Has SC2 Lost too much skill (as we know it) ?

[Protogod]

We've all been thinking about the question, but we've not had such a blunt and clearly structured topic on the matter..until now.

Things to consider when guaging "loss of skill" ;

Multiple buildings are selectable (easier to macro)
Superunits (easier to micro)
Larger unit selection cap
autocasting
smartcasting
"Hard" counters

[TitanWing]

I'm gonna have to say "no", but I feel Blizz crossing the line VERY soon.

[masterofhobbiton]

I'm going to say yes; the slow worker speed, multiple selection and building queues and everything point to it being suspiciously like WC3...

[TitanWing]

There's a lot of great new features and new units, but there's also some bad and Blizz needs to get off their asses and fix this stuff.

The ones I don't like are:

-Superunits (Thor and Mothership, though mostly the Thor)
-Multiple building selection
-Slower workers
-Cartoony graphics (specifically Terran)

Some things I like:

-New Terran addons
-Most all of the new units except for Mothership and Thor
-Rally on minerals/gas for workers makes them auto-mine

[SlickR]

The only thing i would agree with you protogod is the "Multiple buildings are selectable" this adds easier macro and takes out the skill in microing.
But on all the rest i think it's gona actually add microing. If you've played WC3 then you'll know you need intense microing skills in order to win(although almost all units have auto-cast). Auto-cast by itself is a disadvantage. smart casting i think will balance it out for the auto-cast.
Super units? Yeah the thor is sord of a super unit but its the only one. Protoss mothership has been tweaked and although it still has some useful abilities i find them to cover for the lost abilities from some of the old units.

400 mineral and 400gas is a lot, do you recall how much is the maximum carriers you can build on a normal map, it's around 12 to 16 and they you virtually are out of resources. Ofcourse on a custom map you can make lots but the balance is being made for normal maps.

I also don't see many hard counters. Mauby the thor due to its HP and the ability to fire ground and air as well as have artilery strice. But i'm confident it will be balanced out till the final version!

[TitanWing]

The fact that every single debate like this ends up centered on the Thor should be screaming to Blizz if they read our forums.

[Thedutchjelle]

I think that 'skill' should be defined by your strategic knowledge and stuff, not by how fast you can click.

[ChimTheGrim21]

I think that 'skill' should be defined by your strategic knowledge and stuff, not by how fast you can click.

I agree 100%. I think the addition of selecting multiple buildings at once is merely a change of the times. Starcraft II would not be an improvement without newer RTS gameplay innovations implemented. I think you guys are very comfortable with the old gameplay, but don't expect there to be minimal changes in SC2. It is a completely new game. It is not Starcraft 1.5.

[Ktan]

I think that 'skill' should be defined by your strategic knowledge and stuff, not by how fast you can click.

Agreed.


Otherwise, I think it's far too hard to tell without an actually hard copy of the game being played. Everyone's a great backseat general, but in the heat of battle things really can change.

[TitanWing]

I think that 'skill' should be defined by your strategic knowledge and stuff, not by how fast you can click.Poor Korean progamers...all that APM down the drain.

[Aqo]

Whoever says skill doesn't come down to how fast you can click is simply poor at RTS.
No, skill is definitely far from what makes RTS great, but if you remove the requirement for it you ruin the game.

One of the things that make Starcraft great is the physical aspect of it, the fact that it requires specific effort to macro and micro allows for much more interesting tactics. For instance, by attacking at multiple points, you'll force your enemy to micro at different points, thus hurting his macro and gaining the edge.
If you needed not take care of your base, many strategical options will become nullified.

Moreso, hard counters are a major blow to the RTS genre. They force you to use specific units against others because they're the only ones that work, and thus your battle options become limited and the entire game becomes a game of macro based on who can switch the type of units he produces to units that counter the enemy faster.
In Starcraft, nearly any unit that's able to hit another unit also had the ability to beat it, by using strategy and micro, taking advantage of terrain and unit formation, and taking the opponent's awareness of his units (once again, macro and micro matter) into effect.

Making macro and micro easier by adding modern RTS features, and creating hard counter units, may sound good to people who have no clue how to play a decent game, but a real player will know that those are only going to lead to a linear gameplay that becomes boring after two weeks when you master the main principles of it.

