I bought this awesome game that SC2 is and then I discovered Broodwar. I'm starting to discover the history behind it (first being curious about BoxeR, then seeing an Adelscott -a pro SC2 French player- interview about those who inspired him back in his BW days, and as of late ElkY -TV documentary on him that I am working on subbing to English). These days, I was thinking about the fact that Broodwar looked awesome despite the low graphics. That, and it just has some *hype* components to it (eraser, reaver drops, lurkers...)
I started playing SC2:BW (the mod Maverck made for SC2 to behave to a similar way to BW) for fun with other people who, just like me, were playing it for fun. Despite having absolutely no notion of BW strategy, it seemed fun. I even found me a favorite unit: The reaver. :3 Why don't they make reavers in SC2 instead of colossus? v.v
Anyway, I said I was working on subs (still not done with that, I underestimated the difficulty of such process @_@), I got a phone text about the fact that I had 10 euros to use on whatever-I-wanted from a store.
Anyway, I installed the game and all and am now playing the Vanilla SC Terran campaign.
Here are my first impressions: - I think I'll have to wage war vs the UI ^^ I guess that'll help me macro and micro better in SC2 since I think that both are *so hard* in BW, especially micro D: - I have heard about "skill ceilings" in BW that are not there in SC2. If I were to compare, I'd say that SC2 automatically does some stuff you have to do yourself in BW. That, and even the stuff that you would have to take time doing you will do it easier (example: building marines - MBS in SC2, none of that in SC:BW - you have to select everything yourself). - No grid hotkeys (dayum) - Where are my control groups? Or are they not there in the campaign? @_@
And then I watch BoxeR do his tricks and all and am like: OMG how did you domesticate the beast? D: And then #2: Jaedong muta micro, how can he do that with such UI? And then #3: Reaver drops must feel like a sport inside a sport. I don't know, this UI feels threatening xD
It's not like I'm going to give up playing at least the campaign, quite the contrary. I feel like I could use skills acquired from BW over SC2 (since SC2 seems leaps and bounds easier in comparison). That and iCCup seems down, can anyone help moi?
Anyway, done with the random ramblings of an SC2 newb being initiated to BW. Wish me luck >.>
I feel like anyone with BW experience will be a lot better at SC2 than someone without, just because broodwar was SO hard, and to be decent at broodwar, meant your macro was pretty darn solid, giving you an edge to focus on other little things in SC2. (you also have mutiple building select, ALL of your units on one hotkey if you wanted, and... automine. gasp.)
Don't be discouraged! SC:BW is definitely a harder game to play than SC2, but once you get the hang of it youll be having a blast (I was a noob 4 months ago in sc:bw to but now I at least have some what of a clue of what I am doing and actually almost got D + ).
You become much more amazed at the control you see from some progamers after trying it yourself and seeing how difficult it can be. You can't just 1a t and win an engagement against a skilled opponent in BW.
If you are really bad at BW but want to practice with someone on iCCup, PM me. I would probably be an E on iCCup if such low ranks existed (don't know if they do or not). I'm having fun playing vs the AI, but it would be nice playing with someone at my low skill level (based on your post I get the impression youre not very good yet, but I could be wrong).
Also you have control groups, they just dont show up on the UI like they do in SC2.
Playing BW is like flying a spitfire: it seems simple enough, yet it has got a lot of quirks, but it roars like a lion with a diesel engine when you play it right ^^
Every time someone posts a BW is harder than SC2 thread because of the mechanics, I must remind you of a little game called warcraft.
The mechanics of BW were not by design, everything you do is a *feature* and if they were able to do things like MBS and better unit AI, they would have done it. SCBW promoted computer skills over strategical thinking which is why players like nestea didn't do as much in scbw, but in sc2 they shine. SCBW had as much decision making as sc2, but the decisions in sc2 cannot be as easily overcome by micro. If you make a bad unit choice, no amount of micro can help you win. So in bw, micro would cost you games, in sc2, unit composition costs games. It's different.
As for the UI, sc2 is much more user friendly and as a result will appeal to a wider audience making the game much more succesful.
As far as control groups, thanks for the info. I started feeling a bit lost. Even though I'm still lost because I couldn't bind them (let's go google!)
