I've been watching a lot of Brood War recently. I never really played BW, except for the campaign. I got the game from my brother, who loved all things Blizzard (he's 27, he played the original Warcraft back in the day), and I played Brood War when I was maybe 11-12. The campaign (especially the music) and the blistering difficulty (I was 12...) turned me off from it and while I thought it was fun, it was never my cup of tea.
I started playing Starcraft 2 in November, and it turned me into all things e-Sports. At first I would watch SC2 streams and tournaments, but for the past few months it's been all BW. And after watching games from this entire past decade, I've decided that I fear for Starcraft 2's future. SC2 will have a long lifespan and attract a lot of players, but nothing compared to BW. Here's why:
1) Brood War's imbalances and strategies were changed by players and maps, not by patches.
Brood War's latest patch is 1.16. SC2 is at 1.3.4. While the format is different, of course, no one can deny that Blizzard is changing this game at a blistering pace. Over 10 years, Brood War had a handful of big balance patches, while SC2 has an armful for just under a year of life. Not only that, there are 2 expansions coming out! This game will change so much that the focus is no longer on players' ingenuity, it's on how Blizzard makes the 4 gate come out 10 seconds later.
We haven't seen much player ingenuity in this game yet. Everyone so far in Starcraft 2 has won by simply making less mistakes than the other player. I haven't seen anything like Savior's masterful backstab lurker positioning in Starcraft 2, nor has anyone tried. Mostly so far we've seen 1 or 2 unit compositions per race and some exploration with build orders, but the strategy of Brood War isn't here. Some argue that Spanishiwa has changed the everyman's ZvX around, but the originality of his build is in debate and while it is a star in the scheme of things, it's a star in an empty sky.
I tell this to people and they say: Havefa1th, this game is young! BW has been around for 10 years, it's too early to make judgments!
Hogwash, here's why:
2) Starcraft 2 plays faster and easier than Brood War. Starcaft 2 is build around ease of use and speed. Every race has an upgrade to speed, whether it be creep, Metabolic Boost, Glial Reconstitution, Pnematic Carapace, Stimpacks, Chargelots, Observer Speed, Warp Prism Speed or Blink. Combined with swarmier basic units like the Zergling, Marine and Zealot, speed upgrades and the (essentially) unlimited control group, Starcraft 2 units are faster and easier to control. Because units are easier to control, proper positioning and map control become less powerful compared to Brood War, where an unexpected lurker or 2 can wipe out marines while the Terran rushes to control them all. Little things like that become less important, which is why players don't focus on them.
And I don't think they will, not for a long time. At this point SC2 is all about building counters to units you see and making less macro and micro mistakes. In Starcraft 2, we rarely see a higher class of player that goes beyond "banelings counter marines" and into map positioning, backstabs, and metagame.
I hope we someone does start to experiment with great results in Starcraft 2. I'm getting bored of seeing the player who has x+1 stalkers to another Protoss' x stalkers win. I want to see innovation, but I don't think it will come.
BW balance stopped at 1.08 actually, and there were TONS of changes in each one, this is why BW is considered a fluke, that it turned out so perfect even though it was patched in such a way.
On May 28 2011 06:04 locilocisu wrote: So in BW player with 5 dragoons will loose to player with 4 dragoons?
In SC2, PvP is such a matchup where the loss of one Stalker early on can lose you the game (see White-ra vs. MC in Dreamhack) because units are faster and easier to control.
In BW, there are other gameplay factors that allows flexibility to a player with a slightly smaller army size. No such thing in SC2.
Just because the game is easier and more accessible does not mean that it will fail as an E-sport, casuals and most of the Starcraft 2 community who do not know what BW is don't know what you are implying, and they don't care either. The people who watch BW see (from their point of view) flaws in the game, whereas Starcraft 2 watchers see little(or atleast the majority does) flaws in the game when it comes to the things you described.
On May 28 2011 06:27 firexfred wrote: You stated things that are different, but not why that would have any effect on the future of SC2. One doesn't follow from the other logically.
Because units are easier to control, proper positioning and map control become less powerful compared to Brood War, where an unexpected lurker or 2 can wipe out marines while the Terran rushes to control them all. Little things like that become less important, which is why players don't focus on them.
I guess I didn't mention that I think why BW has lasted so long is because the game allows such flexibility and ingenuity from players, while SC2 doesn't, for the reasons stated above and in the blog.
