• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Starcraft II: Legacy of the Void Beta Thread - Will You Be An Archon With Me?

L

Lethe82

Banned
Reading now and very excited. I've always been kind of meh on the Macro mechanics of the races (Chrono boost INJECT and Mules) and have felt like the game would actually flow better without them by allowing for more reliable game situations, thus unit balancing and unit interaction, they generally are not something that (aside from mules) is visible to the player, and take what is suppose to be a skill differentiation and instead make it too much so of an overall requirement for standard play... I know for a fact I've argued against them throughout my history with SCII gaf, so I would be interested in seeing them go away.

My only concern is that Terran kind of has a needed life line with mules, being so vulnerable to a lot of early things that Zerg and Protoss can do...
 
S

Syf

Banned
This is the most optimistic I've been in this beta tbh, I hope they see these changes through and don't turn back.
 
G

grandwizard

Member
Those are huge changes. Especially the options about macro. Good to see Blizzard isn't afraid of making big changes to the game at this point.
 
L

Lethe82

Banned
There will still be a decent buff toss warp prism warp ins and structurally having a pylon that is connected to a gateway (even if you just made sure to build one for said purpose) that is proximity overlapping a nexus with its energy field is pretty common. Numbers aren't final and they may yet add nexus radius, but the way they are looking at changing toss is imo the way to go.
 
S

Syf

Banned
Lethe82 said:
Interesting. I guess that means we will be getting DLC story updates (presumably not featuring the main cast?).
Click to expand...
Yeah I'd assume the storyline for all the main characters ends with the LotV campaign. It's hard to say, this is pretty vague stuff but good to hear they'll continue adding to the game anyway.
 
L

Lethe82

Banned
I've been having a lot of success using Liberators Tanks and Medivacs. You can get absurd value in TvZ with early ish timings and some micro.
 
S

Syf

Banned
They just said on stream that they're going to try out the removal of the macro mechanics (larva inject, mule, chrono boost) from the game in the beta, at least for a while. Will be interesting to play. Still not sure how I feel about it.
 
F

FluxWaveZ

Member
Syfadious said:
They just said on stream that they're going to try out the removal of the macro mechanics (larva inject, mule, chrono boost) from the game in the beta, at least for a while. Will be interesting to play. Still not sure how I feel about it.
Click to expand...

Are those mechanics going to be removed completely or implemented in an automated way? Out of the three, I feel like larva inject is the most important by far.
 
S

Syf

Banned
FluxWaveZ said:
Are those mechanics going to be removed completely or implemented in an automated way? Out of the three, I feel like larva inject is the most important by far.
Click to expand...
Think he said outright removal. I agree inject is very important so we'd have to see how they intend to adjust the races to make up for the missing mechanics.
 
S

Syf

Banned
demosthenes said:
Have played Archon a bunch this week. Really really liking it.
Click to expand...
Yeah I really enjoy it.

Oh they also said automated tournaments are coming to the beta next month. There will be short and long mode tournaments with best of ones for now.
 
Moff

Moff

Member
Syfadious said:
-LotV campaign is longer and has more cutscenes than WoL
Click to expand...

huh, that probably means we will also play as terran and zerg a lot?
sounds very good, I was afraid they would not put much effor into the campaign

Allied Commanders looks great as well, I hope it's not just a static campaign but a legit MP mode with random missions, similar to a MOBA but with more interesting objectives
 
L

Lethe82

Banned
This post basically sums up the same arguments I've made against Macro mechanics years ago. In the case of Zerg Iits actually responsible for how 'weak' those units are, not that zerg were suppose to have strong units, but even basic lings in SCI are terrors compared to SCII because of injects. Frankly I do want to see what the game is like without the mechanics (or having them dramatically toned down), I've always felt like they actually add a ton of unpredictability and imbalance to the game... but I will miss how broken mules could be. Frankly macroing in the later game will be harder now without Zergs being able to insta saturate, terrans being able to mule dump, and mineral patches all running out oddly. Sure it's 'dumbinb the game down' but the scene has changed a ton since the days of BW and I think it's ok to say that the community was wrong then, or at least are certainly wrong now.

Hi there guys, Since the new blizzard feedback update there has been lots of discussion about changing the macro, and there´s been people who have been very vocal about keeping it the way it is, there's even a really in depth study on the front page about it!

The thing is, I don't think many players have actually played Starcraft 2 WITHOUT the macro "crutches".
I have done it a lot, so I thought it would be a good idea to share the differences I've encountered, share some new insights, and debunk some myths about it.

First things first, I have been playing SC2 for years and it´s been quite some time since I got my beta invite for LOTV, however, my experience with crutchless SC2 mostly focus with HOTS, so bear that in mind.
So,to get to the point, I was playing HOTS a lot, but it got stale after a while, so I turned to mods to spice it up a little, one such mod was one that removed macro crutches and left everything else untouched.
What do I mean by macro crutches? well, injects, chrono, and mules.
Everything else was exactly the same only the crutches were removed.
I found this mod rather amusing so I played it until I got my LOTV invite.