XD - if the goons are as terrible as in SC2:BW, then I'll have tough times ahead... As far as my mini-pic, I play Protoss in SC2. I don't know what race I will play in SC:BW just yet, mainly because Terran feels strangely intuitive in it (unlike SC2 - in my opinion, I'm entitled one methinks).
I am starting to get a feel of the UI through the Terran campaign. I'm trying to adapt as quickly as possible and I notice that there is much more effort required in taming it. I mean, campaign, nearing 1000 minerals in the evac mission (Mengsk entering the scene)... >.> bad me for not making moar raxes and getting supply blocked when I think I'm doing well managing my rine positioning. Well, that's something to work on.
Edit: Oh so it's not CTRL + number, it's the other way. Alright at least I got that part covered now.
On April 22 2011 06:27 mizU wrote: I feel like anyone with BW experience will be a lot better at SC2 than someone without, just because broodwar was SO hard, and to be decent at broodwar, meant your macro was pretty darn solid, giving you an edge to focus on other little things in SC2. (you also have mutiple building select, ALL of your units on one hotkey if you wanted, and... automine. gasp.)
i still play SC2 like its BW lol. i forget to use MBS and stuff :x
On April 22 2011 08:50 TheDeli wrote: As far as control groups, thanks for the info. I started feeling a bit lost. Even though I'm still lost because I couldn't bind them (let's go google!)
XD - if the goons are as terrible as in SC2:BW, then I'll have tough times ahead... As far as my mini-pic, I play Protoss in SC2. I don't know what race I will play in SC:BW just yet, mainly because Terran feels strangely intuitive in it (unlike SC2 - in my opinion, I'm entitled one methinks).
I am starting to get a feel of the UI through the Terran campaign. I'm trying to adapt as quickly as possible and I notice that there is much more effort required in taming it. I mean, campaign, nearing 1000 minerals in the evac mission (Mengsk entering the scene)... >.> bad me for not making moar raxes and getting supply blocked when I think I'm doing well managing my rine positioning. Well, that's something to work on.
Edit: Oh so it's not CTRL + number, it's the other way. Alright at least I got that part covered now.
Wait, what? You hold down CTRL, and press the number to assign the group.
Then you press the number to go back to the group.
Well that's what I do but it doesn't work. That, or it might be taking under account the fact that my non-numpad keys are not numbers in AZERTY. Which means, I'd have to play with capslock activated >.>
On April 22 2011 07:41 darmousseh wrote: Every time someone posts a BW is harder than SC2 thread because of the mechanics, I must remind you of a little game called warcraft.
The mechanics of BW were not by design, everything you do is a *feature* and if they were able to do things like MBS and better unit AI, they would have done it. SCBW promoted computer skills over strategical thinking which is why players like nestea didn't do as much in scbw, but in sc2 they shine. SCBW had as much decision making as sc2, but the decisions in sc2 cannot be as easily overcome by micro. If you make a bad unit choice, no amount of micro can help you win. So in bw, micro would cost you games, in sc2, unit composition costs games. It's different.
As for the UI, sc2 is much more user friendly and as a result will appeal to a wider audience making the game much more succesful.
When you say "every time" you really do mean every time. You're like an SC2 propagandist!
I don't see any reason to think that SC2, as a game, promotes "strategical thinking" more than SC:BW. You're framing mechanics and strategical thinking as if they draw from the same attentional processes, as if thought devoted to one necessarily detracts from thought devoted to another. But, in fact, there is almost no limit to the amount of simultaneous processes that can be run by your brain once they have been automated. It's not like Flash is thinking, "I sure would like to be able to contemplate my gameplan right now, but gosh darnit I have to queue up another round of tanks!"
SC2 and SC:BW are different games. SC:BW is not SC2 minus MBS, and SC2 is not SC:BW plus more time for "decision making." Looking over your long post history on the subject, I think you make the comparison in such reductive terms because it corroborates your preference for SC2 as an e-sport. But really I think you should allow people to discuss BW without obeying the urge to jump in with your "omg extraneous mechanical demands!" observations. At least not every time.
