Macro Mechanics Discussion Thread

[ArcherofAiur]

Keep in mind the purpose of the Macro Mechanics: to differentiate and promote macro playstyles. Which means it needs to be tasks that a macro player is focusing on instead of micro.

[n00bonicPlague]

On a personal note, I am getting tired of all of this. For years, I have been open-minded, trying to see just what was lost with the inclusion of MBS and rallymine. With every discussion I've started and/or participated in, in an attempt to discover what the "big problem" is, it all falls apart with everyone holding to their precious little thoughts and opinions with little to no room for compromise. After tiring of this, I decided to do less and less discussion and more of just spitting out whatever ideas I could come up with, in hopes of someone having a spontaneous "EUREKA!" moment. Unfortunately, all of these ideas have churned out the same results: few people fully agreeing, some people partially agreeing, most people fully disagreeing, and the leftovers going off on random tangents about whatever.

I have yet to see anything even remotely productive. Ever since the finalized decision to put MBS in, we have been talking about the same mess over and over and over again. All I've seen is, "It's not complicated enough in this aspect," followed by, "No, that's too complicated in that aspect, but it could really use some complication over here," and then going right back around and around. I'm waiting for Blizzard to just throw their hands up in the air and just tell everyone to fuck off and deal with it. I came from the position of, "There is no problem — IT'S ALL IN YOUR HEAD!!!" and I'm about to go back to that if my patience wears any thinner.

[ArcherofAiur]

On a personal note, I am getting tired of all of this. For years, I have been open-minded, trying to see just what was lost with the inclusion of MBS and rallymine. With every discussion I've started and/or participated in, in an attempt to discover what the "big problem" is, it all falls apart with everyone holding to their precious little thoughts and opinions with little to no room for compromise. After tiring of this, I decided to do less and less discussion and more of just spitting out whatever ideas I could come up with, in hopes of someone having a spontaneous "EUREKA!" moment. Unfortunately, all of these ideas have churned out the same results: few people fully agreeing, some people partially agreeing, most people fully disagreeing, and the leftovers going off on random tangents about whatever.

I have yet to see anything even remotely productive. Ever since the finalized decision to put MBS in, we have been talking about the same mess over and over and over again. All I've seen is, "It's not complicated enough in this aspect," followed by, "No, that's too complicated in that aspect, but it could really use some complication over here," and then going right back around and around. I'm waiting for Blizzard to just throw their hands up in the air and just tell everyone to fuck off and deal with it. I came from the position of, "There is no problem — IT'S ALL IN YOUR HEAD!!!" and I'm about to go back to that if my patience wears any thinner.

I think its just a few people here who have problems. You dont see people complaining allot about the macro mechanics in other forums. Besides allot of us are waiting to see the redone Protoss Macro Mechanic which was the one most people had problems with anyway.

Unfortunately, all of these ideas have churned out the same results: few people fully agreeing, some people partially agreeing, most people fully disagreeing, and the leftovers going off on random tangents about whatever.

This idea has recieved no negative critisism. It seems to be the first idea proposed that no one can find fault with.
http://sclegacy.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2021

[n00bonicPlague]

This is a question I raised in another thread, but I'll go ahead and ask it here. Do the macro mechanics we integrate have to be centered around resources like minerals, gas, and supply? I tried to draw out the way the basic steps to an SC victory interact, and I think one big problem with the resource macro mechanics like PC, MCD, and the original gas mechanic is that they affect way too many things throughout the entire system. So many things depend on minerals and gas that trying to toy with how that section of macro works seems to shift the gameplay as a whole rather than just enhance a piece of it. Mechanics like Protoss Warp-In, Terran Reactor/Tech Lab, and Zerg Spawn Larvae are better because they only affect small pieces of the big picture. If we could come up with macro mechanics that work like small enhancements instead of big gameplay shifts, I think SC2's gameplay potential would fare a lot better.