Without further ado, I will point out the differences and details I found about the macro mechanics of SC2 :

Differences :

-The pacing changes-

As is to be expected, with the removal of macro crutches the pacing changed, but not quite in the way you would expect.

Games didn't turn out slower, timings and build times were mostly unaffected, rather, engagements in the early game became scrappier and with less units. You could make a lot of things work with good control. Things like losing a worker or even a unit tended to hurt a lot, so you mostly tried to save both.

The Mid-game is where the game usually picked up into something that resembled the usual SC2 pacing.
The main difference was the abundance and diversity of higher tech units,accompanied by lower tech units and meat shields, but not as many as you would usually see.
Micro is still a big part of the fights, but your macro dictates the pace of the game since you have to expand more and get more production facilities, the managing of more expansions and buildings than usual starts getting in the way of your micro and your micro in the way of your macro, but up to this point it's not that much harder than the usual macro mechanics.

The Late Game is where the game gets completely insane.
I regret to say that I didn't manage to get many games that lasted this long so I don´t have that much to say except that that if you make it this far the game goes nuts and it gets pretty hard to manage everything.
You have so many bases, so many production facilities,so many different unit types spread just about everywhere, so many different places to defend and attack, both players are already fielding their best units and upgrades.
It gets pretty chaotic, especially with bases and buildings that are pretty far away from each other, and especially with all the fighting going on.

So it starts out Slower and it ends up Faster, why? well, logic would dictate that the current macro mechanics should give a faster game all game no? the reason for this isn't readily apparent until you understand...

-The reason for the current mechanics-

Some people believe the current mechanics are there to increase the skill level required, or as an APM sink, but the real reason is actually quite simple.
The reason for the current mechanics is easy to explain :
To make SC2 bigger and better!
You see, the reasoning for these mechanics was to make the things everyone loved about starcraft more prominent in the sequel, more action packed and exciting.
Having things like injects chrono and mules meant more money to spend earlier, more units to be produced faster and more tech to be delivered earlier in the game, this would have given us a bombastic action packed sequel :

The game starts earlier because you get resources faster!
More units means more fights!
Faster upgrades open a world of possibilities!
A faster game will give the more skilled players more chances to really shine!

This would have worked marvelously... if only we had played the game as blizzard intended us to.

-The current macro mechanics reward spamming and turtling-

This is one of the things you wouldn't normally notice, but once you start playing the game without the crutches become really obvious.
Have you ever wondered why marine marauder medivac is so prevalent? why mutabling works on every match up? why gateway units seem so weak? why a player on 3 bases can drag out the game so easily against an opponent with a lot more bases?

It's mostly because the current macro mechanics reward such play, and as soon as we, the players, found out we started abusing it as creatively as we could.
For the most part the current macro crutches reward the spamming of cheap fast units to be produced with little inconvenience, things like drones probes and mules to make more money, and things like zerglings roaches mutas, marines,marauders,medivacs, etc, to be mass produced and thrown at the enemy.
The combination of mules + reactors, and spawn larva+ the classic zerg macromechanics causes this fllood of cheap low tier units to be very easy to make while also making the fielding of higher tier units a lot harder.
The thing is this makes the game seem wonkier/more imbalanced than it actually is.
For example, gateway units aren't actually weak, but protoss has no proper mechanic to spam units(since chrono is more economic and tech driven),and their units aren't really cheap, so they are always overwhelmed by the amount of enemy units from the other two races.
This isn't to say protoss can't spam, but it is a lot harder for protoss and that puts gateway units at a disadvantage.
This isn't exclusive to protoss, any unit from any of the three races is at a disadvantage against more spammable units.
And it isn't something easy to see either, if you make 15 marines at a time you might think it's because your macro is pretty good, but if you see 10 zealots being warped at your third it seems gimmicky, and it makes it seem like protoss as a race is faulty.

Most of the units in the game on their interactions with other units and each other have some pretty solid math, it's the current macro mechanics that throw that math into dis-balance by always giving the cheaper faster more spammable units the advantage.

Just to drive the point home, "teching" was trying to out maneuver cheaper more numerous units with less of more advanced units,
for example going for a fast tank or in an extreme case opening with a tank(an un-sieged one at it because the upgrade was separate) and hold back zerglings/ dragoons with good control until you could get more.
This will get you killed every time in SC2 because the spammable units have the advantage, no matter how good the control, you will get overwhelmed.

