|
Hey!
At the moment I'm at a LAN in my school over the holiday. It's just a small LAN with around 50 people, anyway: They had a one vs one tournament in Dawn of War, which I had never played before. I thought why not participate? I got the game from a dude and got through the tutorial, and then played a few games vs some at the LAN. I won the most of my matches. Then the tournament started and I won every single one of my games. In the end I won the tournament, with the final match being a bo3 with commentator and the game showed on big screen.
And this was the day after I even started playing the game. I defeated people who had played the game for over a year. I noticed they didn't use hotkeys or sometimes not even the keyboard at all.
Starcraft skillz > all 
  
|
Grats, good for showing them who's boss 
|
1v1 in DoW right now ! il show you whats what, space marine power \m/
I even use a keyboard.
|
haha.
They are probably tools thinking that starcraft is a stupid ugly game with no strategy involved.
Glad you raped them with 0 experience and pure mechanics.
WE ARE THE ELITE OF GAMING
:D
|
yeah.. i rip up most of the other rts nerds too :D try playing company of heroes... wow people are so bad.
|
That's great. congrats.It would be so cool if you could explain to them just HOW to got such an upper hand, and use that as an argument to why Starcraft is sooo much better that any other crappy RTS.
|
Show them Starcraft, and show them at what blazing speeds this game is played. Then explain that you're actually a huge noob when it comes to comparing with the average A- Korean training on Iccup (of which there are hundreds!)
|
haha...the importance of mechanics in SC really does make it that much more challenging and deep a game. You don't really need to nearly as technical as you do with SC...it just comes down to learning that game's balance (or imbalance) and the theory/strategy and whatnot.
I noticed that with other games I tried as well...
We SC players are the pretentious elitsts of the RTS world.
|
Hong Kong20321 Posts
STARCRAFT 4 LYFFFFFFFFFFFF
|
|
|
United States1865 Posts
Haha i've been doing this same thing on every single RTS game that has come out in years and I'm only D+/C- at Starcraft
I've got this trademark thing (among friends / at LANs) of making a "3 day promise" - you pick an RTS game and even though I've never played it I will beat you at it in 3 days guaranteed. Worked for cocky assholes at Age of Empires III, Company of Heroes, Dawn of War, Empire Earth, etc.
It even works on Warcraft III (though this one is by far the closest to SC in terms of depth and much more difficult to use) I gave my friend who had been playing the game for YEARS and had thousands of 1v1 wins a "1 month promise" to see if i could beat him by the end of the month. When the time came I won 2-1 in a Bo3 and then proceeded to beat him again 7-0 a month later.
SC is seriously the most skill intensive game basically ever made. Only some hardcore fighting games are of similiar depth.
|
Exactly this, I played DoW online for about 3 days and lost my first game, then won nine in a row. I haven't played online again, it was just too easy- Starcraft is so much more fun.
|
United States11637 Posts
|
Lol, i did the same thing with Rise of Nations a few years ago and Dawn of War a little while back at some local LANs.
Problem is I don't think I can find RTS games fun like the others anymore, always want to work out my build and make everything perfect until I don't need to think when I play
Oh wells, at least I'm shallow enough to enjoy winning
|
On February 13 2009 08:31 Atrioc wrote:
Only some hardcore fighting games are of similiar depth.
Quake 3 has a insane skill level as well.
|
oh and unreal tournament, some of those vids on source-movies were mindblowing
|
lol.. no hotkeys?...
i remember some1 brining DoW to class and us playing a few games...
it was sooooo slowwwww.... but stil fun for a few games....
glad you won imo
|
I don't completely agree that playing sc was the reason for your win. It is definitely your passion and influence from the pro scene that made you understand the importance of mechanics. I'm pretty sure a decent wc3 player who follows the pro scene can do the same in your situation, perhaps beating a player up to D+ after giving him 3 days of practice (like your scenario)
The thing is, there are many who play sc for years and remain noob (play lots of team match/ums without goal to improve). And sadly, these players should be accounted as sc players as well and ppl who have mechanics from other games can just steamroll over them too. Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about people who play hardcore on bgh/fastest (they have their own sets of skills), but I'm just saying you are simply the better player overall and sc was only helpful because there's a well established pro scene.