[MaybeNextTime]

This is a question I raised in another thread, but I'll go ahead and ask it here. Do the macro mechanics we integrate have to be centered around resources like minerals, gas, and supply? I tried to draw out the way the basic steps to an SC victory interact, and I think one big problem with the resource macro mechanics like PC, MCD, and the original gas mechanic is that they affect way too many things throughout the entire system. So many things depend on minerals and gas that trying to toy with how that section of macro works seems to shift the gameplay as a whole rather than just enhance a piece of it. Mechanics like Protoss Warp-In, Terran Reactor/Tech Lab, and Zerg Spawn Larvae are better because they only affect small pieces of the big picture. If we could come up with macro mechanics that work like small enhancements instead of big gameplay shifts, I think SC2's gameplay potential would fare a lot better.

We've had some cool Drop Pod ideas for Terran on TL:


Command Center upgrades:

- Planetary Fortress (requires Engineering Bay)
- Orbital Command

Sensor Tower (requires Barracks):

- detects units under fog of war within its radius (bigger than LoS)
- allows Orbital Command to drop Building Assistance Drones and Propaganda Towers within its field of vision (LoS)
- detects cloaked units within its field of vision (LoS)
- visible to the enemy on the minimap and under explored fog of war

Orbital Command abilities:

* Drop Building Assistance Drone (BAD) (inspired by Santrega's suggestion):

- unlocked by Barracks
- requires resources (say, 50/50 min/gas)
- 25% building buff speed when dropped on a building under construction
- salvages the target (restricted to player's structures only) when dropped onto a completed building (technicalities of salvage subject to balance)
- destroyable
- only one BAD can be dropped onto a single building (however, it one BAD dies, the player is allowed to drop a new one)
- no energy from OC required
- no cooldown
- Sensor Tower's field of vision needed (subject to balance)

Works like this:

(- build Sensor Towers in appropriate locations)
- select OC (with BAD(s) available)
- press a proper hotkey
- select the target (Sensor Tower's LoS needed)

Possible uses:

- speeding up FE
- speeding up Depot/wall-in construction
- speeding up Turret construction
- faster teching
- faster tech switches (e.g. salvage redudant Barracks and assist in constructing Starports)
- getting rid of redudant buildings on the battlefield, and so on

* Drop Propaganda Tower:

- unlocked by Barracks (losing Barracks early on means no mining bonus!)
- requires Sensor Tower's field of vision
- Propaganda Tower "lands" immediately and grants mineral mining speed buff to workers and attack buff (equal to a singular attack upgrade; units with 0 attack upgrade become 1, with 2 - 3, with 3 - stay 3) within a certain radius
- it burns down and is unrepairable - dies after X time (the process can be sped up by attacking the Propaganda Tower)
- requires OC energy
- no cooldown

Works like this:

(- build Sensor Towers in appropriate locations)
- select OC (with enough energy)
- press a proper hotkey
- pick the target location (workers or a group of units you want to "reinforce")

Possible uses:

- boosting mineral gathering rate
- buffing SCVs' attack when caught off guard early game
- buffing attack of defending/attacking units
- "Propaganda Tower bombs"

* Scan:

- unlocked by Barracks with Lab add-on (meaning you can "disable" scan much like in BW)
- requires OC energy
- works like in BW

(those are mine, some tweaked suggested by other posters)


(and here's the effort of several members)


Terran Macro Mechanic: Drop Pods 4.0
Updated 2/9/09

-After Engineering Bay a Command Center can build up to 4 Drop Pod Add-ons. Cost and build time are the same as an SCV (50 minerals, 18 seconds).

-Infantry can be ordered into the Drop Pod (5 slots). SCVs, reapers, ghosts, maruaders and marines cound as infantry. Units can be rallied into Drop Pod.

-Player hits launch hotkey and selects drop location. Can drop anywhere within a Sensor Tower's range. The entire Add-on is launched and a new one must be build for it to be used again.







Terran Macro Mechanic: Drop Pods 3.0
Updated 1/29/09

-After factory a Command Center can purchase a Drop Pod for 10 minerals. Build time is 10 (about half of an SCV). Drop Pod rises out of the top of CC.

-Infantry can be ordered into the Drop Pod (5 slots). SCVs, reapers, ghosts, maruaders and marines cound as infantry. Units can't be rallied into Drop Pod.