The current crutches also promote turtling.
Mules let you have a lot of money very quickly without having to expand,inject and chrono boost also do this to a much lesser extent, and chrono has the added appeal of not having your tech fall behind because you're not expanding, you can always just boost out the upgrades and tech you would otherwise be missing out or getting late. Inject larva doesn't help turtling very much but instead makes saturating bases almost immediate.
And the reality is that there is no reason not to, there is no reason not to chrono or mule or inject, and since there is no reason not to, there is also no reason not to turtle and not to deathball.
Mix this up with defenders advantage and the aforementioned spamming, and turtle play just ends up coming naturally.

-Removing the crutches-

All in all removing the macro crutches seem to promote more unit variety, more engagements, and focus more on control and management.
It also helps with problems like death balls and turtling, while at the same time rewarding expansions and multiple actions around the map.

This were the things I noticed it when I was playing it, and I think the guys at blizzard came to the same conclusions while testing something similar internally.

That said, I think the idea of keeping the crutches but making them easier to use is a bad idea,the problem with these crutches is not that they are hard to use, is that they make the game itself tumble in confusion about its own rules.

-Mythbusting-

-"Without the current macro mechanics the game will be dumbed down, and will require less skill!"
False.
The game isn't really any easier without the crutches and the skill requirements remain unchanged, the main change of the game is in the pacing.

-"I want the game to be more like broodwar and changing the macro mechanics is a step backward!"
Neither broodwar nor starcraft had any macro crutches, play the game if you don't believe me.

-"Macro will now be too easy. This will affect the higher levels of play!"
Not true, macro didn't get easier, you will have to build a lot of production facilities and extra town halls very regularly to get more resources and units only instead of doing it with a spell you do it with your workers.
In average the APM used is just about the same in both instances, and in the later stages of the game it actually becomes harder.

-"Macro mechanics aren't the problem, the problem is that protoss is badly designed/zerg is OP/terran imba"
As stated before, the math on most of the units is pretty solid, its the crutches that thrust this math into disarray most of the time,I think settling the macro issues will settle a lot of balance issues.

-"Changing the pace of the game will make it more boring!"
It's only the beginning stages of the game that are somewhat slower, as the game goes on it actually gets faster. In LOTV this may very well be an intentional side effect.

-Conclusions/ TL;DR-

It's a wild idea, but blizz might be on the ball with this one.

The current macro mechanics are fun and we've grown to love them,and the ways they positively affect the game are easy to see, but the many ways they negatively affect the game aren't until you actually get rid of them.

As I see it, as far as macro crutches go, cutting them would be better than keeping them, and keeping them would be better than making them easier, for making it easier might actually emphasize the problems with them rather than alleviate them.

It may also make the game more accessible, not in the sense that it will be easier to play, but in the sense the logic will be more sound and less "thats just how it is". It makes sense the more numerous units have the advantage, And it does make sense the stronger units can get overwhelmed by the lesser units, it just doesn't make sense that they always get rolled over without much resistance.
It's up to the player to find the situations in which each of his units excels and how to make the most of their control"I could have made it work if...", rather than "i can't go that unit, I'll get rolled over, it's just the way it is" Little bits of thought trains like that, that will make the game more accessible since the logic behind the matches will always be more sound, therefore less confusing to players.

Overall, I recommend trying the game out without the macro crutches,it really spices thing up.
And I would like for blizz to try it out in LOTV if only for a while, just so other players can see just how much depth removing this one thing, it actually adds.
Click to expand...

Why the macro mechanics exist in the first place. Some history behind sc2's development
There's a lot of discussion surrounding these right now and while I don't have an opinion to offer one way or another, I see a lot of misinformation about this and want to make sure people know the truth.

Macro mechanics exist solely because the community requested them.

When the game was first announced there was concern from the community at large that the inclusion of qol ui changes would decrease the amount of skill required.

On the micro side of things the big concern was the ability to select an infinite number of units instead of 12.

On the macro side the big concerns were worker rallys and multiple building select.

Macro was an element of the game nobody wanted to lose. Certain subsections of the Fandom were convinced the only way to save macro in sc2 was to remove these new features.

Frankly those concerns came from a good place and blizzard acknowledged as much, but they (rightly in my opinion) said they would not remove such features and instead would look at other ways to make sure macro stayed in tact.

Around 2008 they announced a new macro mechanic that went live in demos (this was still pre alpha). This mechanic wad universal to all the races. Vespene geysers would, like normal, run out of gas (I think prior to this change they never did, but would yield smaller gas returns a la brood war) but you could pay minerals for an ability on geysers called "deep drilling" that would fill the geyser with like 500 more gas. Thus was born the first iteration of macro mechanics.

This was a pretty reviled idea. People argued against it and called it a bandaid solution and one that would see little use (mostly because you should be expanding and never really have a good reason to use it till late late game). Most of the feedback called for something else, many of the same people as before still wanted the ui reverted to the archaic bw ui

One poster on the bnet forums had a brilliant idea however. (it happens on occasion) he suggested race specific macro mechanics instead of a universal one. This would help the flavor for each race, as well as solve the macro issue and we could still keep the nice ui updates.