Starcraft's physical effects and the lack of real hard counters are what kept it interesting; they're what made it feel like a true player VS player game and not a player VS how well the other player uses the system game; they're what allowed for new tactics to always arise all the time, thus leading to new things you can do and keeping you interested.

Protoss can specialize in Dark Templar surprises, clever templar storming, reaver drops, arbiter hurries... the possibilities are endless, each player could do whatever he wanted and thus have his own unique experience for each game, combined with the unique result from the combination of whatever he did with what the opponent did.

If there were hard counters, you'll always do the exact same. It will become dull, very fast, like many RTS proved.

Yes, there are the standard cookie cutter which are easier to operate; so terran uses M&M and vessels against zerg, and factory VS protoss. Zerg uses lurkers with lings, or fast mutalisks. But even those can be varied so much...

My opinion about SC2 is undecided here. But if things become easier, and units get hard counters, the game will worsen.


---

Some new RTS features are good, but others are simply automation in disguise. Automation is only good for mechanical issues that do not affect gameplay. If you automate parts of gameplay, you give the players less freedom in playing, thus ruining the game. Less automation = more player control = more fun... unless you suck and can't handle the amount of control required.

Honestly, all automation ever does is give worst players the illusion that they can play better "because now it's more about tactics", when in reality good players will still kick their ass in that aspect, only that it will take them more time to pull off a victory per game because half of the gameplay becomes automated for the players who otherwise wouldn't be able to handle that either, thus making them survive longer and live in the illusion that they play better (but it's only the game that plays itself better).


---


One last note: Most of Korean pro players' APM comes from going over everything they have to watch it all the time. Easier macro and micro will not change that.
It is a VERY important aspect of RTS to pay attention to the entire battlefield in your sight, and it definitely is what makes the grand difference between bad and good players. Paying attention to what's going on allows you to strategize better, gives you extra vulnerability to surprise attacks, and overall makes both players more aware of what's going on, leading to a more interesting game.

Speed is not what RTS is about, but RTS without speed is like Chess without a timer. Better players will still do better at it than worst players thanks to better strategy, but the shit players will last longer because they'll have more time to react to their own mistakes, giving them the illusion that they play better.

[ChimTheGrim21]

I don't think that the "Hard counters" are going to be 100% "hard". For example, if you watch the videos you'll see that the immortal is supposed to counter the Seige Tank, but you'll see that Seige Tanks are still killing off some of the Immortals.

I think the original Starcraft had this same element. You'll notice Firebats don't work well on most units due to their attack type.

[bobboy]

Well if the tanks didnt kill ANY of the Immortals, that's just plain uber imbalanced, even at THIS stage of development.

[3Vee]

I'm going to have to wait and see. My feel at this moment is that the micro emphasis is going to shift: casters - and killing them - is going to end up as a larger part of the game. I really don't like the idea of SC becoming a caster-dominated game, but in order to keep that from happening, spells would need to be nerfed. So I'm keeping a close eye on that.

Macro-wise, I like the multiple building selection idea, but I want to see the implementation before I'm completely sold. I agree that it subtracts from the importance of speed, but I'm not sure it's entirely a good thing.

Thor and Mothership make me very unhappy, but we've gone over that ad nauseam by now.

[SlickR]

@Aqotrooper
Great writing there.
True strategy is not building a specific unit to kill anenemy specific unit, true strategy is the ability to asses the oponet faster and use the terain and your units more effectivly than he does. Ofcourse we also don't want a game of spellcasters and magic but thats why we have macro and micro. Those two kinda balance themselfs and being skilled in both will make the difference.
Again the thing that makes me see some abilities as adding skills is the mechanics of the skills.
For example you need to upgrade the zealot to have the charge ability but this does not mean that he is going to be better at a given situation. Say mauby upgrading armor instead of upgrading to charge ability can sometimes be better and vice-versa.
The only thing i see now as a loss to skill is the Thor and the new "smart casting". At the blizzcon we've seen that 1 thor can destroy 4 out of 5 cobras easily so this means it's not as slow as we thought it was. Thus you only need to auto-attack to destroy those cobras while with the cobras you need to actually do a lot of microing to fight agains the thro's. This means that managing thor's doesen't require much skills. Oposite to the thor the cobra requires more microing(fast clicking and unit awarness)to controll them better.
But i'm glad that blizzard will have some PRO players in the beta testing so they can pass out some useful feedback to the devs so they improve the game before final shipment!

