|
1st off let me say a what a great read. I come mostly from a cs 1.6 background and remember going thru these stages step by step with css.
That being said from what I understand you are pretty off on the halo transition. Halo 1 was (still is?) Condsiderd the best mutiplayer incarnation of the series. When halo 2 came out most high level players didn't like it nearly as much. But the main league MLG was getting very little attendance. They switch to halo2. And exploded with growth despite the "top tier" players disliking it.
This is where money comes in. Even tho they enjoyed playing halo1 more there was no money to be had. Apernrtly making a living from a video game matter more then playing a game they enjoyed more.
Idk if this was happen with Starcraft or not. But GSL is sure trying to take it i'n that direction. For better or worse
|
|
|
On September 21 2010 04:47 krndandaman wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 03:47 PJA wrote:
Everyone sticking to BW says the same shit all the time: BW is hard, SC2 is easy, and all the people who play SC2 just want to play an easier game.
This is like elitist go players saying go is hard, chess is easy, and if you really wanted to play a difficult game, play go. Nobody will ever reach the skill cap in either game, so it's ridiculous to call one "easy" and one "hard." Yes, it's hard to make your units even respond in a reasonable way in BW compared to SC2, but that has nothing to do with which game is more competitive, it only makes BW more frustrating to play as a beginner.
Clearly, BW with only being allowed to select 1 unit at a time and not being allowed to hotkey anything would be "harder" than BW in the sense that you guys are talking about, and it would raise the skill ceiling even higher, but would you really want to play it over BW? No, obviously not.
FWIW: Has anyone noticed that none of the people who switched to SC2 from BW agree with you guys? All of the top players who post on these forums who switched to SC2 pretty much agrees completely with what I am saying. Nony, InControl, etc. Are they all just newbs looking to play an easier game? For reference, I am a BW player who stuck to BW. Also, it's a known fact that BW is harder than SC2, and I'm pretty sure everyone acknowledges that. But I do not think people play sc2 because it's easier.
I feel like you missed the entire point of my post. Sure, BW is "harder" in the sense that it's harder to a-move 100 supply in BW than in SC2, and in the sense that dragoons are mind-bogglingly retarded compared to stalkers. However, BW players want to take this fact and say that BW therefor requires more skill to compete at the top level, or that players will reach some skill ceiling in SC2.
There is no reason to believe a priori that the latter is true, and I think all of the top foreigners from BW who play SC2 believe that it is false; that no one will ever reach the skill ceiling in SC2.
As for the former, it is obviously true at the moment, but that's because nobody has spent 5 years playing the game, perfectly their build orders, timings, mechanics, etc. etc.
So is BW "harder" than SC2? Yes, but only if you want to take a very narrow and irrelevant definition of what it means to be harder.
|
On September 21 2010 03:47 PJA wrote:
Has anyone noticed that none of the people who switched to SC2 from BW agree with you guys? All of the top players who post on these forums who switched to SC2 pretty much agrees completely with what I am saying. Nony, InControl, etc. Are they all just newbs looking to play an easier game?
Has anyone else noticed you only are referring to people who couldn't make it in BW? There's a ton of people who agree with us. I'm a SC2 Beta player who changed back to BW because SC2 was boring as shit to me. Notice noone worth listening to agrees with anyone who has an opinion similar to yours. Its either some other crappy SC2 player or someone who has something vested in the SC2 scene enough so that they'll defend it no matter what. There's no talking to people who are that dumb, so why would we try? I can't speak for the others here but I don't go around the SC2 forum trolling. The SC2 people have no trouble coming here either and continuously proclaiming the death of BW and how sad everything is and how everyone is going to SC2. The bottom line is that the SC2 scene isn't getting a ton of progame teams. Its not getting the multiple large corporate sponsorships, and its not getting ANY of the top 10 players of BW. The next year of tournaments will happen regardless of this stupid-ass Gretech situation as has already been stated officially.
Getting to D+ doesn't mean you know anything at all. I've gotten to C+ within 2 weeks every time I come back and play BW after taking year long breaks, and I don't know any modern build orders (read: I haven't read about build orders/watched pro-BW games since yellow vs boxer). I also don't understand timing attack in BW or any of the other shit you talk about.