The community and blizzard both loved the idea. Most everybody agreed that was a good way to go.

Blizzard went through several iterations of these mechanics (ask me later what a dark pylon is) until they landed on the current iterations.

Just thought this could bring some interesting background to this discussion.

Source: you'd have to dig through years of posts on the bnet forums or look it up on a wiki. I was there for it all as an observer but don't remember all exact dates or names to easily find the info. Too lazy to track it all down. Sorry.
Click to expand...
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/legacy-of-the-void/491742-new-macro-good
 
B

BigWeather

Member
Tempted to pre-order the physical CE from Amazon. Looks like I'll get beta and prologue, so that's cool. Has Amazon provided beta keys yet? Thanks!
 
S

Syf

Banned
BigWeather said:
Tempted to pre-order the physical CE from Amazon. Looks like I'll get beta and prologue, so that's cool. Has Amazon provided beta keys yet? Thanks!
Click to expand...
Don't think anything has been confirmed yet on retail beta keys aside from Best Buy giving them out. We know Blizzard is working with the retailers to provide 'em.
 
G

grandwizard

Member
Lethe82 said:
This post basically sums up the same arguments I've made against Macro mechanics years ago. In the case of Zerg Iits actually responsible for how 'weak' those units are, not that zerg were suppose to have strong units, but even basic lings in SCI are terrors compared to SCII because of injects. Frankly I do want to see what the game is like without the mechanics (or having them dramatically toned down), I've always felt like they actually add a ton of unpredictability and imbalance to the game... but I will miss how broken mules could be. Frankly macroing in the later game will be harder now without Zergs being able to insta saturate, terrans being able to mule dump, and mineral patches all running out oddly. Sure it's 'dumbinb the game down' but the scene has changed a ton since the days of BW and I think it's ok to say that the community was wrong then, or at least are certainly wrong now.
Click to expand...

This is really interesting, thanks. I'm looking forward to seeing how the game turns out with the removal of the macro mechanics. Injects in particular always seemed like pure busywork to me and not fun to have to do, but I also see the fears in the 'dumbing down' of the game.

I think there is something to be said for the idea of lowering the 'skill floor' of a game to make it more accessible, while retaining or raising the 'skill ceiling' for the high end.
 
M

Mr Swine

Banned
Man I'm so happy (if true) that LoTV has a really meaty single player since HoTS was lacking (needed 10 more mission tbh) and that blizzard are going to release more SP levels is a big bonus in my eyes!

But man a whole month without any update is crazy. I do wonder if Blizzard will release the game in December but keep the MP in beta till after New Year
 
G

grandwizard

Member
I get that HotS had less main missions than WoL but I still think it's a substantial campaign. The way you can choose what planet to go to and kind of change how things play out wrt what allies you find and what situation Kerrigan is in during certain events is a cool touch. Also there are the evolution missions which don't count as main missions but still took work to make. I really liked those and how they not only introduce new units but teach you how to use them effectively.
 
S

Syf

Banned
So glad they're following through with that. Can't wait to test this out.

The Protoss warp nerf to pylons could also be great for the game imo.
 
U

UnluckyKate

Member
this is very ballsy to try this so late in this beta. I hardly imagine it coming in 2015 though with all these tests and balance to make
 
P

phoenixyz

Member
I am not the biggest fan when it comes to removing the macro mechanics. But if it plays well in the end...

While I think the idea of changing warp-ins is good, the numbers don't feel right. 16 seconds is just too much.
 
M

Mr Swine

Banned
grandwizard said:
Update http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/18710641223

Goodbye mules, chronoboost, and injects!
Click to expand...

If that is it, then I'm honestly very disappointed. Where are the Cyclone changes? It was going to have both air and ground attack but damage was needed (until upgrade). And I still don't like the Disruptor if it gets the shell and scarab thingy. And Zerg air (vipers) are just op against banshees, Vikings and Liberators. And where the hell are the redesign of Thor and Raven? They still suck -_-
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Helldivers II | Review Thread
Analysis Review 2 3
127
11K
DaleinCalgary replied
Blasphemous II | Review Thread
Analysis Review Hype 2
93
7K
Northeastmonk replied
Cyberpunk 2077: Patch 2.0 Patch Notes
News Hype 2 3 4 5 6
250
18K
Sgt.Asher replied
Blizzard is making significant changes to Diablo 4 next season
News Hype
24
2K
Ogbert replied
Interview with Shuji Utsumi (SEGA Co-COO) by Japanese media outlet Seizo-Trend
Business Game Dev
1
1K
Unknown? replied
Top Bottom