-Player hits launch hotkey and selects drop location. Can drop anywhere within a Sensor Tower's range.









Drop Pods 2.0
Updated 1/27/09

-After factory tech a command center can purchase a drop pod for 25 min. Build time is 17 (same as an SCV). Drop pod rises out of the top of CC.

-Infantry units can be ordered into the drop pod (5 slots). Player hits launch hotkey and selects drop location. Units can't be rallied into a drop pod.

-Can drop anywhere terran player has units or buildings. So if you have a marine out in a field you can drop in a small range around him.




Couple uses:

-Combo with medivac for enhanced mobility and healing.

-Combo with cloaked ghost to infiltrate enemy base and drop in 5 backup infantry.

-Combo with Nighthawk mines to drop in a location your opponent thought you couldn't.

-Great for getting slow moving mauraders into the battle quickly rather then waiting for them to waddle across the map.

-Send one reaper behind enemy lines into mineral line, drop in 5 more reapers.

-Drop 5 new SCV's at that new expansion.

-Drop SCV's on that tank line for repairing.

-Drop marines behind enemies when they get in range of your troops. Allows for a surprise sneak attack.







Original Post: Drop Pods 1.0

How it Works
Command Center could be upgraded to Launch Center. Launch Center would have a Launch Rally Point that could be set to any Barracks. Units produced at Barracks with the Launch Rally Point would be automatically sent to a Drop Pod in the Launch Center. Drop Pods would have five infantry slots and once full could be dropped anywhere Terran player has vision (combo with comsat).

If a drop pod is full but not launched the marine would follow the regular rally point of the barracks it was produced at. This is why the lauch rally point is on the launch center and not the barracks.

Basically, when an infantry unit is produced instead of poping out of the barracks they are fitted into a drop pod. You can not load infantry already on the battlefield into the launch center. It is the same as not being able to warp-in an already produced zealot from one pylon to another.


Macro
Now say you wanted to make a drop pod with five marines. New players could set the launch rally point to one barracks and wait for all five marines to be produced out of that barracks. More experienced players could instead produce five marines from five different barracks and alternate the Launch Rally Point between barracks as each marine is produced. This produces a Drop Pod 5X as fast.

Notice that alternating the launch rally point between barracks is almost the same as SBS. Click rally point hotkey, select barracks, click rally point hotkey, select barracks.


Balance
To balance this mechanic I would give the protoss a mechanic where they can teleport in units in pylon power. For the zerg I would probably give them some sort of nydus ability. Further balance considerations can be addressed by a number of means including: Giving drop pods a min/gas cost, Making Launch Center Tier 2 or 3, Making the ghost call down drop pods, etc…

[ArcherofAiur]

That looks oddly familiar

This is a question I raised in another thread, but I'll go ahead and ask it here. Do the macro mechanics we integrate have to be centered around resources like minerals, gas, and supply? I tried to draw out the way the basic steps to an SC victory interact, and I think one big problem with the resource macro mechanics like PC, MCD, and the original gas mechanic is that they affect way too many things throughout the entire system. So many things depend on minerals and gas that trying to toy with how that section of macro works seems to shift the gameplay as a whole rather than just enhance a piece of it. Mechanics like Protoss Warp-In, Terran Reactor/Tech Lab, and Zerg Spawn Larvae are better because they only affect small pieces of the big picture. If we could come up with macro mechanics that work like small enhancements instead of big gameplay shifts, I think SC2's gameplay potential would fare a lot better.

Just to touch on this point. By definition mineral, gas and supply advantage (as well as unit production) are at the heart of what macro gameplay is.

Also there is much reason to think that warp-in, reactors and Spawn larva could cause the same, if not more, balance issues than any of the straight resource mechanics. Warp in is pretty much the poster boy of a "big gameplay shift".

[Norfindel]

Just to touch on this point. By definition mineral, gas and supply advantage (as well as unit production) are at the heart of what macro gameplay is.

