Is SC2 the first RTS you ever played? Do you have hands on experience with BW? (It will take more than a few games). It's one thing to watch and sift through all the arguments and articles to try and understand it.
I've been around these forums and the community before the re-design (TL used to have a black background with neon green letters). I can see why you would get easily confused. The two games are world's apart when you peel away the layers. One of the biggest being game flow.
There will always be a few bad apples posting, but to say players with a BW background always throw out irrational arguments? Come on now. There is method to some of the madness you see.
Here's one of the mandates I try to uphold on this website: help educate others and show little to no bias.
In MBC Adieu they re-addressed the BW scandal. "If another player is aware of your build you will lose because the players are so close in skill."
I got a good chuckle from that for you see, for even though a lot of the pro gamers are close in skill. There is still a divide and that's why we group players in BW as well. S Class, A Class, B Class and anything lower isn't worth addressing. You say control. I say stay away from sweeping generalizations.
Bare bones,
You need to get at the nitty gritty and it's really hard for an outsider to do that.
To answer your questions, I specifically state SC2 is my first RTS game in the quoted post, I also mention that no matter how much "fanboyism" I see there are several rational and reasonable arguments that make me wonder (and thus why I want to experiment) what SC2 can take away from it. Again, I specifically state I have almost no clue what BW is. I have played a few matches and it is hard even against AI, I see where fluid mechanics are so much more difficult for BW players compared to SC2.
As an update, I believe I will simply play some campaign before really even attempting multiplayer to iron out some mechanics (adding workers, producing out of rax, scouting, and moving armies). Unfortunately whenever I try and start it, there is only a sound effect and no update into the actual gameplay.
Here some micro tricks that really make a difference between players, and between BW and SC2. Read through it to get to know more of the intricacies BW has to offer.
This is an excellent thread; many of you have pointed out what I haven´t been able to put my finger onto although trying to. I really hope that SCII evolves into a more "dynamic" game, because the production, hype and general acceptance of SCII is clearly superior to the underground game of BW. Im sure the next expansion (hots?) will adress some of the "issues" stated in this thread so we can get more exciting game play.
The fact that SCII doesnt have any units that can be cost effective *100 makes it a whole other game. There was this amazing tvz recently (cant remember players, map or anything but in PL) where the Z held off a massive T mech force with one (!) lurker and dark swarm. Litterally won him the game.
Regarding the APM discussion: when does APM stop making a difference in SCII? I feel that it has somewhat lesser relevance in BW than people generally say but my view on it is that-- Consider two players playing a mirror matchup. Who would have the upper hand: the player with 300 or the one with 400 APM? Hard to tell since there are so many other factors. What about if they played the exact same builds, from start to finish? The 400-guy would. So APM for me is just a way to messure your skill cap, i.e. "how good your perfect game could be". Im really interrested in how a good SCII player views APM, since im not one myself and that the casters i watch never really talk about it (in my experience).
Just my 2 cents, probably wont make any sense but w/e.
Is SC2 the first RTS you ever played? Do you have hands on experience with BW? (It will take more than a few games). It's one thing to watch and sift through all the arguments and articles to try and understand it.
I've been around these forums and the community before the re-design (TL used to have a black background with neon green letters). I can see why you would get easily confused. The two games are world's apart when you peel away the layers. One of the biggest being game flow.
There will always be a few bad apples posting, but to say players with a BW background always throw out irrational arguments? Come on now. There is method to some of the madness you see.
Here's one of the mandates I try to uphold on this website: help educate others and show little to no bias.
In MBC Adieu they re-addressed the BW scandal. "If another player is aware of your build you will lose because the players are so close in skill."
I got a good chuckle from that for you see, for even though a lot of the pro gamers are close in skill. There is still a divide and that's why we group players in BW as well. S Class, A Class, B Class and anything lower isn't worth addressing. You say control. I say stay away from sweeping generalizations.
Bare bones,
You need to get at the nitty gritty and it's really hard for an outsider to do that.
To answer your questions, I specifically state SC2 is my first RTS game in the quoted post, I also mention that no matter how much "fanboyism" I see there are several rational and reasonable arguments that make me wonder (and thus why I want to experiment) what SC2 can take away from it. Again, I specifically state I have almost no clue what BW is. I have played a few matches and it is hard even against AI, I see where fluid mechanics are so much more difficult for BW players compared to SC2.
As an update, I believe I will simply play some campaign before really even attempting multiplayer to iron out some mechanics (adding workers, producing out of rax, scouting, and moving armies). Unfortunately whenever I try and start it, there is only a sound effect and no update into the actual gameplay.
the game to play the campaign. It's pretty cheap, I bought it for less than 2€ two years ago.
That was the point I was trying to make. Your looking at RTS from a whole different lens and that can only lead to more confusion in you series. Yes, you are trying to find resources and educate yourself on the matter, but you really have to play it to get it.
It's redundant as hell, but it's a cold-hearted truth and I would stay away from sweeping generalizations. You did commit a few.
There are a few other guys who are working on a How to mini-series on Brood War & it's history as well. I don't remember their names or aliases I should say. My question to you is how are you going to differentiate and package it?