congrats of the win though
|
On February 13 2009 09:03 PocketX wrote:
I don't completely agree that playing sc was the reason for your win. It is definitely your passion and influence from the pro scene that made you understand the importance of mechanics. I'm pretty sure a decent wc3 player who follows the pro scene can do the same in your situation, perhaps beating a player up to D+ after giving him 3 days of practice (like your scenario)
The thing is, there are many who play sc for years and remain noob (play lots of team match/ums without goal to improve). And sadly, these players should be accounted as sc players as well and ppl who have mechanics from other games can just steamroll over them too. Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about people who play hardcore on bgh/fastest (they have their own sets of skills), but I'm just saying you are simply the better player overall and sc was only helpful because there's a well established pro scene.
congrats of the win though
I don't agree. No game has even close to the mechanical skill requirement that SC has.
|
The only games that broodwar doesn't help me are CS Quake and street fighter, Each of those I had to learn an entirely different set of mechanics and ... well everything to excell at.
I do find a very cordinated left hand can give you alot of cheesy options in fps.
Binding, double knife kills and sniper/Deagle/Sniper being the ones I can think of the most.
Good job.
I did the same with with aoe 1 and 2 at lans. I didn't even use hotkeys nearly as much as I just build like 20-30 farms -> pure scout -> wall people in.
|
starcraft skills translates to ANY game. even in mmorpg, megaman games...fps games...
starcraft emphasizes on the importance of timing, speed, and prediction. all of these aspects are crucial in any game.
|
i used it to trash a friend at AoE 2. he did not use the keyboard so i out macroed him every time. had twice his army, and even if i missed the unit mix, i would have a shit load of units after and defeat in front of his base
|
On February 13 2009 09:09 Zoler wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2009 09:03 PocketX wrote:
I don't completely agree that playing sc was the reason for your win. It is definitely your passion and influence from the pro scene that made you understand the importance of mechanics. I'm pretty sure a decent wc3 player who follows the pro scene can do the same in your situation, perhaps beating a player up to D+ after giving him 3 days of practice (like your scenario)
The thing is, there are many who play sc for years and remain noob (play lots of team match/ums without goal to improve). And sadly, these players should be accounted as sc players as well and ppl who have mechanics from other games can just steamroll over them too. Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about people who play hardcore on bgh/fastest (they have their own sets of skills), but I'm just saying you are simply the better player overall and sc was only helpful because there's a well established pro scene.
congrats of the win though I don't agree. No game has even close to the mechanical skill requirement that SC has.
You just haven't explored the games deep enough. You may think sc is like the fastest pace rts, but try playing WC2, with an apm of 200 and Iccup C level, you won't even be able to keep up at the multitasking. The game is like playing sc on x2 maps.
Or take another game for example, Rise of nations. Whereas micro isn't as necessary (whether you micro barely affects outcome of battles), try macroing off 5 towns (in an avg game, you will build 8 towns which is equivalent to 3-4 base of sc as T or P). 5 towns is MUCH harder than 3-4 base of sc. Is macro necessary in that game? not really, but if you have that extra amount of speed that cannot be developed by a human, the potential there is much higher.
What I'm trying to say is, the potential is much higher in these 2 games listed for the aspects I mentioned. But no one actually develops up to that point, If Koreans never picked up SC as an e-sport, it is quite probable that SC's mechanical skills will not be discovered; which is the case for your classmates because they have never seen what a pro is.
|
On February 13 2009 08:31 Atrioc wrote:
Haha i've been doing this same thing on every single RTS game that has come out in years and I'm only D+/C- at Starcraft
I've got this trademark thing (among friends / at LANs) of making a "3 day promise" - you pick an RTS game and even though I've never played it I will beat you at it in 3 days guaranteed. Worked for cocky assholes at Age of Empires III, Company of Heroes, Dawn of War, Empire Earth, etc.