If only the mechanics were the only differences between SC2 and BW .
On April 22 2011 07:41 darmousseh wrote: Every time someone posts a BW is harder than SC2 thread because of the mechanics, I must remind you of a little game called warcraft.
The mechanics of BW were not by design, everything you do is a *feature* and if they were able to do things like MBS and better unit AI, they would have done it. SCBW promoted computer skills over strategical thinking which is why players like nestea didn't do as much in scbw, but in sc2 they shine. SCBW had as much decision making as sc2, but the decisions in sc2 cannot be as easily overcome by micro. If you make a bad unit choice, no amount of micro can help you win. So in bw, micro would cost you games, in sc2, unit composition costs games. It's different.
As for the UI, sc2 is much more user friendly and as a result will appeal to a wider audience making the game much more succesful.
If you want I could put you in contact with my roommate. His parents never let him play video games so not only has he never played sc until now, he has no general knowledge of RTS or video games in general. He's in the same position as you, playing through the vanilla campaign. Since you're on TL I'm guessing your better than him though.
He can beat the zerg computer somtimes... but he loses to the P and T usually to give you some idea.
He really wants to play with people online (who are noobs too) but on iccup everyone is so good, and on public servers he couldn't really find a 1v1.
On April 22 2011 11:24 infinity2k9 wrote: Play Protoss and only play PvT and you can get away with the most basic elements of the game only.
PvT is not even close to only the basic elements of the game. What you mean is that it only requires basic army management skills and relatively little micro. It takes substantial game sense to know what you are able to get away with and exactly how strong your army is once terrans learn how to push properly and to set up their army properly. It is extremely hard to pull out of a bad engagement in PvT, and so you need to be able to judge how strong your army is in comparison to theirs and account for positioning accurately or you end up with a pile of blue goo and a lost game when they walk into your natural, even if you were ahead before that.
That being said, terrans don't learn how to push until at least D+ level on iccup, so for someone just starting out this is unlikely to be an issue.
The reason you have problem with control groups, is that you're playing with a french keyboard, so you need to Caps lock. Advantage of the french keyboard is that the A key is closer to 1234 so it's really nice when you want to 1a2a3a4a !
You asked about muta micro. To stack mutas, put mutas together with a slow or immobile unit in a control group (like an overlord or a larva or a burrowed unit), select the control group, move, and they mutas will automatically stack up !
On April 22 2011 06:39 -{Cake}- wrote: Control groups only can have 12 units in them and are not shown in the lower center Dragoons and Goliaths always bug out xP
On April 22 2011 06:27 mizU wrote: I feel like anyone with BW experience will be a lot better at SC2 than someone without, just because broodwar was SO hard, and to be decent at broodwar, meant your macro was pretty darn solid, giving you an edge to focus on other little things in SC2. (you also have mutiple building select, ALL of your units on one hotkey if you wanted, and... automine. gasp.)
i still play SC2 like its BW lol. i forget to use MBS and stuff :x
All day baby! Honestly I am always amazed that almost no pros use more than a 3 key army, and many use just one. Shocking, especially with all the talk about DPS and splash units.
If you ever want any help/coaching/advice just PM me here or as sGs.LucidDream on iccup.
I agree, reavers are awesome. Such a tear-jerker when you compare them to colossus. Keep up the hard work, BW is a damn fine game that went overlooked by far too many people
12nex is a really weird build. The idea is that you get enough probes out of the expansion and enough mining time that you come out even or ahead even against most early rushes where the terran usually hasn't built his economy as much. You get slightly more units slightly later, so you'll be able to clear out the terran force after he's killed your natural, and as long as you saved all or most of the probes at the natural you have a fine economy and can transition into a mostly normal game. You will, however, lose horribly if he kills probes at your natural as well as the nexus.
ROFL! Oh well, we're being spoiled way too much in SC2. Not regretting getting BW.
On April 22 2011 12:06 Jonoman92 wrote: If you want I could put you in contact with my roommate. His parents never let him play video games so not only has he never played sc until now, he has no general knowledge of RTS or video games in general. He's in the same position as you, playing through the vanilla campaign. Since you're on TL I'm guessing your better than him though.
