a simple mechanic that would allow a considerable margin for misuse and mistakes, something in the use of which a player must exercise his judgment and take risks.

http://sclegacy.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2021