It even works on Warcraft III (though this one is by far the closest to SC in terms of depth and much more difficult to use) I gave my friend who had been playing the game for YEARS and had thousands of 1v1 wins a "1 month promise" to see if i could beat him by the end of the month. When the time came I won 2-1 in a Bo3 and then proceeded to beat him again 7-0 a month later.
SC is seriously the most skill intensive game basically ever made. Only some hardcore fighting games are of similiar depth.
It has nothing to do with the fact that you play starcraft though ~~
Rather you have played RTS games (maybe even games in general) in a resonably competetive enviroment soo much more than these guys that you'll rape them no matter game. It would have been the same if you had played C&C or Wc3 or whatever.
Try playing for example AoE3 vs someone who has played it as much as you have played starcraft, he would 1v3 you + friends without breaking a sweat.
As for your Wc3 friend, those guys exist in bw as well you know :p Random bnet ppl with 10k+ games and they are still barely D level, any seriously competive player from another game would beat them within a month as well.
|
Russian Federation4333 Posts
Hey Zoler, did you win by just massing Space Marine tacticals with heavy bolters and rockets?
I'm curious.
|
|
|
On February 13 2009 09:33 TheTyranid wrote:
Hey Zoler, did you win by just massing Space Marine tacticals with heavy bolters and rockets?
I'm curious.
No I were Necro and "rushed" them as they called it with a very quick upgrade. Then when I had around 3-4 groups of the standard units I reinforced with flayed ones. I think one of the advantages I had was macro, to reinforce all the groups all the time. The ones I played against stacked up a unit with new building units and didn't care about the rest. In that way they just got 1 new unit while I got 3-4... etc.
Also I took control points while we fighted, while they just concentrated on the battle.
|
On February 13 2009 09:33 KlaCkoN wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2009 08:31 Atrioc wrote:
Haha i've been doing this same thing on every single RTS game that has come out in years and I'm only D+/C- at Starcraft
I've got this trademark thing (among friends / at LANs) of making a "3 day promise" - you pick an RTS game and even though I've never played it I will beat you at it in 3 days guaranteed. Worked for cocky assholes at Age of Empires III, Company of Heroes, Dawn of War, Empire Earth, etc.
It even works on Warcraft III (though this one is by far the closest to SC in terms of depth and much more difficult to use) I gave my friend who had been playing the game for YEARS and had thousands of 1v1 wins a "1 month promise" to see if i could beat him by the end of the month. When the time came I won 2-1 in a Bo3 and then proceeded to beat him again 7-0 a month later.
SC is seriously the most skill intensive game basically ever made. Only some hardcore fighting games are of similiar depth. It has nothing to do with the fact that you play starcraft though ~~ Rather you have played RTS games (maybe even games in general) in a resonably competetive enviroment soo much more than these guys that you'll rape them no matter game. It would have been the same if you had played C&C or Wc3 or whatever. Try playing for example AoE3 vs someone who has played it as much as you have played starcraft, he would 1v3 you + friends without breaking a sweat. As for your Wc3 friend, those guys exist in bw as well you know :p Random bnet ppl with 10k+ games and they are still barely D level, any seriously competive player from another game would beat them within a month as well.
I fully agree with this.
On February 13 2009 09:11 ramen247 wrote:
starcraft skills translates to ANY game. even in mmorpg, megaman games...fps games...
starcraft emphasizes on the importance of timing, speed, and prediction. all of these aspects are crucial in any game.