[Dayoh]

I havent really been following this as most of yous have been (just little peeks).

I really dont like the idea of this "Uber units", i get the feeling it will be rush to get ur Uber and GG, with the select all buildings/slower workers, that doesent realy phase me, we dont want SC2 to be "outdated" on release do we :P.

I hope, I HOPE, it doesent turn into WC3

[Faiien]

for all we know the controls might be simplified but the intensity of the game may remain the same who knows. Iam undecided. Mayb some actions will still require a fast apm such as stalker blinking, viking control(split half your troops into air and half into ground), and with the new smartcast system it should also add to the micromanagement department it does seem a little noobish the computer isnt controlling where your gonna storm, you still have to choose the best spot possible and make use of your storms to their best potentials. Lets keep in mind that blizzard knows they have a huge audience in korea and i dont think their willing to give up that entire country to the demand of noobs........

[TitanWing]

Unfortunately, due to the fact that the weapons at Wal-mart were made in China, they break down and you have to replenish them every few minutes. :P

Auto-cast = no
Superunits = no

Most of the other features like rally-mine are great and aren't going to RUIN SC2 by simply allowing you to focus more on the fighting and less on moving each SCV to a mineral.

[Thedutchjelle]

Most of the other features like rally-mine are great and aren't going to RUIN SC2 by simply allowing you to focus more on the fighting and less on moving each SCV to a mineral.

Which is one of the things i meant.

[TitanWing]

I LIKE rally-mine, but I dislike multi building selection.

[Faiien]

all in all i think we can surely say that its a little too early for any serious assumptions on the topic of, if sc2 is too nobified, there are certain aspects of the game that seem to actually add to the micromanagement if you think about it. But before beta is out i think we should consider the possibility of sc2 mayb only having a little less micro but more macro.

[Protogod]

there are certain aspects of the game that seem to actually add to the micromanagement if you think about it.

how so?

[Faiien]

Mayb some actions will still require a fast apm such as stalker blinking, viking control(split half your troops into air and half into ground), and with the new smartcast system it should also add to the micromanagement department it does seem a little noobish the computer isnt controlling where your gonna storm, you still have to choose the best spot possible and make use of your storms to their best potentials which is even more important now due to the weakened storms.there are some more reasons ill post them later as soon as i can think of some XD

[Dayoh]

Allot of people are asking for things that are apparent in RTS games today, like the select building etc.

If yous dont want all the "Norm" extras of today, just play SC:BW.

[TitanWing]

Allot of people are asking for things that are apparent in RTS games today, like the select building etc.

If yous dont want all the "Norm" extras of today, just play SC:BW.Uh no, mmmk?

[3Vee]

Actually, he's got a point. Granted, SC when it came out had a simpler (and therefore harder, more intensive) UI than other games even of the same time (AoE, for example).

On the other hand, change happens, and it really doesn't make sense to stonewall at the old good stuff. The trick really is balancing new innovations and possibilities of technological advance with the same solid gameplay we expect.

Honestly, I'm expecting basic macro and micro to be a little easier. But this makes army micro a more important part of the game, to avoid spells etc. As long as spells aren't overpowered, it's not going to be a problem of difficulty level - just different.

[Faiien]

But this makes army micro a more important part of the game, to avoid spells etc. As long as spells aren't overpowered, it's not going to be a problem of difficulty level - just different.which is exactly why they weakened psi storm

[SilverCrusader]

No, it doesn't dumb down the game, because your competition can do all that as well, which means if they are good they don't have to focus as much time on that one thing, so they can go ballistic on all the other things more, this way you can have multiple fronts of battle at one time rather than the common one.

[BludSyko]

As far as smart casting, that won't take away from the level of skill. It will take that much more skill to dodge and counter your opponent's spells, while trying to weed out his attacking force. (Much like Silver above me said)

Like I've heard some people complaining about in other threads, if you have a high APM, that will definately increase your skill level. If you can cast a spell faster than your opponent, you will come out on top. If you can use your hotkeys to make units more quickly, you will have an advantage. The only thing that the new features are doing is making the game much more fast-paced.

If you want to argue that SC2 will focus more on micro and less on macro, I'll just ask, since when was mining and building units the fun part of the game? I would figure, in a time where every single movie and TV show has violence, people would be more interested in destroying another person's army and base.

