Worried Bout Macro in SC2 more than ever

yeah, I wonder if saviour did an interview after the match... or maybe he had bwchart on :O lol

Thx gup XD

 

I was on BlizzCon 2008 in Anaheim.

I played Starcraft II about 15-20 games (I win most of them because all players was really total noobs ^^)
But i didn't feel that Starcraft II is slower then Starcraft I qute oposit i feel sc2 is much faster.

We play on normal speed all games, but that normal speed was also too fast. I play with terran (now you can trein marine's MUCH faster then before etc...)
Only one thing was very confusing for me and that is GAS. I never has enouf gas....that is big problem...that thing push me to have more exp and ...more exp ...and more exp...because of gas and ALSO more managing.


Mebie i can't explain you very well (because of language) but trust me YOU WILL LOVE STARCRAFT II very much.

I love sc1 but Starcraft 2 is much better (in terms for e-sport just trust me).

 

You know what?
I think that they should choose if you want your miners to automine or not.
I personnaly like the fact that you can choose where you want your miners mine.
In starcraft 64 for example, miners auto mine when you build them which i like and wish you had an option like that.
Although i have to agree that its much funner manning an army and scouts and all that, because that happens to me alot when im managing my base and get attacked.
But i still like it when you order your miners or whether you build stuff.
I LIKE THE ORIGINAL STARCRAFT AS IT IS. MUCH MORE BASIC.
As i say again, you should be able to choose for automine or any stuff like that.
May we all hope Starcraft2 comes quick than expected

 

And this isn't?

Why? No, it won't be the StarCraft (1) players that are the biggest force in allowing this game to have such longevity for years and years since, if they do these things, StarCraft 2 will lose A LOT OF PLAYERS to games such as Dawn Of War II. You just saying that it'll deter a small amount of people shows me you haven't been to other RTS forums and haven't heard their opinions. If StarCraft II had all of these things you are talking about it would be a HUUUGE failure retail-wise compared to what it could have been. There's no really any way you can argue this. You ever heard why most people don't like StarCraft? It's because of the UI. That's why so many people say Dawn Of War and other RTS are so much better and StarCraft is trash when it obviously isn't. I have seen both sides and the opinions of gamers who can't stand the StarCraft series for the things you mentioned.. they are a lot more than you think... a lot more than the current StarCraft fanbase. The only thing that could save it in this respect is the hype and the reputation of StarCraft and Blizzard... and World Of WarCraft. But, a game saved only by reputation would not last.

Also, I've used mutlicommand hacks and automining hacks in the campaign when I want to just relax and have fun.. and .. guess what... IT DIDN'T MAKE THAT BIG OF A DIFFERENCE. And, StarCraft is a game that was based around having heavy UI limitations. Imagine what a game designed around having as little UI limitations as possible could do! Most of the people who are complaining about this are people who haven't really played a game with these features. If StarCraft II can add unit micro and give more mechanics that add macro then it'll be fine.. but even if they don't, it'll still be great because micro is more interesting than macro. It's not like it's instantly going to turn into WarCraft III minus the heroes.

That's definately false without a doubt. That's more accurate if you only take in professional or elitist players such as teamliquid.net but it's still stretching it to say "most" no matter how you put it.

But, it has more micro. Maybe they balance out? Macro is definately an important part and is the reason I love StarCraft so much and keep coming back to it, but it doesn't have to have the same amount of macro to have enough. If they make you have to focus more on your units that will increase macro in itself because of the difficulty of running your base while giving your units commands. To me, micro is much more interesting than macro. I'd rather see things such as in StarCraft: Brood War a "Muta StacK", "Vulture Harass", or some nice storms, dark swarm, and et cetera.

That's 100% micro. No doubt about it. Unless you're just talking about pressing 'A' and clicking on the map. In which case, it's hardly macro either.

-- I disagree with just about everything Jissé says. It appears he only has experience with WarCraft III and has based all of his assumptions around that. I have played just about every RTS and I can tell you... "NO!" If anything, that would describe StarCraft more than StarCraft II the way it is going.

Also, Jissé, your problems with WarCraft III comes from inexperience and unwillingness to try something new. I've been playing WarCraft III for YEARS and it's nowhere even close to as bad as you're saying. Sounds to me like someone complaining about imbalance with Carriers or Zergling Rush in StarCraft. It makes the game look bad even though the fault is with the player.

But ..

I agree with just about EVERYTHING Kimera757 said. I especially agree on what he said about Blizzard trying to increase macro in StarCraft II and a lot of people preferring a micro-intensive game to a macro-intensive game. Also, the soccer example was pure win .

Furthermore, I just want to say that if you think StarCraft II is just about massing units and clicking the attack command, you're watching the wrong videos. But, either way, a lot of units of a certain type against units they are good against could make even StarCraft look that way. What you're talking about is balance which will come later.

 

Now Im confused.. then what the **** is macro?

 

I would be willing to give a detailed explanation but there are already numerous articles on this subject at WarBoards.org and certain other forums and websites such as StarCraft.org that would be more insightful than anything I could give without taking hours. I will find one and give you a link. I hope it won't take long

But, just so you know for now, when it comes to the units (Not base or resource management) there's a thin line between micromanagement and macromanagement. Think of StarCraft as macro and WarCraft III as micro.

 

Well.. this is what i found

 

Yes, that's quite accurate. I am looking through WarBoards.org's forums now because there have been many arguments and articles written about this. So far I haven't found any of them but if I do I will post a link here.

But, for the time being, I think that's pretty accurate and should give you a general idea.