Yes, but that difference was accomplished by expanding more, and the knowledge of when to build what. The macro mechanics are so much simple, that i think they're going to hurt gameplay. With SL, you don't need to be so precise about unit composition, or when to build a second Hatchery, because you get your units so much faster. With Drop Supply, you don't suffer the same if you forgot to build enough Depots. With PC and MULEs, you will be getting more minerals/sec, while before you needed to expand to accomplish that.

That's dumber gameplay. Instead of doing a lot of things that require thinking and timing, it's replaced by a spell.

[ArcherofAiur]

Yes, but that difference was accomplished by expanding more, and the knowledge of when to build what. The macro mechanics are so much simple, that i think they're going to hurt gameplay. With SL, you don't need to be so precise about unit composition, or when to build a second Hatchery, because you get your units so much faster. With Drop Supply, you don't suffer the same if you forgot to build enough Depots. With PC and MULEs, you will be getting more minerals/sec, while before you needed to expand to accomplish that.

That's dumber gameplay. Instead of doing a lot of things that require thinking and timing, it's replaced by a spell.

There really is two sides to everything. Where as I see Spawn Larva as allowing for accelerated rushes, drone vs warrior decision making and macro oriented play you just see it as a less punishin larva restriction for zerg (never mind that this enhances rather then detracts from larva as a zerg resource)

Where I see Drop Supply as a clever addition to help new player who "supply block" themselves (and through this help them learn how to manage supply better) you see it as a gimme to players that should be made to suffer.

Where as I see extra minerals as a way to promote macro gameplay and the amassing of large armies (and through this type of gameplay encouraging expansion) you see it as some type of crutch where players dont need to expand to win the game.

[Norfindel]

There really is two sides to everything. Where as I see Spawn Larva as allowing for accelerated rushes, drone vs warrior decision making and macro oriented play you just see it as a less punishin larva restriction for zerg (never mind that this enhances rather then detracts from larva as a zerg resource)

There is a lot less Drone vs Warrior decision because you aren't resource-limited anymore. If you struggled with the decision to build 3 Drones or 6 Zerglings, now you get more than double the Larvae from the same Hatchery, so you just build 3 Drones and 6 Zerglings, no need to sweat it anymore. The only scenario when it can add decision, is when playing against another Zerg player.

Where I see Drop Supply as a clever addition to help new player who "supply block" themselves (and through this help them learn how to manage supply better) you see it as a gimme to players that should be made to suffer.

Another one that won't get used in the higher play levels.

Where as I see extra minerals as a way to promote macro gameplay and the amassing of large armies (and through this type of gameplay encouraging expansion) you see it as some type of crutch where players dont need to expand to win the game.

Yes, it will encourage macro, but can someone win with pure micro against a player that is reaping the benefits of +20% income from every base, while not been micro-limited much? I doubt it. So, at the end, the mechanics won't help to set a micro player apart from a macro player, both would need to use it, or lose the game. Forced useless gameplay.

[ArcherofAiur]

There is a lot less Drone vs Warrior decision because you aren't resource-limited anymore. If you struggled with the decision to build 3 Drones or 6 Zerglings, now you get more than double the Larvae from the same Hatchery, so you just build 3 Drones and 6 Zerglings, no need to sweat it anymore. The only scenario when it can add decision, is when playing against another Zerg player.

Now the choice is between 6 drones and 12 zerglings. I think the only problem is that peoples perception of the change is based on the SC1 equation and not SC2s.

Another one that won't get used in the higher play levels.

I wouldnt be surprised if we do see it in higher level play but ill wait for beta to see.

Yes, it will encourage macro, but can someone win with pure micro against a player that is reaping the benefits of +20% income from every base, while not been micro-limited much? I doubt it. So, at the end, the mechanics won't help to set a micro player apart from a macro player, both would need to use it, or lose the game. Forced useless gameplay.

lol by that logic wouldnt the micro player only needs to do 20% more damage. Imagine how many minerals you can get with a well placed psi storm. Which brings up another point. People are thinking of this as the SC1 equation where macro advantage was much more than 20%.

For all we no macro advantage and micro advantage could be balanced right now.