We all went to SC2 without knowing what the units were. Within a few days, anyone who could do the basics could be diamond. Today the diamond league is still a huge cesspool of semi-ok players. I was a high diamond on SC2 as well as play BW. I don't care how much you self-proclaim that you're some awesome player on both and how we're full of shit. You're the only one that is constantly proving how full of shit you are. The only good players in SC2 are ex-BW players, and the ones that switched over were either practically retired on BW or sucked so bad they couldn't contend with top BW players anymore. Hell, even NaDa old as he is could probably stand up at the top for a long time on SC2 (definately will stomp the entire current joke of a "proscene" SC2 has). I'm willing to bet you're not really as good as you say you are on either game because quite simply... I've been involved in the inner workings of the proscenes a lot more than most. Noone, and I mean noone who is any good has attitudes like yours. When you learn how to act like an adult, maybe you can join us in trying to have BW and SC2 working together.
|
On September 21 2010 05:08 Diminotoor wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 03:47 PJA wrote:
Has anyone noticed that none of the people who switched to SC2 from BW agree with you guys? All of the top players who post on these forums who switched to SC2 pretty much agrees completely with what I am saying. Nony, InControl, etc. Are they all just newbs looking to play an easier game? Has anyone else noticed you only are referring to people who couldn't make it in BW? There's a ton of people who agree with us. I'm a SC2 Beta player who changed back to BW because SC2 was boring as shit to me. Notice noone worth listening to agrees with anyone who has an opinion similar to yours. Its either some other crappy SC2 player or someone who has something vested in the SC2 scene enough so that they'll defend it no matter what. There's no talking to people who are that dumb, so why would we try? I can't speak for the others here but I don't go around the SC2 forum trolling. The SC2 people have no trouble coming here either and continuously proclaiming the death of BW and how sad everything is and how everyone is going to SC2. The bottom line is that the SC2 scene isn't getting a ton of progame teams. Its not getting the multiple large corporate sponsorships, and its not getting ANY of the top 10 players of BW. The next year of tournaments will happen regardless of this stupid-ass Gretech situation as has already been stated officially. Show nested quote +Getting to D+ doesn't mean you know anything at all. I've gotten to C+ within 2 weeks every time I come back and play BW after taking year long breaks, and I don't know any modern build orders (read: I haven't read about build orders/watched pro-BW games since yellow vs boxer). I also don't understand timing attack in BW or any of the other shit you talk about. We all went to SC2 without knowing what the units were. Within a few days, anyone who could do the basics could be diamond. Today the diamond league is still a huge cesspool of semi-ok players. I was a high diamond on SC2 as well as play BW. I don't care how much you self-proclaim that you're some awesome player on both and how we're full of shit. You're the only one that is constantly proving how full of shit you are. The only good players in SC2 are ex-BW players, and the ones that switched over were either practically retired on BW or sucked so bad they couldn't contend with top BW players anymore. Hell, even NaDa old as he is could probably stand up at the top for a long time on SC2 (definately will stomp the entire current joke of a "proscene" SC2 has). I'm willing to bet you're not really as good as you say you are on either game because quite simply... I've been involved in the inner workings of the proscenes a lot more than most. Noone, and I mean noone who is any good has attitudes like yours. When you learn how to act like an adult, maybe you can join us in trying to have BW and SC2 working together.
I don't really card enough to respond in paragraphs, since your arguments are just absurd and you are misrepresenting my position horribly, as well as making unreasonable logical fallacies.
a) I never claimed to be good, I'm only pointing out that most of the people responding are terribad
b) Good job, you made it into high diamond. Did you win any big tournaments?
c) Of course it is easy to get into high diamond 1 month in, but it was easy to be a top player in
BW 1 month in also. Try getting high diamond in 2 years.
d) Doubting that a random can get to C+ and have a shitty attitude towards idiots is LOL.
e) BW players troll harder than anyone, so accusing SC2 players of trolling is ridiculous. Any thread I read in the BW forums that mentions SC2 says this: "BW skill, SC2 unskill, everyone who plays SC2 does it because they're bad." They also say the same thing about WC3.