Well yeah, but sc doesn't develop everything efficiently. It's like a pingpong player can run faster than him/herself if he/she hadn't picked up any sport. While sc may be the game that develops the most skills, you can't say playing sc will make you own every game.
|
On February 13 2009 09:03 PocketX wrote:
I don't completely agree that playing sc was the reason for your win. It is definitely your passion and influence from the pro scene that made you understand the importance of mechanics. I'm pretty sure a decent wc3 player who follows the pro scene can do the same in your situation, perhaps beating a player up to D+ after giving him 3 days of practice (like your scenario)
The thing is, there are many who play sc for years and remain noob (play lots of team match/ums without goal to improve). And sadly, these players should be accounted as sc players as well and ppl who have mechanics from other games can just steamroll over them too. Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about people who play hardcore on bgh/fastest (they have their own sets of skills), but I'm just saying you are simply the better player overall and sc was only helpful because there's a well established pro scene.
congrats of the win though
There's a difference between a player who plays standard melee SC games and tries to learn the game seriously and a player who plays casually to have fun and to enjoy themselves.
Obviously, only the former is going to have those transferable mechanics.
|
United States47024 Posts
On February 13 2009 09:27 PocketX wrote:
You just haven't explored the games deep enough. You may think sc is like the fastest pace rts, but try playing WC2, with an apm of 200 and Iccup C level, you won't even be able to keep up at the multitasking. The game is like playing sc on x2 maps.
WC2 is one game. Its also older than SC, and has more interface restrictions, not to mention the fact that the game-speeds don't translate well on modern CPUs.
On February 13 2009 09:27 PocketX wrote:
Or take another game for example, Rise of nations. Whereas micro isn't as necessary (whether you micro barely affects outcome of battles), try macroing off 5 towns (in an avg game, you will build 8 towns which is equivalent to 3-4 base of sc as T or P). 5 towns is MUCH harder than 3-4 base of sc. Is macro necessary in that game? not really, but if you have that extra amount of speed that cannot be developed by a human, the potential there is much higher.
Actually, RoN macro is fairly easy compared to SC macro, due to the fact that the interface helps automate many aspects (e.g. queues that go much longer than SC's 5, and autogathering for a good number of the resources).
|
actually, playing sc really brings out the other skills from other games like hand speed especially.
|
United States1865 Posts
On February 13 2009 09:33 KlaCkoN wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2009 08:31 Atrioc wrote:
Haha i've been doing this same thing on every single RTS game that has come out in years and I'm only D+/C- at Starcraft
I've got this trademark thing (among friends / at LANs) of making a "3 day promise" - you pick an RTS game and even though I've never played it I will beat you at it in 3 days guaranteed. Worked for cocky assholes at Age of Empires III, Company of Heroes, Dawn of War, Empire Earth, etc.
It even works on Warcraft III (though this one is by far the closest to SC in terms of depth and much more difficult to use) I gave my friend who had been playing the game for YEARS and had thousands of 1v1 wins a "1 month promise" to see if i could beat him by the end of the month. When the time came I won 2-1 in a Bo3 and then proceeded to beat him again 7-0 a month later.
SC is seriously the most skill intensive game basically ever made. Only some hardcore fighting games are of similiar depth. It has nothing to do with the fact that you play starcraft though ~~ Rather you have played RTS games (maybe even games in general) in a resonably competetive enviroment soo much more than these guys that you'll rape them no matter game. It would have been the same if you had played C&C or Wc3 or whatever. Try playing for example AoE3 vs someone who has played it as much as you have played starcraft, he would 1v3 you + friends without breaking a sweat. As for your Wc3 friend, those guys exist in bw as well you know :p Random bnet ppl with 10k+ games and they are still barely D level, any seriously competive player from another game would beat them within a month as well.
I do agree with you to a point - you are right I wasnt able to win those games simply because I had played SC. My training regimen in the 3 days (or 1 month) was way way more efficient than anything those guys were using - I knew how to practice, to find the best builds quickly and practice them heavily, and to watch pros to see how they react to situations. I do agree that (even though these ARE skills I learned from starcraft) those were my keys to my winning.