He can beat the zerg computer somtimes... but he loses to the P and T usually to give you some idea.
He really wants to play with people online (who are noobs too) but on iccup everyone is so good, and on public servers he couldn't really find a 1v1.
As soon as I get an iCCup account, no problem (I have this Forbidden screen, no idea why). Well, I still didn't tame the UI and I'm only playing campaign for now. Though I have some SC2 experience. I'm still learning them BW hotkeys. I still didn't play any game vs AI.
LOL @ Kenpachi xD
=== I'm still not set on what race I'll pick in BW. It all depends on how they feel in the campaigns.
On April 22 2011 12:06 Jonoman92 wrote: He can beat the zerg computer somtimes... but he loses to the P and T usually to give you some idea.
Zerg computer is totally beatable except when he 4pools and a lot easier than P or T computers. T is meh, but P is good. I mean, it rocks. Up to now, I was: 1- DT rushed as T 2- 2gated as Z 3- 1gate teched as Z from P computer and he wiped the floor with me every single time.
T generally does 2 rax academy TvZ and mixes it up TvP. You generally see science facility units tho.
@OP: Iccup has been DDOS'd for quite some time and registry doesn't work for now so you won't be able to get an account until the site is completely back.
Some hints from me on campaigns: 1- You can beat vanilla terran campaign by tank leapfrogging. In mission "Trump Card", you just D-Matrix the SCV and send him to the destination. Average time is 1 minute for that mission. 2- Vanilla protoss campaign is just spam zealot dragoon and a-move into opponent. 3- BW Protoss is the same and so is BW Terran
I couldn't beat zerg campaigns for some reason and I even play zerg in BW.
Another advice, when you get your iccup account, don't get nervous of laddering for a few reasons: 1- Mass gaming generally gains points. My current record is 21-48 and still have 1311 points. Digging to 0 is impossible . I saw some people getting that cute little purple computers, which is the E rank, got it myself with another account, but this season i've never got down lower than 500 for some reason. I won after going down for some time. This season I went down to 760 or a little lower maybe, but then, I'm on a roll. This account was 11-40 at some time. 2- You can clear your stats every 2 weeks. 3- You can have infinity amount of accounts. I think I have 4 as far as I can count and all are still active. I only play with certain one though. Others are all 0-0. I'm dropping you a pm with one of them and its password. Have a nice time and plz don't get complaints
Also, see you in the channel if you still hang out in sc2 and I'll probably find you in BW as we both are kinda in same time zone and you'll be using my account for foreseeable future (if some other person didn't pm you one of his smurfs ofc )
On April 22 2011 06:38 Grobyc wrote: You become much more amazed at the control you see from some progamers after trying it yourself and seeing how difficult it can be. You can't just 1a t and win an engagement against a skilled opponent in BW.
And it only gets worse as your opponents become more skilled and start making you do things/requiring you to react to things you've never seen before. It's all well and good to master luring a computer's units one at a time when you have 30 APM, but a human can see you focusing all your attention of picking off the outskirts of his army and just drop you at the same time while you're not paying attention. Then when you get better and your controlling your main army of four groups really well, at maybe 150 APM, your opponent will still find ways to make you do more things than you have concentration to do. They will posture their army and force you to react, while having perfect macro and doing a vulture runby somewhere else, meanwhile your macro plummets and you lose 7 probes because you're too intent on not giving up position.
There's just so much to do in BW. Even Jaedong's 400 APM is not enough to do everything perfect, he has to make decisions about what he will spend his time doing. And then you watch TSL where someone who only binds 3 hotkeys is able to be competitive with someone using all 10 LOL. Where you don't need to look back at your base except to shift click build a bunch of depots automatically, since you can hotkey every single gateway on the map even if you have 40. The macro in the early game is essentially harder than it is in the late game because at least in the early game you have to build tech lol. 4zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzddddsssss.
There is just so little to do in SC2... It's not that BW will make you better at SC2, it's that if you've played BW for 10 years the mechanics of SC2 will be easy. Play BW to get good at BW If you wanna get good at SC2, playing BW will just make the skills you gain redundant since they don't matter in SC2.