I don't think SC2 will die out, not at all. I think it'll go on for a long time, I just don't know if we'll such a colorful history like BW's.
Well, we'll see in ten years . They're two different games and hopefully we'll be able to see players playing at a high level in both. Would be AMAZING if we could see OSL and OSL2 (for starcraft 2) and likewise for proleague and MSL. Even better would be seeing players competing in both games simultaneously. Imagine Flash and Jaedong fighting against each other in both OSL, MSL, and GSL.
I'm confused as to why you mention the Spanishiwa build, because that's talking about BOs, not about the mechanics you're talking about. Even then, there are tonnns of innovation in builds beyond Spanishiwa - I've watched SC2 since the beta, and strats are really different (Tester's 2gate 5zealot pressure into expand builds xD).
For instance: 2forge protoss builds [I first saw it used by tyler, don't know if he started it, popularized it, or etc.] IEchoic TvT TLO's ghost opening TvT (especially that game vs goOdy ) Mango build
I mean you can't just seriously have said: "we rarely see a higher class of player that goes beyond "banelings counter marines"". Does MarineKing ring a bell?
And people totally ignore positioning, I mean it's not like anyone ever cares about forcefields, concaves, spread of units, surrounds, baneling drops on protoss clumps that try to FF themselves, etc....oh, wait.
In short, I know it's all opinion, but there's way too much dramallama in the blog title, and these conversations were old even six months ago.
Total luck. They weren't designing an esport back then, they were just making fun stuff. Browder first wanted to make the game fun, but he did it by making it try to play like command and conquer, and Starcraft units needed to be responsive, microable. He took the criticism of his unit designs and started nerfing everything down to try and balance the game because he thought this would make people want to watch it. I think he removed a lot of skill to the game by trying to hard to balance every unit. Hopefully my fears are unfounded.
On May 28 2011 06:04 Megaliskuu wrote: BW balance stopped at 1.08 actually, and there were TONS of changes in each one, this is why BW is considered a fluke, that it turned out so perfect even though it was patched in such a way.
I'm one of the crowd who's inclined to argue it worked because it was patched that way (i.e. basically twice for balance). By limiting patches, the law of unintended consequences has less to work with even if you're changing a ton at once.
(As a BW Protoss player, I'm still bitter about the storm nerf though.)
Not that the SC2 approach (omg strategy is imba must patch it out kekeke) is necessarily bad, especially as the competitive scene is so much bigger than BW was at first that damage control patching is almost a must - but idk how it will turn out long-term. What I'm hoping is that we see "damage control" continue through the expansion releases, and then they just leave well enough alone for like a year.
I honestly believe SC2 will turn out the way WC3 did. without a dedicated fanbase like korea, many players will soon grow out of the game or start playing other games with better graphics. we'll see after the last expansion.
I don't mean to sound ignorant, but if BW balance was a "fluke", did balance have to do with Kespa and ELO ratings showing Terran > Zerg >> Protoss or did the better players normally just choose T and Z?
Btw, I played Terran in BW and I didn't and don't care if it was super balanced or not so I didn't keep up with that sort of thing. I'm just curious as to why there were these notable discrepancies back in BW. What then determined that BW was balanced? :S
On May 28 2011 07:49 JudicatorHammurabi wrote: I don't mean to sound ignorant, but if BW balance was a "fluke", did balance have to do with Kespa and ELO ratings showing Terran > Zerg >> Protoss or did the better players normally just choose T and Z?
Btw, I played Terran in BW and I didn't and don't care if it was super balanced or not so I didn't keep up with that sort of thing. I'm just curious as to why there were these notable discrepancies back in BW. What then determined that BW was balanced? :S
Lot of the balance was done by Kespa making maps. I mean back ten Lost Temple was a serious map, and now we look back and wonder which idiot designed this shit.
On May 28 2011 06:04 locilocisu wrote: So in BW player with 5 dragoons will loose to player with 4 dragoons?
In SC2, PvP is such a matchup where the loss of one Stalker early on can lose you the game (see White-ra vs. MC in Dreamhack) because units are faster and easier to control.
In BW, there are other gameplay factors that allows flexibility to a player with a slightly smaller army size. No such thing in SC2.