HOWEVER, I actually DID play AoE3 at a competitive level - I was #10 USA pre-War Cheifs and was #1 in the world 2v2 when TWC was released. I had never even heard of Starcraft - and when my friend called me out on it, I pulled a similiar stunt (hadn't invented the 3 day promise yet) and challenged him at SC - and got RAPED. This guy was D-, but I got absolutely trashed in a variety of ways (me Z him T) for a LONG time, because I was simply not ready mechanically or mentally.
I simply didnt think about things like an SC player - i.e. "look back at your base whenever you get a chance", or practice 1 build until you get it down. I kept thinking my failure was based on unit choice - I tried using Queens with Broodling vs Tanks because I simply didnt "get" that my fault was not making lurker/ling but that I wasnt making nearly enough lurker ling.
So while I agree with you that its more the person rather than the game - a person good at SC is guaranteed to be good at any other RTS once he learns the stratagies, while the reverse is not true - making being good at SC the best "base" anyone could ask for.
|
On February 13 2009 09:03 PocketX wrote:
I don't completely agree that playing sc was the reason for your win. It is definitely your passion and influence from the pro scene that made you understand the importance of mechanics. I'm pretty sure a decent wc3 player who follows the pro scene can do the same in your situation, perhaps beating a player up to D+ after giving him 3 days of practice (like your scenario)
The thing is, there are many who play sc for years and remain noob (play lots of team match/ums without goal to improve). And sadly, these players should be accounted as sc players as well and ppl who have mechanics from other games can just steamroll over them too. Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about people who play hardcore on bgh/fastest (they have their own sets of skills), but I'm just saying you are simply the better player overall and sc was only helpful because there's a well established pro scene.
congrats of the win though
A warcraft player who has never played broodwar before would be absolutly RAPED by a D+ player.
I take bets.
|
Btw it remembers me a friend who used to play war3 and challenged me at broodwar because he thought he was good at strategy games ( althought i don't even think he was really good at war3 lol ).
He never beat me, even when i played with off races and after like 3 or 4 months he left because "macro is too hard".
Haha and i'm not even a decent player.
When i played PvT vs him i could take the whole map ^_^
|
Hahaha, I love how local meets always end up with one guy who knows what hotkeys and build orders are owning everybody. It allows me to feel happy when I get owned on iCCup.
|
should have introduced sc to them when you had the chance.
|
Sweet. I played it for the first time a few months ago too and although I didn't play it at a LAN I felt I got a hold of the game very fast, and my friend was telling me I was better than he was and he owns the game.
|
On February 13 2009 09:37 Zoler wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2009 09:33 TheTyranid wrote:
Hey Zoler, did you win by just massing Space Marine tacticals with heavy bolters and rockets?
I'm curious. No I were Necro and "rushed" them as they called it with a very quick upgrade. Then when I had around 3-4 groups of the standard units I reinforced with flayed ones. I think one of the advantages I had was macro, to reinforce all the groups all the time. The ones I played against stacked up a unit with new building units and didn't care about the rest. In that way they just got 1 new unit while I got 3-4... etc. Also I took control points while we fighted, while they just concentrated on the battle.
HAHAHA people always want to play me in that shitty game and this is what i do too exactly and i beat them at it just like you said
its so easy too like what the hell
|
|
|
On February 13 2009 09:33 KlaCkoN wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2009 08:31 Atrioc wrote:
Haha i've been doing this same thing on every single RTS game that has come out in years and I'm only D+/C- at Starcraft
I've got this trademark thing (among friends / at LANs) of making a "3 day promise" - you pick an RTS game and even though I've never played it I will beat you at it in 3 days guaranteed. Worked for cocky assholes at Age of Empires III, Company of Heroes, Dawn of War, Empire Earth, etc.
It even works on Warcraft III (though this one is by far the closest to SC in terms of depth and much more difficult to use) I gave my friend who had been playing the game for YEARS and had thousands of 1v1 wins a "1 month promise" to see if i could beat him by the end of the month. When the time came I won 2-1 in a Bo3 and then proceeded to beat him again 7-0 a month later.