EDIT: Because you're so incredibly dense, let me repeat this:
Yes, the SC2 is "a joke" compared to BW. THIS IS BECAUSE SC2 IS 6 MONTHS OLD. The fact that you even try to compare the proscene in 10+ year old game to the proscene in a 6 month old (if you include the beta) game is just beyond retarded.
|
I don't really card enough to respond in paragraphs, since your arguments are just absurd and you are misrepresenting my position horribly, as well as making unreasonable logical fallacies.
You're trying to pull "logical fallacies" while simultaneously managing to show your lack of understanding of what they are. I usually respond in a longer format because I'm an educated person, and like to cover my points thoroughly. Its ok that most don't choose that route for their minds though.
a) I never claimed to be good, I'm only pointing out that most of the people responding are terribad
The same goes for SC2's side.
b) Good job, you made it into high diamond. Did you win any big tournaments?
No or else I'd probably be practicing my ladder right now instead of posting. I certainly tried though and found I could in fact contend at the earlier rounds and with practice maybe I could've gone farther.
c) Of course it is easy to get into high diamond 1 month in, but it was easy to be a top player in
BW 1 month in also. Try getting high diamond in 2 years.
No, try getting into high diamond after its been out for years AND both the expansions have been out for years (plural). That is when I'll consider the SC2 scene to be as big, dominating, and mature as everyone seems to be acting like it is.
d) Doubting that a random can get to C+ and have a shitty attitude towards idiots is LOL.
Unless you cheese your way there, I literally don't know anyone who plays by 2007's rules (or earlier) and hasn't played in years and never touched SCBW who can just come back and clomp around near the blue ranks. If you play BW, you know that even a little time off will make your skill slip considerably when compared to the people who have been playing the entire time.
e) BW players troll harder than anyone, so accusing SC2 players of trolling is ridiculous. Any thread I read in the BW forums that mentions SC2 says this: "BW skill, SC2 unskill, everyone who plays SC2 does it because they're bad." They also say the same thing about WC3.
This is the most LOL ever. SC2 players are people just like BW players are. People tend to bitch and annoy each other sometimes no matter what. SC2 people definately troll hard like you claim SCBW people do. I don't go over there with a shitty attitude because one day I might be too old to play at 300+ APM on BW or maybe I'll just want to switch over 100% instead of 50-50. The same type of people can certainly exist within SC2 community like they can in SCBW. As for the whole "skill vs unskill" thing... "SCBW Proleague". That's all I have to say.
|
|
|
I just read it and I agree with most of what you said. Its really hard for a beginner to get into SC1 because of the skill level. Even d- players in iccup aren't too bad
|
Yes, the SC2 is "a joke" compared to BW. THIS IS BECAUSE SC2 IS 6 MONTHS OLD. The fact that you even try to compare the proscene in 10+ year old game to the proscene in a 6 month old (if you include the beta) game is just beyond retarded.
Really? No shit! So stop trying to argue a bunch of retarded points as if the scene is mature and ready to take on the scene of BW. The fact that you come in a forum dedicated to BW, make an ignorant blanket statement that everyone in this opinion pool is a terribad n00b player with no brains IS "beyond retarded".
|
Very nice write up. Thanks a bunch for it. :D
|
**Edit double-post somehow... stupid browser**
|
On September 21 2010 05:38 krndandaman wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:05 PJA wrote:On September 21 2010 04:47 krndandaman wrote:On September 21 2010 03:47 PJA wrote:
Everyone sticking to BW says the same shit all the time: BW is hard, SC2 is easy, and all the people who play SC2 just want to play an easier game.
This is like elitist go players saying go is hard, chess is easy, and if you really wanted to play a difficult game, play go. Nobody will ever reach the skill cap in either game, so it's ridiculous to call one "easy" and one "hard." Yes, it's hard to make your units even respond in a reasonable way in BW compared to SC2, but that has nothing to do with which game is more competitive, it only makes BW more frustrating to play as a beginner.
Clearly, BW with only being allowed to select 1 unit at a time and not being allowed to hotkey anything would be "harder" than BW in the sense that you guys are talking about, and it would raise the skill ceiling even higher, but would you really want to play it over BW? No, obviously not.