Ramps and uphill shooting is one important part, plus reavers in PvP. Even though i'm not a fan of PvP in BW particularly it's clear that you can overcome unit comp and build orders with excellent micro and skill, moreso than SC2 PvP. In my opinion.
On May 28 2011 06:04 locilocisu wrote: So in BW player with 5 dragoons will loose to player with 4 dragoons?
just look at horang2's dragoons. juat look at them.
On May 28 2011 07:49 JudicatorHammurabi wrote: I don't mean to sound ignorant, but if BW balance was a "fluke", did balance have to do with Kespa and ELO ratings showing Terran > Zerg >> Protoss or did the better players normally just choose T and Z?
Btw, I played Terran in BW and I didn't and don't care if it was super balanced or not so I didn't keep up with that sort of thing. I'm just curious as to why there were these notable discrepancies back in BW. What then determined that BW was balanced? :S
The race imbalance can be engineered to be whatever you want it to be like. look at central plains or odd-eye for example.
I know how the OP feels . I'm a newcomer to the pro scene and I've checked out both BW and SC2 I kinda like the BW more, but I watch SC2 because I don't want to listen to korean commentators. I'm hoping that we get to see more positional plays and greater understandings of the maps to see the better players win consistantly, but I"m still hopefull because the game is so new
BW is just as close to perfect as a RTS will ever get. Unfortunately SC2 isn't there and I doubt it will even get close to there even if there are a million more patches to come. But yeah what's in the OP is valid and exactly how I feel about the state of the game.
On May 28 2011 05:57 Havefa1th wrote: 1) Brood War's imbalances and strategies were changed by players and maps, not by patches.
Brood War's latest patch is 1.16. SC2 is at 1.3.4. While the format is different, of course, no one can deny that Blizzard is changing this game at a blistering pace. Over 10 years, Brood War had a handful of big balance patches, while SC2 has an armful for just under a year of life. Not only that, there are 2 expansions coming out! This game will change so much that the focus is no longer on players' ingenuity, it's on how Blizzard makes the 4 gate come out 10 seconds later.
The reason behind patching the game so much is because SC2 was made to be an e-sport. Releasing an unbalanced game and telling the players to figure it out themselves does not make for a good e-sport. However, the frequency of patches has decreased a lot during the last months, and it's probably going to continue that way.
The game had to be patched as frequently as it was during the early days because people had a different mindset when SC2 was released compared to SC. Imbalances were found and used faster because of the increased amount of players, competitions and communication.
I don't consider the patching bad, in fact, it has been pivotal in the success of SC2. However, if Blizzard keeps fixing every little thing that seems to be winning games more than usual, then I agree it's bad. That hasn't happened yet and I don't think it will though.
On May 28 2011 05:57 Havefa1th wrote:We haven't seen much player ingenuity in this game yet. Everyone so far in Starcraft 2 has won by simply making less mistakes than the other player. I haven't seen anything like Savior's masterful backstab lurker positioning in Starcraft 2, nor has anyone tried. Mostly so far we've seen 1 or 2 unit compositions per race and some exploration with build orders, but the strategy of Brood War isn't here. Some argue that Spanishiwa has changed the everyman's ZvX around, but the originality of his build is in debate and while it is a star in the scheme of things, it's a star in an empty sky.
You're generalizing a bit too much here by saying that everyone in SC2 has won by being better mechanically. The lurker positioning could be compared to burrow baneling positioning to swing games in one players direction. I don't really get your argument though, it seems like you are just trying to justify your opinion without valid arguments. You say that we've seen "some exploration with build orders", while in fact experimentation with builds have been going on since early beta, and we regularly see new builds popping up.
Also, 1 or 2 unit compositions per race? You are making false statements. There are different ways to play every matchup, and just because all of them haven't been figured out yet, that doesn't mean they never will be. There are definitely more than 1 or 2 unit compositions per race.
"The strategy of Brood War isn't here". You are absolutely right. But as people usually say, give it time. Can't expect people to come up with all viable strategies instantly.
On May 28 2011 05:57 Havefa1th wrote: Starcaft 2 is build around ease of use and speed. Every race has an upgrade to speed, whether it be creep, Metabolic Boost, Glial Reconstitution, Pnematic Carapace, Stimpacks, Chargelots, Observer Speed, Warp Prism Speed or Blink. Combined with swarmier basic units like the Zergling, Marine and Zealot, speed upgrades and the (essentially) unlimited control group, Starcraft 2 units are faster and easier to control. Because units are easier to control, proper positioning and map control become less powerful compared to Brood War, where an unexpected lurker or 2 can wipe out marines while the Terran rushes to control them all. Little things like that become less important, which is why players don't focus on them.
