Macro Mechanics Discussion Thread

[Nicol Bolas]

Just so we are clear youve completly dropped all alegations about imbalance and are now complaining that it limits strategy right?

This isn't "ArcherofAiur vs. the world"; there are different people with different positions here. I am not D-Squid. I did not propose that SC1 was significantly imbalanced, nor was I defending such an assertion.

All of this centers on how often you want the player to actively macro and what actions actively macroing should entail.

No. All of this centers on whether you think that having regular, "go-back-to-your-base" activities are central to creating the time pressure that an RTS needs.

[ArcherofAiur]

This isn't "ArcherofAiur vs. the world"; there are different people with different positions here. I am not D-Squid. I did not propose that SC1 was significantly imbalanced, nor was I defending such an assertion.

Oh I didnt realize you didnt agree with him.

No. All of this centers on whether you think that having regular, "go-back-to-your-base" activities are central to creating the time pressure that an RTS needs.

Technically its whether Blizzard thinks regular, "go-back-to-your-base" activities are central to creating the time pressure that an RTS needs.

[Draco]

I decided to pitch another idea for the Mule.

How about you make the Mule just a better SCV? Make it cost 50 minerals like a real SCV. The idea of spawning units without any resource consumption seems rather unrealistic, but my main justification for adding the cost is to add consequence to making a Mule over spending the energy (or minerals) elsewhere.

It can mine faster (gas too), build faster, and repair faster than a normal SCV, so it's up to you with what you want to dedicate that energy toward. I like the building faster because it really throws a monkey wrench into the whole memorizing build order timings.

[Nicol Bolas]

Make it cost 50 minerals like a real SCV.

I'm going to assume that you mean 50 minerals in addition to the energy cost.

Well, this is semi-interesting. What you're effectively doing is making a super-worker who's production rate is lower than that of a regular worker (and can be produced alongside it).

This creates some interesting choices. If you try to replace your SCV fleet with Mules, you're leaving yourself wide open for harassment. Mules aren't replaced as quickly as SCVs, so economic damage is far more painful for you.

However, I would say that, if you do this, Mules should specifically be better at mining, and only mining. They shouldn't even be able to build or repair. This ensures that Mules will be in mineral lines, and thus be available to be harassed.

[Draco]

I'm going to assume that you mean 50 minerals in addition to the energy cost.

That's a correct assumption.

Well, this is semi-interesting. What you're effectively doing is making a super-worker who's production rate is lower than that of a regular worker (and can be produced alongside it).

This creates some interesting choices. If you try to replace your SCV fleet with Mules, you're leaving yourself wide open for harassment. Mules aren't replaced as quickly as SCVs, so economic damage is far more painful for you.

However, I would say that, if you do this, Mules should specifically be better at mining, and only mining. They shouldn't even be able to build or repair. This ensures that Mules will be in mineral lines, and thus be available to be harassed.

Well, I was still considering the retention of its transitory nature. I'd rather have the building and repair potential, but only it lasts a brief period of time. I feel that the diversity in its function is paramount over propensity to harass potential. And, if these macro mechanics are going to remain as appealing as they are, there will undoubtedly be at least 1 out during the base at any given time. So that option to harass is still there, but admittedly mitigated. Also, you don't have to be mining to be susceptible to harassment. Key SCVs building tech buildings or Supply Depots are high priority targets to Ling and Muta harass quite often.

After thinking about the implications some more, I realize that through faster construction, you can still achieve eventual mineral returns by using it toward expansion. I also realize that can be abused if you can drop a Mule anywhere visible to build a CC. If the Mule doesn't last long enough to finish a CC, it prevents the Terran player from expanding to any spot visible to him unless he can get an SCV there. It would still be interesting as proxy potential.

[ArcherofAiur]

It decreases the frequency of macro. Thats against every version of the macro mechanics Blizzard has created. What your doing isnt hard. If I wanted the player to choose the other abilities over the MULE more I could make the MULE only collect 1 mineral per trip.

[Draco]

It decreases the frequency of macro. Thats against every version of the macro mechanics Blizzard has created. What your doing isnt hard. If I wanted the player to choose the other abilities over the MULE more I could make the MULE only collect 1 mineral per trip.

I didn't say that I wanted the Mule to not be chosen. Rather, I'd like it to have more consequence to your base than depleting an energy pool.

I don't understand where you're getting at with the less frequently used macro. There is no basal frequency to work with here. Regular 30s intervals or GTFO was not an implicit assumption.

[ArcherofAiur]

Regular 30s intervals or GTFO was not an implicit assumption.

Lets talk about that. Lets look at the current version of the macro mechanics as well as the previous versions. We can try and guess just how frequently the alternative micro mechanics are used. Then once we have figured that out we can argue about whether this is by design.

How often do you think you are going to be choosing Scanner Sweep over MULE with the current version? Is this more frequent or less frequent then you would choose to send an SCV somewhere other than the mineral line?

Likewise how often do you think you are going to choose creep tumor over spawn larva?

[Draco]

Lets talk about that. Lets look at the current version of the macro mechanics as well as the previous versions.


How often do you think you are going to be choosing Scanner Sweep over MULE with the current version? Is this more frequent or less frequent then you would choose to send an SCV somewhere other than the mineral line?

Likewise how often do you think you are going to choose creep tumor over spawn larva?

I'm just proposing an idea because a static +200 to minerals or whatever is not compelling or engaging. I'm only making suggestions for a particular option, this argument is really not relevant to that suggestion. The obvious solution to the not-so-tense energy tension is to make the alternatives less intrusive or more appealing. Either that or throw away the energy system and rework the nature of the macro ability.

You say that reducing frequency of macro goes against Blizzard's philosophy, but it seems to me that it's quite the opposite. All the changes they've made in macro have been the simplifying of its interface to reduce that macro tedium.

[ArcherofAiur]

You say that reducing frequency of macro goes against Blizzard's philosophy, but it seems to me that it's quite the opposite. All the changes they've made in macro have been the simplifying of its interface to reduce that macro tedium.

I dont want to say it goes against Blizzards philosophy. I cant say that with 100% certainty because Blizzard has yet to clarify indepth on the design intent of the macro mechanics. What I can do is look at every version of the macro mechanics they have ever made and identify unifying themes.

Every version of the macro mechanics they have made has had a regular interval of about 30 seconds

Every version of the macro mechanics has had the player coming back to the base.