FWIW: Has anyone noticed that none of the people who switched to SC2 from BW agree with you guys? All of the top players who post on these forums who switched to SC2 pretty much agrees completely with what I am saying. Nony, InControl, etc. Are they all just newbs looking to play an easier game? For reference, I am a BW player who stuck to BW. Also, it's a known fact that BW is harder than SC2, and I'm pretty sure everyone acknowledges that. But I do not think people play sc2 because it's easier. I feel like you missed the entire point of my post. Sure, BW is "harder" in the sense that it's harder to a-move 100 supply in BW than in SC2, and in the sense that dragoons are mind-bogglingly retarded compared to stalkers. However, BW players want to take this fact and say that BW therefor requires more skill to compete at the top level, or that players will reach some skill ceiling in SC2. There is no reason to believe a priori that the latter is true, and I think all of the top foreigners from BW who play SC2 believe that it is false; that no one will ever reach the skill ceiling in SC2. As for the former, it is obviously true at the moment, but that's because nobody has spent 5 years playing the game, perfectly their build orders, timings, mechanics, etc. etc. So is BW "harder" than SC2? Yes, but only if you want to take a very narrow and irrelevant definition of what it means to be harder. No, BW is harder because 1) harder to amove groups of units/control 2) no multi building selection (harder macro) 3) no automining 4) more retarded AI People think SC2 is a game that requires more intelligence than bw, but that is wrong. SC2 just rewards intelligent thinking more because all of the 'mechanics' are pretty much dealt with by the AI and new features. I really don't think anyone would reach the skill ceiling in any RTS. Please ask the top foreigners whether they think bw is harder or sc2. Most of them will say BW. Though some will prob give the bullshit responses "oh both are hard games" "you cant compare the 2". None, I mean zero, will say SC2 is harder than bw. I also think I remember Nony or Idra saying BW was harder, i forget. im a bit more sure it was idra edit: or it could be both of them who said bw was harder
You still aren't understanding:
In any player versus player game, as long as there is no skill cap that players can actually reach and the winner is determined primarily by skill (i.e., not mostly luck based), it is meaningless to say one game is harder than the other.
|
On September 21 2010 04:47 krndandaman wrote:
For reference, I am a BW player who stuck to BW. Also, it's a known fact that BW is harder than SC2, and I'm pretty sure everyone acknowledges that.
Regarding Starcraft 2's gameplay, he said that "I think the game has gotten more difficult compared to the original", adding that "But because I had experience playing Starcraft as a progamer, I'm getting better rapidly."
- July officially announces his move to Starcraft 2
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=151746
|
|
|
On September 21 2010 06:35 Jaeger wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 04:47 krndandaman wrote:
For reference, I am a BW player who stuck to BW. Also, it's a known fact that BW is harder than SC2, and I'm pretty sure everyone acknowledges that. Regarding Starcraft 2's gameplay, he said that "I think the game has gotten more difficult compared to the original", adding that "But because I had experience playing Starcraft as a progamer, I'm getting better rapidly." - July officially announces his move to Starcraft 2 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=151746
July was referring to the ability to dominate the competition is harder, because there is so little that separates the top tier from the rest in SC2 atm unlike in BW where for the top players it was easier to just maintain your skills due to there being more separating the top from the average joe
|
On September 21 2010 06:52 krndandaman wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 06:30 PJA wrote:On September 21 2010 05:38 krndandaman wrote:On September 21 2010 05:05 PJA wrote:On September 21 2010 04:47 krndandaman wrote:On September 21 2010 03:47 PJA wrote:
Everyone sticking to BW says the same shit all the time: BW is hard, SC2 is easy, and all the people who play SC2 just want to play an easier game.
This is like elitist go players saying go is hard, chess is easy, and if you really wanted to play a difficult game, play go. Nobody will ever reach the skill cap in either game, so it's ridiculous to call one "easy" and one "hard." Yes, it's hard to make your units even respond in a reasonable way in BW compared to SC2, but that has nothing to do with which game is more competitive, it only makes BW more frustrating to play as a beginner.
Clearly, BW with only being allowed to select 1 unit at a time and not being allowed to hotkey anything would be "harder" than BW in the sense that you guys are talking about, and it would raise the skill ceiling even higher, but would you really want to play it over BW? No, obviously not.