SC is seriously the most skill intensive game basically ever made. Only some hardcore fighting games are of similiar depth. It has nothing to do with the fact that you play starcraft though ~~ Rather you have played RTS games (maybe even games in general) in a resonably competetive enviroment soo much more than these guys that you'll rape them no matter game. It would have been the same if you had played C&C or Wc3 or whatever. Try playing for example AoE3 vs someone who has played it as much as you have played starcraft, he would 1v3 you + friends without breaking a sweat. As for your Wc3 friend, those guys exist in bw as well you know :p Random bnet ppl with 10k+ games and they are still barely D level, any seriously competive player from another game would beat them within a month as well.
this would be true except for the fact that no other game really has a reasonably competitive environment when compared to starcraft. Only Wc3 even comes remotely close.
|
On February 13 2009 07:55 Boblion wrote:
WE ARE THE ELITE OF GAMING
:D
^^
|
Yes, SC: BW is probably the most difficult game to master there is, but you people are being ridiculous. Since when does beating your friends at any game mean anything? Everyone's friends think they're the shit at every game they play whether it be Mario Kart, Madden, Smash Brothers, Counterstrike, etc. Since when does beating bad players mean anything?
Being a good SC:BW player isn't what makes you good at other games, having the intelligence and desire to be a good SC:BW player requires the same drive to be good at other games, other games are just all easier and take less time.
It's just absolutely sick some of you think that because you have good macro at Starcraft that your easily a top tier player at any other game.
For example, whoever's crappy friend that plays War3 and is 50% after 5000 games would probably have been an even worse Starcraft player. But playing 5000 games of Starcraft would not have made him a better War3 player, he would have just been horrible at both games.
A warcraft player who has never played broodwar before would be absolutly RAPED by a D+ player.
I take bets.
I have a friend who grinds 400NL now who was a top UD War3 player who could possibly be interested in this. How much exactly do you want to bet? And how long are you going to give him to practice?
|
On February 13 2009 15:58 lwstupidus wrote:
I have a friend who grinds 400NL now who was a top UD War3 player who could possibly be interested in this. How much exactly do you want to bet? And how long are you going to give him to practice?
Well since i can't really know if he has never played bw ( no proofs ) i won't bet money with a random dude on bnet ( and i'm quite broke actually although i can always find few euros ) who could be an oldschool player or a guy smurfing
Otherwise it would have been 3 days ( as it was stated in the post i quoted ).
But we can go for free or a sig bet ( although i doubt he would be interested if he plays 400NL lol ).
I would bet 50$ with trustworthy people for a bo3. But well, i don't know many trustworthy people on TL / bnet and those people have to know one War3 player with 0 bw experience and ready to take the bet so ...
|
On February 13 2009 16:07 Boblion wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2009 15:58 lwstupidus wrote:
I have a friend who grinds 400NL now who was a top UD War3 player who could possibly be interested in this. How much exactly do you want to bet? And how long are you going to give him to practice? Well since i can't really know if he has never played bw ( no proofs ) i won't bet money with a random dude on bnet ( and i'm quite broke actually although i can always find few euros ) who could be an oldschool player or a guy smurfing Otherwise it would have been 3 days ( as it was stated in the post i quoted ). But we can go for free or a sig bet ( although i doubt he would be interested if he plays 400NL lol ). I would bet 50$ with trustworthy people for a bo3.
Fair enough.
|
nice story! i also remember a lan at my school where they played bw and thought they were the ubergosus because they had around 100 to 300 b.net games on mucho maps... tbh the games i watched weren't even thaaaat bad (they even used some hotkeys). i thought about bragging a bit and playing some games to show them how bw is really played but well in the end i didn't care and let them have their fun on their level without saying a word
|
I think its the heavy emphasis on the mechanics in Starcraft that translates. Most good Starcraft players understand the theory behind the mechanics in RTS games(resource/economic management, build orders, unit control, etc). These things are in all RTS games, though with differing amounts and emphasis. Because good Starcraft players already understand this really well, its easy to apply this another game, since they only need to adapt to the metagame of that game and learn a little bit of theory. However, the inverse could be true as well, but there isn't a game that has been developed so much and with such a large emphasis on mechanics like Starcraft.