[TitanWing]

I don't think anyone here is against rally-mine (you're an idiot if you are, fyi ;)).

[ChimTheGrim21]

Uh no, mmmk?

...

I agree with Dayoh. I don't see how you would seriously expect a 10-year old RTS gameplay style to return in SC2. It is a new game. This is a different decade. If you want to play the old way, then SC:BW is there for you.

[TitanWing]

If you want to play a new game, then all those new games are there for you.

The rest of us would like Blizz to stick to the features that made SC great, that way raw skill actually makes more of a difference than building the right unit at the right time in the right quantity.

[GroG]

Lets just face the facts here guys, any time you play a real time strategy game the faster you are the better you are. Whether or not that means you click more or faster is up to interpretation, but the more efficient and decisive you are the better. If you want to just be the smartest one with no time limit, you should be playing a turn based strategy game.

Now, having extensively played both WC3:TFT and SC:BW (many of you know I 1v1 alot in both games), I'll go ahead and give my opinion as I see it.

For the multiple building selection selecting issue, there are a few things that offset this, from my experience in WC3. First, if you have different production buildings, like say a factory and a barracks, then you will be able to control group them together but you'll have to tab through them to produce your units while microing. This means you can't just hit "z" to produce a bunch of units-- it'll only apply that to the building it works with. But it will still require your opponent to build 6 gateways and not 2 gateways with a qeue of 3 units a piece. Timing will still be important since you can't just build 4 gateways right off the bat. Also, remember you aren't going to be stuck with upkeep like in WC3 -- you can expand as much as you want and there are no limits to what to build as fast as you can. Also, you can play riskier -- there is no enemy hero gaining experience when your rush fails so his counter attack is that much easier with his powerful spells.

From what I've seen, you guys are complaining a lot about "hard counters". I hate to break it to you guys, but SC was a lot about hard counters, it wasn't until your army started mixing units did it become more about soft counters and positioning and such. WC3, on the other hand, was more about microing and soft counters--ie one unit didn't necessarily beat another unit, it depended on how you used it. One thing that aided that was the heroes and how they complimented your army. Superunits might be comparable to heroes, and that'd be the main reason why I wouldn't want them. I'd rather see army composition determining the soft counter as opposed to the single unit they made.

The last thing I'd like to touch on is autocasting. I have mixed feelings about autocasting, some spells like medic/priest heal are great for autocast. But I've also seen a hero-based non-autocast heal spell be very good as well (and not too micro intensive - SW healing wave or Paladin holy light). But I've also seen bad ones, like the alchemist healing spray -- too hard to use. On the other hand, many people consider other autocast spells like slow, slow-poison, and faerie fire to be too powerful. So what's my opinion? I'd say think real world. In the real world, would every medic require the commander to tell them to heal a unit? No. Would they require the commander to tell them to cast restoration? I say no to that also - a change from SC. But would a commander need to inform his troops when to cast strategic spells like slow or faerie fire? I say yes to this.

That's my 2 cents.

[3Vee]

Good post! I want to touch on one of your points here, because I think we may be talking past each other.

From what I've seen, you guys are complaining a lot about "hard counters". I hate to break it to you guys, but SC was a lot about hard counters, it wasn't until your army started mixing units did it become more about soft counters and positioning and such.

It depends exactly what you mean by this. It's true that SC has a lot of hard counters - but what most people are concerned about, I think, is what happened especially with the BW expansion: some units had, as it were, too hard a counter, and didn't get used. Scouts; T infantry in some match-ups.

Nitpicky, I realize, but still.

[BlackDefiler]

Voted undecided.

Multiple building selection wouldn't make it too noobish I think, since everyone would still have to manage unit production, It would just be faster overall.

Hard counters are a bigger problem, I wouldn't like SC2 as a "he builds that so I have to build this or I lose" game. But I didn't really see any exceptionally hard counters so far. Of course the thor is hard to kill, but it's a superunit so it doesn't really hardcounter anything it's just strong. Immorals look more like a hard counter, but maybe the P needed a good cannonfodder against pushes.

Autocast was also in BW with the medic, so I think it could be applied to some basic spells without making it imba.
Smartcast is more concerning, but I guess they addressed the biggest problem with nerfing the psi-storm.

Superunits...well bit undecided with them as well. I don't think they are good enough to be rushed for. SC2 will have fast rushes from the start, so you won't have the opportunity to just sit back in your base and spend all your money on teching. Plus their high prices will really make them a moneydrain, so my guess is we won't see them used in every game or mostly just on turtlefests.