And I don't think they will, not for a long time. At this point SC2 is all about building counters to units you see and making less macro and micro mistakes. In Starcraft 2, we rarely see a higher class of player that goes beyond "banelings counter marines" and into map positioning, backstabs, and metagame.
I hope we someone does start to experiment with great results in Starcraft 2. I'm getting bored of seeing the player who has x+1 stalkers to another Protoss' x stalkers win. I want to see innovation, but I don't think it will come.
So for now, I continue watching MSL VODs.
Once again you are generalizing too much. About map position and backstabs, a good example of this is MarineKing's usage of Marines and Marauders in TvT. Normally you would say Siege Tanks counter these bio units, right? However, by dropping multiple positions and spreading the army of the Meching player, MarineKing has managed to win games even though he had an army that would lose in a army on army fight. All of this by using his positioning and activeness on the map.
An unexpected burrowed baneling can still wipe out tons of marines, just like a lurker could. And just because Banelings are the counter to Marines, people still use Marines against them.
Not good enough?
Of course a player with a weaker army will lose against someone with a stronger army IF the player with the weaker army doesn't do anything special to gain the advantage. This is not unique to SC2 though, it's the exact same case in BW.
While I respect your opinion, I do think that SC2 will continue to evolve. Whether it will be as figured out as BW is one day is impossible to know, your arguments haven't convinced me to believe it won't be though.
Side note: I have been watching BW ever since I first heard of StarCraft 2 which was mid to late 2009, and I like both games equally but because of different reasons.
On May 28 2011 15:34 Kar98 wrote: I know how the OP feels . I'm a newcomer to the pro scene and I've checked out both BW and SC2 I kinda like the BW more, but I watch SC2 because I don't want to listen to korean commentators. I'm hoping that we get to see more positional plays and greater understandings of the maps to see the better players win consistantly, but I"m still hopefull because the game is so new
Hey check out season 1-3 of GomTV from the BW days. Maybe not the best games ever played, but theres some big names there and the commentating is the best in SC history imo.
On May 28 2011 05:57 Havefa1th wrote: 1) Brood War's imbalances and strategies were changed by players and maps, not by patches.
Brood War's latest patch is 1.16. SC2 is at 1.3.4. While the format is different, of course, no one can deny that Blizzard is changing this game at a blistering pace. Over 10 years, Brood War had a handful of big balance patches, while SC2 has an armful for just under a year of life. Not only that, there are 2 expansions coming out! This game will change so much that the focus is no longer on players' ingenuity, it's on how Blizzard makes the 4 gate come out 10 seconds later.
The reason behind patching the game so much is because SC2 was made to be an e-sport. Releasing an unbalanced game and telling the players to figure it out themselves does not make for a good e-sport. However, the frequency of patches has decreased a lot during the last months, and it's probably going to continue that way.
The game had to be patched as frequently as it was during the early days because people had a different mindset when SC2 was released compared to SC. Imbalances were found and used faster because of the increased amount of players, competitions and communication.
I don't consider the patching bad, in fact, it has been pivotal in the success of SC2. However, if Blizzard keeps fixing every little thing that seems to be winning games more than usual, then I agree it's bad. That hasn't happened yet and I don't think it will though.
On May 28 2011 05:57 Havefa1th wrote:We haven't seen much player ingenuity in this game yet. Everyone so far in Starcraft 2 has won by simply making less mistakes than the other player. I haven't seen anything like Savior's masterful backstab lurker positioning in Starcraft 2, nor has anyone tried. Mostly so far we've seen 1 or 2 unit compositions per race and some exploration with build orders, but the strategy of Brood War isn't here. Some argue that Spanishiwa has changed the everyman's ZvX around, but the originality of his build is in debate and while it is a star in the scheme of things, it's a star in an empty sky.
You're generalizing a bit too much here by saying that everyone in SC2 has won by being better mechanically. The lurker positioning could be compared to burrow baneling positioning to swing games in one players direction. I don't really get your argument though, it seems like you are just trying to justify your opinion without valid arguments. You say that we've seen "some exploration with build orders", while in fact experimentation with builds have been going on since early beta, and we regularly see new builds popping up.