Woot! Thanks for the PM Djagulingu! Even though I didn't get to go on iCCup, for some reason it was telling me: "Incorrect password blargh!"
And all things considered I'm going to try to get good at Broodwar itself. It will influence on my SC2 gameplay indirectly but I'm already starting to reeeeally enjoy BW and its cartoonish graphics.
On April 22 2011 07:41 darmousseh wrote: Every time someone posts a BW is harder than SC2 thread because of the mechanics, I must remind you of a little game called warcraft.
The mechanics of BW were not by design, everything you do is a *feature* and if they were able to do things like MBS and better unit AI, they would have done it. SCBW promoted computer skills over strategical thinking which is why players like nestea didn't do as much in scbw, but in sc2 they shine. SCBW had as much decision making as sc2, but the decisions in sc2 cannot be as easily overcome by micro. If you make a bad unit choice, no amount of micro can help you win. So in bw, micro would cost you games, in sc2, unit composition costs games. It's different.
As for the UI, sc2 is much more user friendly and as a result will appeal to a wider audience making the game much more succesful.
You were never very good at BW, were you? There's a lot more wrong in all that you just wrote than there is right.
On April 22 2011 07:41 darmousseh wrote: Every time someone posts a BW is harder than SC2 thread because of the mechanics, I must remind you of a little game called warcraft.
The mechanics of BW were not by design, everything you do is a *feature* and if they were able to do things like MBS and better unit AI, they would have done it. SCBW promoted computer skills over strategical thinking which is why players like nestea didn't do as much in scbw, but in sc2 they shine. SCBW had as much decision making as sc2, but the decisions in sc2 cannot be as easily overcome by micro. If you make a bad unit choice, no amount of micro can help you win. So in bw, micro would cost you games, in sc2, unit composition costs games. It's different.
As for the UI, sc2 is much more user friendly and as a result will appeal to a wider audience making the game much more succesful.
lol your conclusion statement contradicts your intro statement
"sc2 is much more user friendly" is just another way of saying its easier..sure you might want to sugarcoat it but in the end bw is the harder game by FAR. I don't understand the point of your post. Are you suggesting that unit composition does not cost games in BW?
Not to mention you are looking at the game at a very skewed level, the level of pros only, which is only about 5% of the BW community in general (excluding korea), compared to the gazillions of "master" level sc2 players out there.
In the end, your argument is that starcraft 2 is comparable to broodwar in terms of difficulty, which any player who really spent time learning BW would scoff at. Yes, it's different. But BW is still a hell of a lot harder than SC2 will ever be...
when you think about it, BW in itself is really not that complicated. campaign is pretty easy because none of us were really that good when the game came out. you can even beat the game without using hotkeys.
it's playing against people that's complicated because everyone's soooo good.
On April 22 2011 12:06 Jonoman92 wrote: He can beat the zerg computer somtimes... but he loses to the P and T usually to give you some idea.
Zerg computer is totally beatable except when he 4pools and a lot easier than P or T computers. T is meh, but P is good. I mean, it rocks. Up to now, I was: 1- DT rushed as T 2- 2gated as Z 3- 1gate teched as Z from P computer and he wiped the floor with me every single time.
...
Another advice, when you get your iccup account, don't get nervous of laddering for a few reasons: 1- Mass gaming generally gains points. My current record is 21-48 and still have 1311 points.
You're having a hard time against the protoss computer but you have a 21-48 record on iccup ?
On April 23 2011 07:56 TheDeli wrote: Woot! Thanks for the PM Djagulingu! Even though I didn't get to go on iCCup, for some reason it was telling me: "Incorrect password blargh!"
And all things considered I'm going to try to get good at Broodwar itself. It will influence on my SC2 gameplay indirectly but I'm already starting to reeeeally enjoy BW and its cartoonish graphics.
For god knows what stupid reason, changing site password doesn't change server password. I changed server password and it's the same as the one in PM now.
On April 22 2011 12:06 Jonoman92 wrote: He can beat the zerg computer somtimes... but he loses to the P and T usually to give you some idea.