GIVE BACK WORKER SPEED

I guess that's all.

[ChimTheGrim21]

I generally like the new things like multiple building selecting, but I would be worried about smartcasting like BlackDefiler said. My idea of smartcasting becoming an annoyance is in ZvZ match-ups with the Queen's Spawn Broodling ability. If everyone just gets 12 queens and broodlings everything real fast. I wonder what exactly the Zerg gameplay in SC2 is going to consist of.

[ecyor0]

Don't we all.....

[Ahzz]

I think that 'skill' should be defined by your strategic knowledge and stuff, not by how fast you can click.
starcraft is like that. You're just too nooby to realize it. I bet some of you have heard of this, but I just love to use this example.
One of my ex buddy used to have 400 actions per minute. funny thing was, he was pure shit at the game itself, which is quite laughable. even now you can be top of europe level if you only have 150-ish apm.

Starcraft has never been a game which only requires speed. However, now that required speed is decreasing, you guys talk about "it shouldnt be skill = speed boohoo". Very annoying.

One of my irl friends was like easily top of Finland in warcraft 3 (finland has always had very high level lineup for it) and he said that its VERY easy to play 'perfect', rest is just about luck or if you get bored or fool around and stuff. Any wc3 player who starts saying otherwise is obviously much worse at it, so please dont. Do you want starcraft 2 to be slow paced piece of shit like warcraft 3? I don't.

It's funny. All the noobs who don't even know how to play wish for all new RTS crap like easy micro, lots of hp, automine, heck, probably even automatic micro. They've never even bothered to actually play a game on high level, and then they ask for all these noob friendly things? You know why so many stayed at cs 1.6 instead of moving to source? because source was made so easy that it had no more challenge. so easy to make a headshot etc. We can compare starcraft vs starcraft 2 to cs 1.6 vs source.

if you want a easy game, I know EXACTLY what you're looking for.
http://www.progressquest.com/
here. A fabulous game where you can absolutely nothing. it does everything for you. interesting aint it? hehheh. All of you gotta love it, since its so simple and easy. anyone can get high level. gotta love it. kyaa!
right? well, seriously no.

In general I never like anything unless it has a challenge. I don't like playing against people inferior to me, and I don't like a game that is made damn easy. as simple as that ~~

Some stupid stuff:
you can hotkey unlimited amount of units, even buildings to a single hotkey. now you got automine too. lets see.... lets say its late or middle game at starcraft (anyone with a little bit of sc experience will know what im talking about), you have several expansion. You hotkey all nexuses and put automine on minerals and keep making constant probes. Woah, perfect economy.

now, hotkey your gateways to a few hotkeys too. even while microing, you can just do 0z9h8i
and woah, all your 18 gateways are producing zealots, hightemplars, and immortals. So easy to have good macro too.

Now, mass unit select and smart moving, in other words, they wont run in straight line, but actually advance in neat lines. its a game where large armies battle against each other, well, what before took 9 groups, now takes only 3, you get a good flank with those three groups, and it took alot less effort. woah?

Anyone still doubting me that its about to be just a LITTLE bit too nooby?

and you know, thats only the beginning but my drink is in the freezer and its already been there 1 hour 30 mins so its almost completely frozen, so I'll leave it at that for a while.

maybe this will shut some of you down how you want it to be more nooby and "speed = not skill" etc ;P
speed is a damn big part of skill, but its not like you only need speed to be GOOD.

[Snot]

Ahzz, you take all the fun out of living, just so you know... <_<

Anyway, speed is a very valuable factor in winning in SC, cause it won't do you any good if you are just building say a Citadel of Adun and upping your Lots speed now, and your opponent has already got shit loads of DTs from his Templar Archives, speed will tip the game in your favour early game. No matter how you look at it, you always want to get at your opponent as fast as you can, and try and avoid a battle in middle game where you both are evened out either in force or in resources. Or god help us you get to late game and end up starving one another out... the nightmares still haven't ended.

SC2 will be more like real combat, you need to get here and get here fast, or you lose the edge you have... actually... SC was like that too, SC2 just makes it look cooler.;)

[Ahzz]

:P What I want sc2 to be... Well, I don't care if they make all new buildings and units, I just want it to work the same way. no extra stuff to make it easier, and all that. As long as the feeling is just the same, its gonna be good. Well, hard to say since I've not played it but... Starcraft is perfection.