Also, 1 or 2 unit compositions per race? You are making false statements. There are different ways to play every matchup, and just because all of them haven't been figured out yet, that doesn't mean they never will be. There are definitely more than 1 or 2 unit compositions per race.
"The strategy of Brood War isn't here". You are absolutely right. But as people usually say, give it time. Can't expect people to come up with all viable strategies instantly.
On May 28 2011 05:57 Havefa1th wrote: Starcaft 2 is build around ease of use and speed. Every race has an upgrade to speed, whether it be creep, Metabolic Boost, Glial Reconstitution, Pnematic Carapace, Stimpacks, Chargelots, Observer Speed, Warp Prism Speed or Blink. Combined with swarmier basic units like the Zergling, Marine and Zealot, speed upgrades and the (essentially) unlimited control group, Starcraft 2 units are faster and easier to control. Because units are easier to control, proper positioning and map control become less powerful compared to Brood War, where an unexpected lurker or 2 can wipe out marines while the Terran rushes to control them all. Little things like that become less important, which is why players don't focus on them.
And I don't think they will, not for a long time. At this point SC2 is all about building counters to units you see and making less macro and micro mistakes. In Starcraft 2, we rarely see a higher class of player that goes beyond "banelings counter marines" and into map positioning, backstabs, and metagame.
I hope we someone does start to experiment with great results in Starcraft 2. I'm getting bored of seeing the player who has x+1 stalkers to another Protoss' x stalkers win. I want to see innovation, but I don't think it will come.
So for now, I continue watching MSL VODs.
Once again you are generalizing too much. About map position and backstabs, a good example of this is MarineKing's usage of Marines and Marauders in TvT. Normally you would say Siege Tanks counter these bio units, right? However, by dropping multiple positions and spreading the army of the Meching player, MarineKing has managed to win games even though he had an army that would lose in a army on army fight. All of this by using his positioning and activeness on the map.
An unexpected burrowed baneling can still wipe out tons of marines, just like a lurker could. And just because Banelings are the counter to Marines, people still use Marines against them. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGJP0BgvUPA Not good enough?
Of course a player with a weaker army will lose against someone with a stronger army IF the player with the weaker army doesn't do anything special to gain the advantage. This is not unique to SC2 though, it's the exact same case in BW.
While I respect your opinion, I do think that SC2 will continue to evolve. Whether it will be as figured out as BW is one day is impossible to know, your arguments haven't convinced me to believe it won't be though.
Side note: I have been watching BW ever since I first heard of StarCraft 2 which was mid to late 2009, and I like both games equally but because of different reasons.
First of all, thanks for taking the time to put this much effort into a blog post lol. Everyone else that doesn't agree with me has called me naive and dramatic, but I really enjoy you taking the time to actually discuss this with me.
Overall, I agree with most of your points, but I still feel that compared to BW, more players DO win by being simply mechanically better in SC2, whether it be in proleagues or ladders. TvT is a notable exception, where positioning is everything. But I just can't say that there are many "Savior" moments in SC2 where there's plain and simple GENIUS in the game that pushes him over the edge to beat his opponent.
MKP is notable for multi-pronged attacks, but I wouldn't call that notable. In fact, dropping with most of your army when sieged is the proper response to being sieged, is it not? Regardless, some of his micro is reminiscent of BW and I can't really argue that he isn't a good bridge between the two games.
Otherwise, I think you've shown me that I'm being too general. I'll make another blog post when I find the replays and stuff to really prove what I'm saying. I guess my blog post isn't an argument either, just my feelings for the game. I kinda need to advance to have anyone really take me seriously, I suppose.
EPT
. They're two different games and hopefully we'll be able to see players playing at a high level in both. Would be AMAZING if we could see OSL and OSL2 (for starcraft 2) and likewise for proleague and MSL. Even better would be seeing players competing in both games simultaneously. Imagine Flash and Jaedong fighting against each other in both OSL, MSL, and GSL. 
)
. I'm a newcomer to the pro scene and I've checked out both BW and SC2 I kinda like the BW more, but I watch SC2 because I don't want to listen to korean commentators. I'm hoping that we get to see more positional plays and greater understandings of the maps to see the better players win consistantly, but I"m still hopefull because the game is so new