Zerg computer is totally beatable except when he 4pools and a lot easier than P or T computers. T is meh, but P is good. I mean, it rocks. Up to now, I was: 1- DT rushed as T 2- 2gated as Z 3- 1gate teched as Z from P computer and he wiped the floor with me every single time.
...
Another advice, when you get your iccup account, don't get nervous of laddering for a few reasons: 1- Mass gaming generally gains points. My current record is 21-48 and still have 1311 points.
You're having a hard time against the protoss computer but you have a 21-48 record on iccup ?
Any D player can beat the computer 1v3....
I beat zerg computer solely by muta microing but T&P, I have quite a hard time against. And there are players at D/D- level that are a lot worse than computer.
Yeah. Since SC2 many brand new players came and actually a couple of those switched to BW. And since iccup and TL are right next to each other, a handful of these new players can be found on iccup nowadays. I'm one of these guys and I met a couple others. You just need to take some time and find them.
So would you guys recommend me practicing against an I some builds I'd find on Liquipedia? And what builds would you recommend for a semi-aggressive Protoss player? Sorry for the fact that this post is short :p
Oh, by the way, I registered on iCCup before Djagulingu posted about the password change (v.v) and my ID is TheDeli. I'll be there later this night.
On April 22 2011 12:06 Jonoman92 wrote: He can beat the zerg computer somtimes... but he loses to the P and T usually to give you some idea.
Zerg computer is totally beatable except when he 4pools and a lot easier than P or T computers. T is meh, but P is good. I mean, it rocks. Up to now, I was: 1- DT rushed as T 2- 2gated as Z 3- 1gate teched as Z from P computer and he wiped the floor with me every single time.
...
Another advice, when you get your iccup account, don't get nervous of laddering for a few reasons: 1- Mass gaming generally gains points. My current record is 21-48 and still have 1311 points.
You're having a hard time against the protoss computer but you have a 21-48 record on iccup ?
Any D player can beat the computer 1v3....
I beat zerg computer solely by muta microing but T&P, I have quite a hard time against. And there are players at D/D- level that are a lot worse than computer.
Reading that statement empowered me to try out iCCup for the first time in my life.
I won 2 TvTs, one against a one-base, 2 fact, and another against a Wraith build. Considering that I'm a measly Random Gold player in SC2, I was actually surprised that I could win games on the infamous iCCup ladder.
On April 22 2011 12:06 Jonoman92 wrote: He can beat the zerg computer somtimes... but he loses to the P and T usually to give you some idea.
Zerg computer is totally beatable except when he 4pools and a lot easier than P or T computers. T is meh, but P is good. I mean, it rocks. Up to now, I was: 1- DT rushed as T 2- 2gated as Z 3- 1gate teched as Z from P computer and he wiped the floor with me every single time.
...
Another advice, when you get your iccup account, don't get nervous of laddering for a few reasons: 1- Mass gaming generally gains points. My current record is 21-48 and still have 1311 points.
You're having a hard time against the protoss computer but you have a 21-48 record on iccup ?
Any D player can beat the computer 1v3....
I beat zerg computer solely by muta microing but T&P, I have quite a hard time against. And there are players at D/D- level that are a lot worse than computer.
Reading that statement empowered me to try out iCCup for the first time in my life.
I won 2 TvTs, one against a one-base, 2 fact, and another against a Wraith build. Considering that I'm a measly Random Gold player in SC2, I was actually surprised that I could win games on the infamous iCCup ladder.
I guarantee you that if you reach C- you will be able to roll master league players like its nothing edit: at least the old C- guys, pre sc2.. I don't know how good c- are nowadays
iCCup laddering is kind of random. If you play anyone and don't abuse, you are at the mercy of fate. Sometimes you will get lots of good players, other times you will get people who really don't know what they're doing. If you do abuse (that is, you play the same map all the time, ban people if they are from Korea, etc etc) then even very bad players can get points on iCCup.
I don't know what rank really means on iCCup anymore, but the Korean servers like Fish and Brainclan I expect still have a tonne of very good players as you climb points. Koreans also seem to be less afraid of facing smurfs, so you don't get weird players who have a decent record/points but play like crap because they refuse to play anyone they think is still climbing to their actual rank (ie anyone good).
EPT
.
)