[Snot]

Ahzz, pull your nose out of Blizzards rear for 5 seconds... please.:D

[ChimTheGrim21]

It's funny. All the noobs who don't even know how to play wish for all new RTS crap like easy micro, lots of hp, automine, heck, probably even automatic micro.
I don't remember seeing anyone say they want more HP on units in SC, And if they did.. they should just stay out of SC2 discussion.

:P What I want sc2 to be... Well, I don't care if they make all new buildings and units, I just want it to work the same way. no extra stuff to make it easier, and all that. As long as the feeling is just the same, its gonna be good. Well, hard to say since I've not played it but... Starcraft is perfection.

I'm kinda confused as to what you consider to be "extra stuff to make it easy". Is it having the ability to select multiple buildings, to select more than 12 units, etc..?

[Ahzz]

yep. it makes it easier. Alot. I already gave several examples.

[Aqo]

Listen to Ahzz guys. He knows what he's talking about.

[Protogod]

Yeah, if you're still trying to refute it after Ahzz's rant, you either didn't read it or you've never played standard 1v1 melee.

I mean, really, his story took all of 13 clicks to play through a full battle w/ expansions & flank & macro.

If I can play a game in 13 clicks, I would rather not play SC2.

[ecyor0]

Except that if someone has 18 gateways already, they're probably going to win regardless

[Aqo]

Not if their opponent has 20 hatches.

[GroG]

I actually disagree with the vast majority of points Ahzz made about WC3 and how parts of it shouldn't be used in SC2. I also think the point about how "my friend is good, he knows what he's talking about, and if you don't agree you obviously aren't as good and should stop talking now". Right. Anyways, I wasn't AMAZING!!!!! but I was ranked just under 800 in solo on Azeroth a year or two ago using my own strategy of solo pitlord on roughly 80% of my games, so I can tell you that it doesn't require "perfect" play, and in fact perfect play is impossible if you play any innovative player or if you try to innovate yourself, or hell if you just have a different playstyle..

Anyways, I don't want this to degenerate into WC3 SUCKS SC RULES! or anything, but I did want to point out that if you don't actually take the time to ladder yourself for a while and understand a game, you probably shouldn't talk about it. It's like the rumor mill -- Oh, my friend's cousin's brother's sister's ex-babysitter said that WC3 required no skill, and he was high on some foriegn ladder that no one heard of so you can't dispute it. Ok, but form your OWN opinion by playing, don't take someone else's word for it. It'd be too bad if your friend told you that SC had sucked back in the day, what would you do then?

And to the point at hand-- taking away some of the tediousness of SC will really help out the game. I noticed they are using the "idle worker" icon like WC3 used, that will be a nice improvement. I also don't think the hotkey of multiple buildings is that big of a deal either, and I'd like to know whats the difference in "skill" of having to click 1 1 (center on building) click-z click-z click-z click-z to make all of your zealots as opposed to click 1 click z. It just takes out the redundancy and doesn't fix the needing to make more gateways or not timing your buildings properly.

Finally, if you want SC2 to be the same as SC1, please tell me what the point of a new game would even be? Seems like you just want to continue playing SC1. There's nothing wrong with that, but what's the point in trying a new game if you don't want a new experience?

[ChimTheGrim21]

I actually disagree with the vast majority of points Ahzz made about WC3 and how parts of it shouldn't be used in SC2. I also think the point about how "my friend is good, he knows what he's talking about, and if you don't agree you obviously aren't as good and should stop talking now". Right. Anyways, I wasn't AMAZING!!!!! but I was ranked just under 800 in solo on Azeroth a year or two ago using my own strategy of solo pitlord on roughly 80% of my games, so I can tell you that it doesn't require "perfect" play, and in fact perfect play is impossible if you play any innovative player or if you try to innovate yourself, or hell if you just have a different playstyle..

Anyways, I don't want this to degenerate into WC3 SUCKS SC RULES! or anything, but I did want to point out that if you don't actually take the time to ladder yourself for a while and understand a game, you probably shouldn't talk about it. It's like the rumor mill -- Oh, my friend's cousin's brother's sister's ex-babysitter said that WC3 required no skill, and he was high on some foriegn ladder that no one heard of so you can't dispute it. Ok, but form your OWN opinion by playing, don't take someone else's word for it. It'd be too bad if your friend told you that SC had sucked back in the day, what would you do then?

