Confession time! What's the one thing you hate most about SC2?

[Dalarsco]

Remember that all the Terrans are the descendants of convicts and freaks, those who survived a mass anti-religious genocidal purge on Earth I believe. You shouldn't be surprised they're all Caucasian with a few sparse blacks. Most East Indians were likely killed for their faith, and the Chinese (or asians in general) would have lost a war with the Caucasian majority due to technology.

Actually much science fiction talks about some kind of Eastern war and eliminating the Muslims because frankly they'd be a huge threat to intergalactic relations if we did encounter other intelligent life in the galaxy.

Please for the love of god tell me this is a joke.

The game has one incorrigible flaw, which singlehandedly leads to most of the problems that SC2 have - it’s the game’s ENGINE.

Arguments:
1. Not enough of quality micro, thus heavily macro oriented meta, thus practically complete absence of ‘awe-factor’ – all due game engine, which allows just minimal amount of micro to be performed via basic commands (like ‘move’ and ‘attack’, i.e. ‘natural’ micro) compared to Brood War, which leads to forced and artificially created ability-heavy micro. If you add unlimited unit selection, MBS, auto-mining and most of all – smart-casting, augmented by the fact that the only one race having reasonably good and complete set of units with micro abilities (Protoss), you’ll have what we have now – in 2/3 of the matchups we have macro-ing/massing + a-moving through the whole early, mid/mid-late game, with rare casters’ occurrences in the late game, which is by itself very rare (and even in Protoss match-ups all we see is Force field micro and rare Storms – which is getting old fast).

2. Lack of synergy between units, i.e. specific game design centered on individual units with micro abilities – the reason is the same as above: game engine doesn’t allow enough ‘basic’ ‘natural’ micro, so there is a replacement – artificially created micro, based solely on the abilities/spells usage.

3. Uber hard counters which is plainly OP ‘in the vacuum’ (Marauders, Roaches, Immortals), which by only their presence in player’s arsenal deny many strats from the opponent – added to the game coz the engine doesn’t provide enough room for unit diversity, thus providing insufficient tension in army composition: in general, most ranged/melee unit feels and plays basically the same as any other ranged/melee unit, and only distinguished (gameplay-wise) in most cases by abilities they have. Thus there is artificially added tension at the expense of balance/balanceability.

4. Macro mechanics – game engine doesn’t provide enough things to do for players in natural way, so again we have artificially added gameplay elements (i.e. APM sinks) to occupy players more.


So, to the topic:
One thing that I hate the most in SC2 is the fact, that the game has the enormous flaw which won’t be fixed coz it’s too fundamental to do so at this stage (obviously).

Micro isn't just switching between control groups and casting spells. It's also about attacking certain units with certain other units. This is the kind of micro that they are going for with hard counters. With the current selection mechanics I can make one group of my entire army for moving them into position, and then easily create control groups for each individual unit type no matter how many of that type I have so that I can properly attack based on hard counter advantage. Have you ever played Homeworld 2? It's the most micro-intensive RTS ever, and that's the system it uses.

[Justamonster]

@ Dalarsco: You’re pretty much missed the point.

Please read my 1st and 2nd arguments for the reference.

[pure.Wasted]

From the wiki:
A game engine is a software system designed for the creation and development of video games. There are many game engines that are designed to work on video game consoles and desktop operating systems such as Microsoft Windows, Linux, and Mac OS X. The core functionality typically provided by a game engine includes a rendering engine (“renderer”) for 2D or 3D graphics, a physics engine or collision detection (and collision response), sound, scripting, animation, artificial intelligence, networking, streaming, memory management, threading, localization support, and a scene graph.

I don't how this has ANYTHING to do with the in-game micro. Is it more difficult to select units when they're standing behind others? Is that part of the problem? Apart from saying "game engine" about a hundred times, you failed to identify any specific links between the 3D engine Blizzard is using, and all of the issues you outlined. For instance:

4. Macro mechanics – game engine doesn’t provide enough things to do for players in natural way, so again we have artificially added gameplay elements (i.e. APM sinks) to occupy players more.

The game engine has absolutely nothing to do with the lack of quality macro in the game. Warp-In is the best example of a macro mechanic done right, perfectly achievable within SC2's engine.

[Justamonster]

You don’t have to be rude, pure.Wasted: I didn’t say “game engine about a hundred times” as I didn’t fail to indentify the problem and the cause, because already provided information is pretty self-explanationary:
Game engine is the core of any game, which is responsible for not only 2d-3d, but PHYSICS engine or COLLISION detection and ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (see the wiki reference) as well, which regarding to SC2 directly relates to the ‘basic’ or ‘natural’ micro (or whatever you want to call it) or rather to the lack of it (compared to the Brood War of course).

As for macro mechanics, the fact that some of the macro mechanics are “done right” does NOT nullify my statement (and reality) about macro mechanics being artificially created APM sinks added solely for purpose to being an APM sinks (which has been stated by Blizzard itself – and I won’t bother to provide the links, you can google it yourself), because of the game engine, which doesn’t provide enough things to do for players in a natural way.