All I got is you want to bring a new and clear perspective, but that's just hogwash. Guess I'll have to see for myself in your pilot because you are still at the research phase.
Star, the goal of this little set (or even large set) of videos will be to introduce BW to sc2 newbies like myself, so the target audience may be a tad bit different, as I'm aiming for people new to the RTS esport scene. I will also be aiming to see if there is any massive sweeping differences BW style can make to Sc2 (such as army control, map control, map design, team play, etc)
In the end it isn't a how-to BW like a boss, it is more of a learning from our past that I'm interested in. Obviously I can't make it happen as a lowly NA plat (as a gm KR server I could attempt to apply BW concepts to sc2 tried and true to increase success but I'm not haha). A journalism article if you would.
Still playing BW Is certainly fun, if I can make decent mechanics in BW then I will obviously do better in my sc2 play haha
The thread becomes really shitty really fast but it was (iirc) the first major sc2 vs BW debate and a lot of good points were raised, albeit in an awful manner.
Its strange, apm makes a big difference in BW, but so does strategy, tactics, etc. So it balances itself out. SC2 rewards all rounded players the most, because being better at one aspect only makes a small difference.
In BW, being the best in a single aspect can make a huge difference and compensate for being low level in other areas. Consider Stork and Savior's APM which is around the 230 mark, but they are strategic geniuses, both of them S-Class players. In BW I have found players with more extremeties in style than in SC2, and this is where the whole notion of skill ceiling comes in, the ability to compensate for other skills, by having extreme skill within a single aspect.
Imagine if MC could win with just pure sentries and forcefields (no stalkers), just like Jaedong can with mutalisks, that is the level we are talking about.
In my opinion, this pretty much the single most important difference. Even at low levels (D- to C-), having mediocre everything but one exceptional skill will pull through for you. I know from my personal experience that you can ride all the way up to C- with 100% muta micro and god awful macro.
This is my favorite JD game of all time, showcasing his muta micro. And against Iris who (especially then) was a very solid player.
If you watch the original korean commentary, you can just feel how unbelievable it is for JD to take control of the game like that.
EDIT: oh, it's important to note how ridiculous what JD does is. Controling 1 group of mutas to stack and harass like that takes massive apm, especially to macro/tech while doing it. Like 250-300 at least(I hit like 230ish average once I start muta harass). JD somehow simultaneously stacks and micros two groups of mutas which I still don't understand how that's humanly possible. I'm pretty sure it's only ever been seen in progames like 3 times in the history of BW. (although I took a break from watching BW for like a year so don't quote me on that) This game is equally absurd. The commentators say "Does he have 4 arms? Did he bring an extra mouse? Maybe he's also using his mouth?" + Show Spoiler +
On January 27 2012 01:38 Skeggaba wrote: This is an excellent thread; many of you have pointed out what I haven´t been able to put my finger onto although trying to. I really hope that SCII evolves into a more "dynamic" game, because the production, hype and general acceptance of SCII is clearly superior to the underground game of BW. Im sure the next expansion (hots?) will adress some of the "issues" stated in this thread so we can get more exciting game play.
The fact that SCII doesnt have any units that can be cost effective *100 makes it a whole other game. There was this amazing tvz recently (cant remember players, map or anything but in PL) where the Z held off a massive T mech force with one (!) lurker and dark swarm. Litterally won him the game.
Regarding the APM discussion: when does APM stop making a difference in SCII? I feel that it has somewhat lesser relevance in BW than people generally say but my view on it is that-- Consider two players playing a mirror matchup. Who would have the upper hand: the player with 300 or the one with 400 APM? Hard to tell since there are so many other factors. What about if they played the exact same builds, from start to finish? The 400-guy would. So APM for me is just a way to messure your skill cap, i.e. "how good your perfect game could be". Im really interrested in how a good SCII player views APM, since im not one myself and that the casters i watch never really talk about it (in my experience).
Just my 2 cents, probably wont make any sense but w/e.
APM is just as important in SC2 as in BW. However there is a difference.
APM in SC2 requires no where near as much physical resources than in BW. Here's a simple example.
To make an SCV from 2 bases in SC2 requires 3 actions, 4-s-s.
To make an SCV from 2 bases in BW requires 4 actions. F2 - click CC - s, F3 - click CC - s. However in reality this is 6 actions, plus you are switching screens, meaning you are not focusing on the battle.
Whats the difference? To make scvs while microing an army in BW takes many times more effort than achieving the same thing in SC2 even though the apm requirement is similar.
This strategical element is therefore missing in SC2. In BW, the player has to decide, should I sacrifice army control for macro, or should I get the most out of this battle, then catch up in macro later?
What sucks is that even if we had no automining in SC2 it would still be a moot point, because there is little difference you can make in an army engagement anyway, meaning every player would opt to switch back and macro, rather than make their army more efficient.
An 8 marine drop with a medivac will always do a similar amount of damage against a competent player, so you can just blindly drop a couple of bases and ignore because banelings and queens will get them eventually and there is nothing you can do about that (pickup marines, medivac dies to queen). But a well micro'd 6 marine 1 medic 1 firebat drop can win you the game, m&m&f just run around and kill every ground unit the zerg throws at it while taking out all zergs buildings.
EPT