FWIW: Has anyone noticed that none of the people who switched to SC2 from BW agree with you guys? All of the top players who post on these forums who switched to SC2 pretty much agrees completely with what I am saying. Nony, InControl, etc. Are they all just newbs looking to play an easier game? For reference, I am a BW player who stuck to BW. Also, it's a known fact that BW is harder than SC2, and I'm pretty sure everyone acknowledges that. But I do not think people play sc2 because it's easier. I feel like you missed the entire point of my post. Sure, BW is "harder" in the sense that it's harder to a-move 100 supply in BW than in SC2, and in the sense that dragoons are mind-bogglingly retarded compared to stalkers. However, BW players want to take this fact and say that BW therefor requires more skill to compete at the top level, or that players will reach some skill ceiling in SC2. There is no reason to believe a priori that the latter is true, and I think all of the top foreigners from BW who play SC2 believe that it is false; that no one will ever reach the skill ceiling in SC2. As for the former, it is obviously true at the moment, but that's because nobody has spent 5 years playing the game, perfectly their build orders, timings, mechanics, etc. etc. So is BW "harder" than SC2? Yes, but only if you want to take a very narrow and irrelevant definition of what it means to be harder. No, BW is harder because 1) harder to amove groups of units/control 2) no multi building selection (harder macro) 3) no automining 4) more retarded AI People think SC2 is a game that requires more intelligence than bw, but that is wrong. SC2 just rewards intelligent thinking more because all of the 'mechanics' are pretty much dealt with by the AI and new features. I really don't think anyone would reach the skill ceiling in any RTS. Please ask the top foreigners whether they think bw is harder or sc2. Most of them will say BW. Though some will prob give the bullshit responses "oh both are hard games" "you cant compare the 2". None, I mean zero, will say SC2 is harder than bw. I also think I remember Nony or Idra saying BW was harder, i forget. im a bit more sure it was idra edit: or it could be both of them who said bw was harder You still aren't understanding: In any player versus player game, as long as there is no skill cap that players can actually reach and the winner is determined primarily by skill (i.e., not mostly luck based), it is meaningless to say one game is harder than the other. How is that so? Just because there is no skill cap does not mean that all games have the same learning curve. It also is easier to reach near the skill cap in some games over others. I can safely say it's easier to reach near skill cap in say Warcraft III over BW. Right?
What evidence do you have to support that conclusion about WC3?
Also, what exactly is appealing about having a steeper learning curve? As long as the skill cap is high enough that no players will ever reach it, I would prefer games to have a less steep learning curve so that more players can enjoy having at least a half-decent game, and more casuals now-->more competitive players later, generally.
|
On September 21 2010 06:53 unit wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 06:35 Jaeger wrote:On September 21 2010 04:47 krndandaman wrote:
For reference, I am a BW player who stuck to BW. Also, it's a known fact that BW is harder than SC2, and I'm pretty sure everyone acknowledges that. Regarding Starcraft 2's gameplay, he said that "I think the game has gotten more difficult compared to the original", adding that "But because I had experience playing Starcraft as a progamer, I'm getting better rapidly." - July officially announces his move to Starcraft 2 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=151746 July was referring to the ability to dominate the competition is harder, because there is so little that separates the top tier from the rest in SC2 atm unlike in BW where for the top players it was easier to just maintain your skills due to there being more separating the top from the average joe
I'm not going to say this is inaccurate, but where are you inferring this from?. The link given by krndandaman doesn't suggest anything of the sort.
|
On September 21 2010 07:00 PJA wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 06:53 unit wrote:On September 21 2010 06:35 Jaeger wrote:On September 21 2010 04:47 krndandaman wrote:
For reference, I am a BW player who stuck to BW. Also, it's a known fact that BW is harder than SC2, and I'm pretty sure everyone acknowledges that. Regarding Starcraft 2's gameplay, he said that "I think the game has gotten more difficult compared to the original", adding that "But because I had experience playing Starcraft as a progamer, I'm getting better rapidly." - July officially announces his move to Starcraft 2 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=151746 July was referring to the ability to dominate the competition is harder, because there is so little that separates the top tier from the rest in SC2 atm unlike in BW where for the top players it was easier to just maintain your skills due to there being more separating the top from the average joe I'm not going to say this is inaccurate, but where are you inferring this from?. The link given by krndandaman doesn't suggest anything of the sort.
its due to the learning curve being so rediculously easy, July said sc2 is harder, thats because there are way more people at the higher levels and the game depends less on APM which July had relied on for a while (if you were around July IS mr.818 apm)
|
|
|
On September 21 2010 06:53 PJA wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 06:52 krndandaman wrote:On September 21 2010 06:30 PJA wrote:On September 21 2010 05:38 krndandaman wrote:On September 21 2010 05:05 PJA wrote:On September 21 2010 04:47 krndandaman wrote:On September 21 2010 03:47 PJA wrote:
Everyone sticking to BW says the same shit all the time: BW is hard, SC2 is easy, and all the people who play SC2 just want to play an easier game.