For further clarification actually READ my first post in this thread.

[Taoo]

I don't know if anyone brought this up in this thread at least, earlier, but GOD is it annoying meeting arranged teams when you are playing Random 2v2. Being in random ladder is a lot different from being in the team ladder because teams are just better. So, when you do meet gold teams, due to that bug, you get your ass kicked and you get demoted; which is really f'ing annoying because you know you're better.

That's what I hate the most about Starcraft II right now.

[DemolitionSquid]

??? last I heard, there's a shit ton of Chinese on Earth (I'm one of them :P)

It was a typo, I meant "mostly."

Please for the love of god tell me this is a joke.

I never joke.

You really think the Islamic state would accept aliens in a non-violent way? You know what would have happened if the Prawn of D9 landed in Iraq? Certainly not refugee status.

[pure.Wasted]

Game engine is the core of any game, which is responsible for not only 2d-3d, but PHYSICS engine or COLLISION detection and ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (see the wiki reference) as well

With you 100% so far.

which regarding to SC2 directly relates to the ‘basic’ or ‘natural’ micro (or whatever you want to call it) or rather to the lack of it (compared to the Brood War of course).

You lost me. What sort of "natural micro" does BW have that SC2 lacks? What does the game engine have to do with it? This is not self-explanatory. This is the specific details that I've been asking about. I'm sorry if I came off overly rude, but I got the sense that you were throwing big words around without really understanding them; and it may be true you understand them, but I feel you've yet to demonstrate this by explaining to me specifically what you mean.

As for macro mechanics, the fact that some of the macro mechanics are “done right” does NOT nullify my statement (and reality) about macro mechanics being artificially created APM sinks added solely for purpose to being an APM sinks (which has been stated by Blizzard itself – and I won’t bother to provide the links, you can google it yourself), because of the game engine, which doesn’t provide enough things to do for players in a natural way.

You don't need "links" on this as I absolutely understand why (and agree that) macro mechanics are artificial APM sinks, and lazy game design by Blizzard. However, I fail to see how the game engine is the cause of any of this.

[Asfastasican]

The game has one incorrigible flaw, which singlehandedly leads to most of the problems that SC2 have - it’s the game’s ENGINE.

Arguments: Stuff

So, to the topic:
One thing that I hate the most in SC2 is the fact, that the game has the enormous flaw which won’t be fixed coz it’s too fundamental to do so at this stage (obviously).

1. All of that is really caused by unlimited unit selection alone, along with the fluid pathing. You can leave everything else out of it.

2. I don't know what you're getting at tbh. You could argue the same things about SC1 while considering the fact that spell casting in SC1 was a lot harder.

3. I agree. Hard counters are always bad for the Starcraft. Weapon damage types are fine but things like the immortal need to be more about performance and a little softer in the gimmick department.

4. And why are the macro mechanics a bad thing? How are those macro mechanics any more or less rewarding than dealing with SC1's interface? You don't HAVE to use them but they are giving you the option to use them. There will always be several skill levels of players regardless.

[Dalarsco]

@ Dalarsco: You’re pretty much missed the point.

Please read my 1st and 2nd arguments for the reference.

1. That was rude.
2. I did read your arguments and explained why they are wrong. Your idea of what micro is is myopic and borderline incomprehensible. You don't adequately explain what "natural micro" was so I made an effort to figure out what you were talking about. If you weren't talking about unit skills then yes I did miss the point, but that's only because you didn't explain in such a way that anyone should be expected to hit it.

It was a typo, I meant "mostly."



I never joke.

You really think the Islamic state would accept aliens in a non-violent way? You know what would have happened if the Prawn of D9 landed in Iraq? Certainly not refugee status.

1. Middle eastern countries might have some extreme reactions to alien life, but they have extreme reactions to everything. The worlds millions of moderate Muslims would react exactly the same as moderate Christians and moderate Athiests.
2. Your point about Asians was more nonsensical. What do you mean by "lost a war due to technology"? China is technologically equal to the rest of the world, and Japan is at the cutting edge of everything.
3. Overall, I was hoping you were joking because you came across as incredibly racist.

[DemolitionSquid]

1. Middle eastern countries might have some extreme reactions to alien life, but they have extreme reactions to everything. The worlds millions of moderate Muslims would react exactly the same as moderate Christians and moderate Athiests.

It has nothing to do with moderation. The number of extreme Muslims outnumbers the number of extreme Christians and extreme Athiests by a significant number. They are psychopathic and happily suicidal. Either their destruction or ours is inevitable.

2. Your point about Asians was more nonsensical. What do you mean by "lost a war due to technology"? China is technologically equal to the rest of the world, and Japan is at the cutting edge of everything.

By technology I meant nuclear weaponry. Sorry it wasn't clear.

3. Overall, I was hoping you were joking because you came across as incredibly racist.

I'm pretty sure I've stated I am racist towards East Indians many times.