And to the point at hand-- taking away some of the tediousness of SC will really help out the game. I noticed they are using the "idle worker" icon like WC3 used, that will be a nice improvement. I also don't think the hotkey of multiple buildings is that big of a deal either, and I'd like to know whats the difference in "skill" of having to click 1 1 (center on building) click-z click-z click-z click-z to make all of your zealots as opposed to click 1 click z. It just takes out the redundancy and doesn't fix the needing to make more gateways or not timing your buildings properly.

Finally, if you want SC2 to be the same as SC1, please tell me what the point of a new game would even be? Seems like you just want to continue playing SC1. There's nothing wrong with that, but what's the point in trying a new game if you don't want a new experience?

I played both Starcraft and Warcraft III since their release... and I agree 100% with Grog. I was better at Warcraft III than Starcraft I'll admit, but I still don't see how "the skill of starcraft" will be taken out just by making it more convenient to hotkey unit training, etc..

[Ahzz]

but I was ranked just under 800 in solo on Azeroth
he was almost top 10 in northrend solo.

but enough of that. I've already told what I think.

[IrishDutchman]

IMO should be a battle of wits, of pitting your resourcefulness, perception and knowledge against that of another player.
It should about knowing your enemy, scouting his forces, predicting his moves and then countering them.
It should be about misleading your enemy, and then surprising him with units he didn't even know you had.
It should be about building an effective force as fast as possible, using the best build order for that situation and adapting it to his.
It should be about sneak attacks, ambushes, flanking, and full on assaults with lots of explosions.
I don't care if the mundane parts like managing your workers and clicking all the units you produce one by one are taken away. In fact, it would be quite cool.
The only part of the traditional 'skill' I would like to keep is the necessity of micro. People are afraid that if you are able to select your army all at once, it takes away the need for micro skills. However, if you just attack-move all of your units at the same time, someone who DOES manage their units closely will still beat you.

[Thedutchjelle]

And i fully agree with you.

I especially liked this part. and full on assaults with lots of explosions.

[Ktan]

I think it's worth pointing out, that one side to the 'OMG, less clicking!" is in reference to 'smart casting' not reducing skill.

Essentially, it's not about how fast you can click between templar, for example, but how well you react to threats and how you respond. Yes, this does require speed, but having to deselect and select about five templar is due to an engine limitation.

Essentially, if Blizzard could have done smart-casting in StarCraft I, they would have done. This is really more my opinion than fact, but I'm sure they would have done.

Also, a lot of modern RTS use smartcasting systems, but require micromanagement. It's just a different breed altogether.

Taking the Eldar in DoW as an example, learning and applying their tech tree well, while successfully managing your units on the front line is vital to not actually sucking with them. In this way, micro with Eldar is entirely different to that of the micro in SC, because you can just tab between units, but they will require a lot of attention to play.

thus, if Blizzard get it right, micro won't be removed, just changed. You're probably still going to require precise control of your units. Making this easier simply makes it more accessible.

Plus, I'm sure once people get the game in their hands, they'll start doing things that contradict what Blizzard expected.

I still maintain it will be too hard to tell until we're actually playing it. For all we know, you may have to click less, but react faster, something that perhaps does not take as much 'dexterity' but takes more 'skill'.

And that's the problem with this argument, because lots of the arguements that SC is dumbing down seem to be using dexterity and skill as interchangeable terms.

Skill
1. the ability, coming from one's knowledge, practice, aptitude, etc., to do something well: Carpentry was one of his many skills. <---Applies most to SC, I would reckon
2. competent excellence in performance; expertness; dexterity: The dancers performed with skill. <--- as does this
3. a craft, trade, or job requiring manual dexterity or special training in which a person has competence and experience: the skill of cabinetmaking. <--- I might add, though it states dexterity, this is referring more to manual labour, or having a 'skill'.

Dexterity
1. skill or adroitness in using the hands or body; agility. <--- current SC
2. mental adroitness or skill; cleverness. <--- Ideally what will apply mainly in SCII, just hopefully at a high speed.

Basically, we'll know if it requires skill when we have the appropriate knowledge and start applying it. :P

[ChimTheGrim21]

Good post. I totally agree.