This is like elitist go players saying go is hard, chess is easy, and if you really wanted to play a difficult game, play go. Nobody will ever reach the skill cap in either game, so it's ridiculous to call one "easy" and one "hard." Yes, it's hard to make your units even respond in a reasonable way in BW compared to SC2, but that has nothing to do with which game is more competitive, it only makes BW more frustrating to play as a beginner.
Clearly, BW with only being allowed to select 1 unit at a time and not being allowed to hotkey anything would be "harder" than BW in the sense that you guys are talking about, and it would raise the skill ceiling even higher, but would you really want to play it over BW? No, obviously not.
FWIW: Has anyone noticed that none of the people who switched to SC2 from BW agree with you guys? All of the top players who post on these forums who switched to SC2 pretty much agrees completely with what I am saying. Nony, InControl, etc. Are they all just newbs looking to play an easier game? For reference, I am a BW player who stuck to BW. Also, it's a known fact that BW is harder than SC2, and I'm pretty sure everyone acknowledges that. But I do not think people play sc2 because it's easier. I feel like you missed the entire point of my post. Sure, BW is "harder" in the sense that it's harder to a-move 100 supply in BW than in SC2, and in the sense that dragoons are mind-bogglingly retarded compared to stalkers. However, BW players want to take this fact and say that BW therefor requires more skill to compete at the top level, or that players will reach some skill ceiling in SC2. There is no reason to believe a priori that the latter is true, and I think all of the top foreigners from BW who play SC2 believe that it is false; that no one will ever reach the skill ceiling in SC2. As for the former, it is obviously true at the moment, but that's because nobody has spent 5 years playing the game, perfectly their build orders, timings, mechanics, etc. etc. So is BW "harder" than SC2? Yes, but only if you want to take a very narrow and irrelevant definition of what it means to be harder. No, BW is harder because 1) harder to amove groups of units/control 2) no multi building selection (harder macro) 3) no automining 4) more retarded AI People think SC2 is a game that requires more intelligence than bw, but that is wrong. SC2 just rewards intelligent thinking more because all of the 'mechanics' are pretty much dealt with by the AI and new features. I really don't think anyone would reach the skill ceiling in any RTS. Please ask the top foreigners whether they think bw is harder or sc2. Most of them will say BW. Though some will prob give the bullshit responses "oh both are hard games" "you cant compare the 2". None, I mean zero, will say SC2 is harder than bw. I also think I remember Nony or Idra saying BW was harder, i forget. im a bit more sure it was idra edit: or it could be both of them who said bw was harder You still aren't understanding: In any player versus player game, as long as there is no skill cap that players can actually reach and the winner is determined primarily by skill (i.e., not mostly luck based), it is meaningless to say one game is harder than the other. How is that so? Just because there is no skill cap does not mean that all games have the same learning curve. It also is easier to reach near the skill cap in some games over others. I can safely say it's easier to reach near skill cap in say Warcraft III over BW. Right? What evidence do you have to support that conclusion about WC3? Also, what exactly is appealing about having a steeper learning curve? As long as the skill cap is high enough that no players will ever reach it, I would prefer games to have a less steep learning curve so that more players can enjoy having at least a half-decent game, and more casuals now-->more competitive players later, generally.
Why do we need more competitive players? The high skill cap of BW makes it a very impressive spectator game. If every player has perfect macro, that immediately takes away a whole element of multitasking. Now things like easy spellcasting, again makes it massively easier and also makes the spells far less impressive to pull off considering they happen in every game perfectly. No more Jangbi storms, no BeSt style players known for their macro. I can imagine the future of SC2 is going to result in much closer games decided by very small mistakes to be honest, to me that is far less interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