An analogy would be mathematics. RTS mechanics is similar to mathematics, as its the basis for competitive RTS like how mathematics is the basis for most sciences. Physics would be closest to Starcraft because physics has such a heavy emphasis on mathematics unlike the other sciences. With a good mathematics background/RTS mechanics and understanding of how science/RTS work, it would be most likely easier to go from physics/Starcraft to say biology/Warcraft 3 then the other way around.
This is just my opinion, so don't flame me. 
|
|
|
I had a friend named jon.
Fucking sick sick sick RTS gamer .... I mean bloody fucking sick.
Every RTS since warcraft (the real one  he immediately becomes amazing.
In a year of playing he was never able to maintain an over 50% record on the bottom rungs of wgtour
Reason. The mechanics were too demanding. His brilliant strategic mind was stiffled by the fast paced, mechanics. I've taken this as an omen. Since I improved at starcraft there has yet to be an RTS that I can't simply destroy people at normally with in a couple of hours. My first games of AOE were on lan 1:1 tournament, and I won convincingly, because I played "Starcraft aoe" basicly the japanese like zerg, and made 10 stables, and pumped scouts.
I think starcraft is the only rts from it time period that you can't just jump into playing. Now of course wc3 and others have risen in status and complexity but overall I would say this is the only game that I needed help when I first started ....
|
On February 13 2009 08:31 Atrioc wrote:
Haha i've been doing this same thing on every single RTS game that has come out in years and I'm only D+/C- at Starcraft
I've got this trademark thing (among friends / at LANs) of making a "3 day promise" - you pick an RTS game and even though I've never played it I will beat you at it in 3 days guaranteed. Worked for cocky assholes at Age of Empires III, Company of Heroes, Dawn of War, Empire Earth, etc.
It even works on Warcraft III (though this one is by far the closest to SC in terms of depth and much more difficult to use) I gave my friend who had been playing the game for YEARS and had thousands of 1v1 wins a "1 month promise" to see if i could beat him by the end of the month. When the time came I won 2-1 in a Bo3 and then proceeded to beat him again 7-0 a month later.
SC is seriously the most skill intensive game basically ever made. Only some hardcore fighting games are of similiar depth.
my first competitive game was starcraft and this maybe sounds funny but some mindset came through when I started playing fighting games
like how to prepare against a cheese build is very similar to preparing for a wakeup shoryu
also i could take my time in training mode easier because i got used to the (somewhat boring) practice
|
On February 13 2009 08:31 Atrioc wrote:
Haha i've been doing this same thing on every single RTS game that has come out in years and I'm only D+/C- at Starcraft
I've got this trademark thing (among friends / at LANs) of making a "3 day promise" - you pick an RTS game and even though I've never played it I will beat you at it in 3 days guaranteed. Worked for cocky assholes at Age of Empires III, Company of Heroes, Dawn of War, Empire Earth, etc.
It even works on Warcraft III (though this one is by far the closest to SC in terms of depth and much more difficult to use) I gave my friend who had been playing the game for YEARS and had thousands of 1v1 wins a "1 month promise" to see if i could beat him by the end of the month. When the time came I won 2-1 in a Bo3 and then proceeded to beat him again 7-0 a month later.
SC is seriously the most skill intensive game basically ever made. Only some hardcore fighting games are of similiar depth.
I'm sure you'd beat me in WC3 in 3 days... -_-
or in a month. -_-...
|
BW fighting!!
|
Starcraft skills pretty much translates into all rts games. Good job.
|
Netherlands19135 Posts
Good job :D. In my experience SC multitasking carries through in alot of games, esp ones with easy mechanics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
